REVIEW: Spec Ops The Line

Shooters are not an easy genre to dominate. Thanks to the success of Call of Duty and Battlefield, most shooters don't do particularly well. They also don't create memorable stories that resonate with players past the occasional set piece action moments. Spec Ops The Line is the answer to that dilemma pitting the player in a foreign country where things aren't what they seem. But despite it's movement in improvement on the campaign side of the genre, the solid gameplay can not make up for a predictable ending with an illusion that choices matter.

Spec Ops the Line revolves around a group of Delta Operatives who have been sent in Dubai to investigate a radio message received from the 33rd Battalion, a group of soldiers who lost contact six months prior to the games opening sequences. Captain Walker of the Delta Operatives is sent in to search for the leader of the 33rd Battalion, John Konrad, who had saved him in Kabul years ago. Upon their arrival, they notice things are awry and are surrounded by death and despair. The team of three push on witnessing and experiencing things that should tear at the human soul, but in an effort to find answers, they continue the trek to find Colonel Konrad.

Whereas in most shooters the characters themselves never change throughout the story, Spec Ops The Line has you witness the wear and tear of the characters emotional state. What starts out as friendly banter between the protagonists ends with them almost blowing each others heads off. The things they run across throughout the game causes them to slowly crumble and it is evident in the dialogue and behavior of the characters. Instead of calm tactical speak like they do in the beginning, the end has each of them barking expletives and frustrations. Their bodies gain soot and burns from their journey, and you genuinely feel terrible for what the characters are going through. Gamers who want a change of pace from the usual bad ass they play as, Spec Ops The Line use the emotions, look, and dialogue of the characters in a way that games in the shooter genre (first or third person) should take into consideration.

The gameplay, however, isn't anything groundbreaking. It's solid, handles well, and I couldn't find any complaints with it. Everything felt fine. One would suspect that the actual shooting may suffer due to the focus on narration, but all of the staples are there. You run forward in linear levels with more open areas for bad guys to shoot as you hide behind cover. You poke out and shoot or blind fire before moving forward. Let me tell you, there are a LOT of people to shoot and kill. But that's the point of that, and you realize it later on in the game. More on that in a bit.

When asked about what separates Spec Ops The Line from other shooters, the folks at Yager would inform you of how the setting can play a large part in the game. In a way they are right. Some levels have enormous dust storms crop up in the middle of battle causing firefights to be a tad more intense as it's more difficult to pick out enemies. So you risk moving forward at easier shots. Luckily, the same trouble you have with seeing, the enemies do as well. There are also many parts in the game where the sand from Dubai can change the outcome of a shootout. Since the dust storm that cut off the 33rd Battalion was the biggest one in recorded history, many places in Dubai are covered with sand and sometimes buried in it. This allows for players to shoot out vents or windows that cause billows of sand to flood into the room and daze or even engulf enemies. While this option sounds good, I found myself using it very little and it rarely crossed my mind during my time with the game. More often than not, it was mainly used as the way to get from one moment to the next.

There is also one other thing that caused some people to be off put by the game. The executions. Melees in the game do not kill, they stun. Enemies fall to the ground, and if nothing is done, they regain composure and stand back up to continue their assault. So you can run up to the enemies while they are on their ground and given a prompt to execute. Depending on where you are in the game, the executions vary. These executions take the form of the emotions the character is going through at the time. Butting the rifle in the head of the enemy is one thing, but near the end you shove a shotgun to their head and let go a round. While it feels like the violence is going a tad far, it's just one more extreme Yager takes to show the state of the players.

But if there's one thing that was touted above everything else, it would be the choices made in this game. We were told that repercussions would occur based on decisions made by the player and the ending would be different based on them. Well...yes and no.

There are really only two choices that matter, and four endings for the game. Both choices come in the last chapter and the epilogue, and the rest do nothing to affect the storyline of it. Instead, they are shown as flashbacks as what you did when confronted with those situations, but don't warrant the back of the box bullet point. The choices help put you in the shoes of the character, forcing you into difficult decisions that will make you feel lousy regardless of the choice. Of all the choices, there is one in particular near the end that I knew I shouldn't do...but damnit I wanted to. Just let loose with a barrage of bullets to teach these folks a lesson. Either way, it doesn't matter. Nothing changes because of what you do, it only effects how you feel when you do it.

The ending itself is predictable. When weird things start happening, it felt like there would be one logical conclusion to it because it's the same safe conclusion games like this make. It's the lead-up to it that makes it worthwhile. There are moments where the character and game itself breaks the fourth wall and they are great moments. Some are during actual gameplay, that if you die and replay, are not the same. I don't know if this is an error on the games part for not loading up the same experience correctly, but if so, I hope it's not patched. The loading screen illustrates a moment where the fourth wall is broke when, instead of tips on how to play the game, they ask the gamer questions like "The US Military does not condone the killing of unarmed combatants, but this isn't real so does it even matter?" or "Do you feel like a hero?" Just little touches like that really help nail the point home that yes, there are a lot of people to kill, but the game wants you to feel that. It wants you to question what you are doing and why you do it. Does it even matter how you feel while doing it and whether you should get joy out of killing the people you do on a video game? Little things, not even part of the game, that really left me looking at the screen like a five year old in Philosophy class. Other moments don't break the fourth wall, but have you questioning how much of a "realistic" approach this game takes. One section of the game has you by yourself and a heavy troop notices you. As he attacks, the lights overhead start flickering and you are trying to take out this armored man in the flashes of light you can. But something happens during it that causes you to freak out.

And it's moments like that, that pain me to say that Spec Ops The Line is a sub-par game hidden by one of the better stories a shooter has provided. The veil of choices-make-a-difference that the developer alludes to in interviews is pretty much a joke, but do put the player in circumstances that they don't feel like a winner with regardless of the outcome. If you enjoy shooters but would like them to have a campaign that feels like it matters, Spec Ops The Line is a good choice. Where it lacks in gameplay, it makes up in story, characterization change, and one hell of a roller coaster ride up to the end...where it sadly falters.

Series that I Want Resurrected

Publishers have been pushing old games on us with HD Remakes and digital re-releases. I think they are trying to find cheap ways to make a buck, but they should also be looking at potential games that still interest gamers. I want to run through a list of series and/or games that I want to make a return and bring something new to the table. It's time to get away from the same games that we continue to add a number to every two years or so. If new IP's aren't selling points to publishers, perhaps bringing back nostalgic games can do the trick.



Comix Zone

 I started reading comics when I was six years old. I grew fond of the artwork and storylines that were only held back by imagination and time-sensitive deadlines. It gave me an escape in a way no movie or TV show could. So when a game like Comix Zone was released, I was eager to see how they adapted a comic book feel in a game. Sadly I would never get to really know as it was a brutally hard game that I have never passed the second level. But the game had a beautiful look to it and the comic book feel of jumping between panels and choosing which way you wanted to go was a blast. And although there have been games to try and capture a similar feel, none have felt quite on par with the feeling Comix Zone gave me.




Mother/Earthbound

 Whenever I feel I can add the Mother series onto my list, I will do it. Earthbound is my favorite game of all time, and I am currently working my way through Mother 3. I tried the original Mother, and while I found the premise of the story intriguing, the enemies and random encounters killed my interest in finishing it. Luckily they made improvements on the encounter mechanic but kept the dark but light-hearted feel of the original. The setting, characters, mood and music all contributed to my love of the series and I am saddened that the US has really only had Earthbound to play with. I never purchased a N64, and part of it was...Earthbound 64 was never released. And while I know there's probably no chance of a new Mother game being released, I hold hopes that there's still potential to do it or even a re-release of the original games.

Chrono Trigger/Cross

There are very few RPG's that have had a lasting impact on players like Chrono Trigger. Even if you stripped away the time travel aspect, music, the number of endings, battle system, story, and the art style, you are still left with some of the best characters in any RPG, and some could argue, gaming in general. While Chrono Cross tried to live up to it's predecessor, it failed in many respects but still has a cult following among many gamers, myself included. Yet, there haven't been many games that I get lost into but the Chrono games pull it off with ease. Not only is the world itself large, but when you factor in the time travel, it expands it so much more. Chrono Trigger is considered to be one of the greatest RPG's of all time, and to a much lesser extent Chrono Cross as well, and adding to the Chrono fiction is something I thought Chrono Break would accomplish before it was swept back under the rug.






Destruction Derby

Before the Burnout series impressed gamers with it's fun and ridiculously good looking crash modes, Destruction Derby was the game that helped make car games fun again. Simulation games can be fun and all, and so can shooting missiles, but there's an inner joy I get when I can ram my car into other ones in a last-car-driving match. Despite it's terrible graphics and a difficulty I could never surpass, Destruction Derby gave me a car game I wanted. Don't make me race around in a circle for 3 laps. Put me in a coliseum and let me play chicken with the cars across from me. And although Burnout's crash mode is incredible, it doesn't satisfy me in the same way a new Destruction Derby game would.

Killer Instinct

Let me preface this by saying: I hate fighting games. Loathe them. If there's not an easy mode, I rarely can get past the second fighter. I'm terrible with combos, I'm awful with defense and counters, and I can not pull out special moves for the life of me. Despite my hesitation with fighters, I would leap all over a new Killer Instinct. The look of the characters and the characters themselves were only held back by the limited number of games they released. Even the music, which in fighters I would normally disregard, came with a CD entitled "Killer Cuts" which was surprisingly solid. The number of times I listened to "K.I. Feeling" is embarrassing. The recent resurgence of fighting games thanks to Street Fighter 4 made me believe we would see another Killer Instinct considering the last one was on the Nintendo 64. No such luck. Killer Instinct has not made a return and it baffles me the same way Darkstalkers fans are with a new release (or any release for that matter) of their games.

Rocksteady and Silver Age Batman

So news was released this week that the developer behind Batman Arkham Asylum and Arkham City are set to release a new Batman game in 2014. There is one catch though! It's going to be a more stylized version than the past two games were. This is due to it being a prequel to Batman: Arkham Asylum and set in the Silver Age backdrop.

Well what does that mean exactly? For those who aren't familiar with the term Silver Age, this was an era in comics where everything was more lighthearted and goofy. Before the Frank Millers of comics decided to brood everything up, comics were over-the-top and weird. To use the best example, the 60's Adam West Batman is a good idea of what the Silver Age represented. Shark repellent, quippy dialogue, running around with a large bomb, and being punny are all things that the Silver Age of comics boiled down to.

The question is, why would Rocksteady go this route? After two successful games with a grim and gritty realistic Batman, why go the route of the 60's and more recent Brave and the Bold cartoon? It would seem that would possibly turn off a lot of fans that don't want a more comedic take on Batman. But perhaps they have a plan on how to make it work, especially if it will be a sequel. Here's what I think could happen...

If the game is indeed a prequel, why would they offer such a drastic change of appearance to it? The city of Gotham feels to dark to ever have been a colorful and chipper city to begin with. But Rocksteady does have something they can fall back on to bring this different world into the game and have it still fit in. Enter Batmite.

Similar to Superman's magical 5th dimensional imp Mr. Mxylt...spt..lck...the big headed floating man in a derby......Batmite is a creature with magical powers that from time to time would come and cause mischief with Batman. Batmite is a character who grew to love Batman and idolize him. So every once in a while he would make an appearance and change a lot of weird things to see his hero in action. At one point he even changed the characters to reflect their name counterpart. So someone like Catwoman was actually a cat. Stuff like that. He even can make appearance in the DC offices and force them to write a book with him in it. His reality-warping seems to know no bounds.

So it would seem to introduce a character like Batmite could give the Arkham series a different look with the more simplistic artsy appearance of the Silver Age. But there's one other route they could go which seems to be the one more possible. A few years back, a writer found a way to incorporate all of Batman's history into the life of one man. As this writer (Grant Morrison for those of you wondering) has experienced trippy hallucinations due to drugs in the past, he wrote a story that found an explanation for the weirdness of the Silver Age and an incorporation of Batmite into it as well.

In the flashback, Batman was attempting to understand the psyche of his villains, most notably the Joker. To do so, he subjected himself to not only sense deprivation but also many drugs to figure out how the villains think. Thus, the psychedelic experiences that many Silver Age books inflicted to Batman. The man who overlooked these happenings also implanted a hypnotic trigger in Batman, that when triggered, caused Batman to pretty much lose it. He changed costumes and became more violent and had Batmite following him around.

If Rocksteady goes with an approach to the next game, I'm going to say this will be it. A villain is able to get into the head of Batman which changes the entire world and seems to set it in the Silver Age era. This would excuse the style change and maybe explain the Justice League involvement. And if one were to suspect the beginning of Arkham Asylum as a clue, then the Joker would be involved as well. Which would tie in what caused the Joker to be taken in at the beginning of Arkham Asylum in the first place.

In truth, it doesn't matter to me how they decide to do this game. Rocksteady made two amazing games with Batman, something that I don't think anyone expected them to do. This new route of Silver Age and inclusion of the Justice League sounds like them ramping up their game and testing the waters for some other possibilities. I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, and for those cautious about a drastic change, I think it's in capable and trusting hands.

The Backwards Compatibility Enigma

The recent talk about the looming next generation of consoles have brought up a topic that has led to heated discussions. It involves the ability to play games one already owns on a new system that is being released. Many have gone on record saying that if the new systems are not capable of playing older games then they will not bother purchasing them. We all know how that will turn out, but for the sake of argument, let's say that's true. I want to quickly go over the backwards compatibility discussion and state that it shouldn't matter whether or not it's available in upcoming systems.

1. If you have the games, keep the system

There's this false assumption that with every iteration of a new console, the big three companies MUST put backwards compatibility in it. I think what most of these gamers forget is that backwards compatibility is a luxury, not a standard for consoles. Think about it. To my knowledge, the PS2 was the first console to really allow gamers to play games from the previous generation. We never had that with the transition to other consoles like the NES to SNES, the Genesis to Saturn, SNES to Gamecube, etc. You could argue that handhelds for the most part has been able to do that, but there's iterations there where that isn't true.

The problem is, most companies hear consumers complain about the price. In their effort to make the systems cheaper, they have to cut out parts of the system. If gamers are concerned about playing old games, shouldn't they have the system for those games already? If not, why get rid of it since there shouldn't be any guarantee the new system can play them? Companies are not held to any obligation to keep old system hardware in a new hardware iteration. This isn't anything new, and has happened for quite some time. The transition from VHS to DVD. Cassette tapes to Cd's. This is just going to be another transition where they held on to the ability to do it for a while, but it's time to phase that option out. Gamers need to get over it and keep the system they want those games on or realize that companies need money to function. One of their ways to capitalize on this idea, is by offering new methods to pay for old games.

2. Collections and Classics

There's been an influx of video games coming both digitally and retail involving the purchasing of old video games from previous generations. For example, you can purchase old Final Fantasy games on PSN from the PS1 Classics part of the store. If you enjoyed games like God of War or Devil May Cry, both have had HD collections of past games on a disc. Gamers who've already played these games see it as a money grab from them, but they forget there's new gamers who have never experienced these games. If anyone should be buying these, it's those gamers. Not the smitten ones.

This is yet another reason why the companies will keep the systems from having backwards compatibility. Why allow them to play old owned games from systems they didn't feel were worth keeping around when they can release them again to be purchased? Final Fantasy 4 is the perfect example of this as it's released on practically everything. It's become such a staple for a console/handheld that it should be mentioned up there with the likes of Ridge Racer and it being a release day game.

It's easy for them to make money off of love for old games. Add in something like achievements or better graphics in parts (not all, even) of the game, and it's likely to still sell. That will be one benefit the companies see in phasing out backwards compatibility and offering these games again for not only cheap, but slightly better versions of the game graphically.


3. Forced to Buy

Customers have this warped sense of logic when it comes to re-release of old games. They believe that if a company removes backwards compatibility and releases the game digitally or on disc, then they MUST purchase the game. Customers apparently have all free-will stripped from their souls when companies do this, because they have no choice but to purchase these games they release.

It's all utter nonsense as the companies aren't forcing gamers to purchase anything. Just because they don't allow the game to be played on a new system and are releasing it in new formats doesn't mean it's the only way to play it now. If you have the game, go play it on the system it was created for. This selfish and ridiculous belief that the game you own is unplayable now and the new release is the only method to experience it is possibly the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

It's one thing to dislike the company for removing something you felt was a bonus, but it's something else entirely for an idiotic notion that it's the only way to play the game now. These gamers need to rethink what they say before they spout these imaginary realities of how consumerism works.


4. It's a Bonus

I have to reiterate this. These console developers are not obligated by any means to incorporate ways to play old games. The consoles are being created to play new experiences with possible means to play older games. If those means are to repurchase the games, then so be it. That is their decision to make. If consumers don't like it, they have other means to play the games. Either by the console the game was created for or emulation. The first option would be preferred, but some games I can't really frown on by using the latter.

If this generation of consoles didn't allow for users to play old games like the original models allowed (which didn't work on 100% of games anyhow), would this still be a problem? Probably. The Internet wasn't really available to everyone in earlier years of gaming, so I'm not sure how loud the outcry is over backwards compatibility between consoles, but I'm sure it was still there. But it's loudest now because it became a reality. But it's something the companies gave their consumers as a bonus and never once did they say they will continue to release consoles with the ability to play older games. We as fans seem to ignore that and expect it. We are greedy, but like to project our greed on companies to make them seem greedier.


5. Fans Do Have a Point...

Companies shot themselves in the foot by showing it's possible. They can't really blame the consumers for wanting something as great as backwards compatibility for new consoles when they showed it's possible to do so. Gamers want a reason to buy a new console and ditch the old one. Why do they want 8 different consoles in their home when they can condense it down to two or three? And why would they want to purchase the same game on different platforms when they already own a copy?

Piracy and emulation is something that a lot of publishers and developers may frown on, but when gamers already own one (or in some cases many) copies of a game, they don't want to purchase it once again. They will go to more extreme measures to play the game especially if they feel cheated by big wigs who don't look at it from their point of view. You take into consideration that some of these games are no longer in print, their copy has stopped working, or any other potential problems, the fallback solution may not rub those looking to sell another copy the right way.

Consumers should be heard. It's their money being spent on games that are changed very little but have the same going price as a brand new game from 15 years ago. If they can purchase a used game off eBay for $5 for the Gamecube, why would they want to then spent $29.99 on the same game for the WiiU especially if there were no changes other than it being put on a different disc format? Fans are not hesitant to verbalize their feelings on the statement, and it's not unreasonable for them to do so either.

As a fan, backwards compatibility is fantastic. It allows me to sell or trade in an old console and buy a new one and reduce the number I have lying around my TV or shoving into the back of my closet. I can spend my money on newer games instead of games I already have in my collection and I also have games to fall back on while newer games are in production. But as someone who also sees the side of the companies, it makes sense for them to take the option off. It lowers the price of the console like most gamers want and gives them the ability to re-release games to not only give the experience to new gamers, but also make money off of anyone who wants to play the game on the new system. However, it is their right to take out backwards compatibility and re-release old games whenever they want. It is their product and they can make it however they choose.

REVIEW: Lollipop Chainsaw

Occasionally in video games, you come across a concept that seems like it would work better than any game before it. So when an idea like Lollipop Chainsaw is brought up, it seems like a surefire win. "Okay. You're a cheerleader who runs around with a colorful chainsaw and the head of your boyfriend. Zombies have taken over your town and you're running around bashing them with pompoms and receive stars when you decapitate them. It's in the style of a comic book with licensed metal music. You don't see rainbows and zombies mix, but with Lollipop Chainsaw, they go hand in hand". Yet, even with an amazing premise, Suda51 and Grasshopper Manufacture can't pull more than a mediocre action hack-n-slash game out of their locker.

In Lollipop Chainsaw, the player takes the role of Juliet Starling, a lively but moronic cheerleader who comes from a family of zombie hunters. Aided by her family and her boyfriend...well, his severed head at least...Juliet runs around her zombie infested town to defeat four demonic forces before the barrier between our world and the demonic/zombie realm is destroyed. This barrier is being brought down by a fellow schoolmate of Juliet who has felt rejected from society. Maybe if he tried to be more presentable in the looks department....

The story itself shines a light on the major problem with Lollipop Chainsaw. There's just nothing really special about it aside from a few bells and whistles. The characters themselves are annoying with Juliet being the standard airheaded bimbo that cheerleaders are stereotyped as. Juliet's family does have Cordelia who is the saving grace of the Starling family as the only one I really liked. Their dad is a toned down version of Elvis that doesn't add much other than some remarks to Juliet's beheaded boyfriend. Her younger sister, Rosalind, is spunky but incredibly dense and loud whose only use in the game is driving some large vehicles. Juliet says her mom is the reason they "wear their vagina proudly", but she doesn't do anything in the game to make me understand why. Luckily, Juliet's boyfriend Nick helps make the game a tad more tolerable to get through. Whereas Juliet seems to roll with the punches and nothing seems to shock her, Nick is the more sane one in the game. He constantly remarks about how crazy things are, and the constant bickering and witty banter he has with Juliet is quite pleasant. Whereas most talking heads don't really think about it, Nick asks almost immediately, "How am I able to talk without a thorax?!"

The dialogue in the game tends to be a toss up. Most of the game is littered with comments to Juliet from zombies about how they want to "fist your ass with my head" or "I'm going to fuck your father." Mix that in with the usual "bitch", "slut" & "whore"and you see why this can get old real fast. In fact if hearing it wasn't enough, one of the boss battles actually spell it out for you where you are attacked by the giant words of "vanilla slut" or something to that affect. The students you save aren't so rude, so instead they'll comment about "I'm totally going to masturbate to you tonight". Fortunately, there are times where it catches you off guard with something funny (such as how Frankenberries are propaganda). The problem is wanting to not mute the tv from everything else being said in the game.

The music, however, will also keep you from turning it off....probably. The majority of the game has tracks from Children of Bodom, Arch Enemy, and Dragonforce. That doesn't keep them from adding in the tracks of "Lollipop" by the Chordettes for the store menu or "Pac Man Fever" by Buckner & Garcia. The set list for Lollipop Chainsaw is surprisingly solid, but also incredibly quick to repeat. As much as I loved the soundtrack, I found myself getting sick of some of the music as it would begin to loop. Not the biggest turnoff, but like most things from Lollipop Chainsaw, one good thing is offset by a bad.

The actual gameplay of Lollipop Chainsaw, while simple, doesn't bring anything new to the table that other action games haven't already done. Juliet has the ability to attack zombies with her pompoms which act as light attacks to eventually stun the zombies. Once this happens, a heavy attack is the next best option which is when Juliet will rip out the chainsaw and start slicing away at the zombies. If the zombies had been stunned, it leads to an automatic decapitation. If you are able to remove the heads of three or more zombies at once, you are treated to a starry and colorful closeup screen of Juliet with zombie heads rising from the bodies in a still frame display of sorts. Based on the number of zombies this is used on, Juliet is rewarded with coins that can go to improving her stats or learning new moves. She also receives a bonus in star power which will cause her to go all sparkly with one-hit kills with her chainsaw. The combo attacks themselves don't pose any problem as they are easy enough to perform, but there's no need to use a whole lot especially since the one of the messages on the loading screen specifically tells you which single combo move is the strongest. There's also the option to hone in on enemies, but it made the combat worse and it wasn't really necessary.

The Chop2Shop.com store is a little kiosk with a giant yellow chick on it that is found throughout the levels. Here, Juliet can spend gold and platinum coins she receives on new clothes to wear, new attack combos, stat boosts, original music, concept art, or items to use in game. These items consist of lollipops Juliet will eat to regain health, the ability to buy platinum coins (the more difficult coin to obtain), or bullets for her speaker gun.

I think it's a speaker gun at least. It appears to be a megaphone that Juliet will pull out which then fires bullets in a less-than-ideal shooting mechanic the game has. While blowing off zombie heads are possible, it can be frustrating to do so as it's an automatic lock-on, but the zombies don't always move straight towards you. So you fire, they move to the side, you miss. Happened quite a lot for me, but it's an easy way to remove zombies from a distance if you don't want to get up close and personal. This is also an easy way to rack up some coins and star power as getting three zombies in a row isn't difficult, and you are still treated to extra coins and power.

The last battle mechanic is Nick Roulette, which uses Nick's head as a weapon. To do so, tickets can either be bought at the Chop2Shop or found throughout levels. Using one brings up the roulette wheel to use a number of moves: Juliet can tie Nick's head to a rope and swing it around her body hitting any nearby zombies, use head's Nick as a sort of piggy bank in which she shakes it and coins or lollipops bounce out, shoot his head out of the megaphone, or something else that wasn't particularly memorable. Not a particularly useful battle mechanic as it's not really any stronger than anything Juliet is already capable of, but does add another option when attacking zombies.

However, Nick's not done there. At various points in the game, a headless zombie will pop into the fray and stand there. No real explanation why, but he's glowing blue. These are for Nick. You force Nick's head on them and you get to enjoy a frustrating Quick Time Event moment where he will dance or shuffle his way to something that's blocking your path and remove it. It's not fun, and it's used repeatedly. The same seems to happen with Juliet where she finds a trampoline or some blocks that bounce her into the air. Yet another QTE but fortunately is done for bonus coins. As you perform these, Juliet will pose in the air as if her cheerleading squad is tossing her at an event. But don't worry, if those QTE's don't do it for you, Juliet can also be above zombies in parts of the game. Here, she can hop across a section on top of zombie heads in another QTE moment. Oh yes, one more. QTE's happen at other points in the game as objects fly towards you and you have to chainsaw them or flip out of the way. If you haven't caught on yet, Lollipop Chainsaw enjoys it's QTE's. But I didn't and you probably won't either.

Mini-games also plague the game in one form or another. On two occasions you will find yourself playing basketball with zombies. In this game, zombies rush you as you try to score enough points to beat the zombie team that's already ahead by a 100 points. You have a time limit to do so and one zombie who guards the basket. These are automatically one hit kills with the chainsaw, and as you attack, the heads act as a basketball and go for the basket. The one guard zombie can block these keeping you from scoring. Get him out of the way, and it's smooth sailing. This is similarly done with baseball where you have Nick run the bases with one of the zombie bodies. Shoot the zombies trying to attack you until he can run around the bases enough times to win. Dull and lazy games to incorporate in Lollipop Chainsaw that felt like afterthoughts to pad the game time out. However, one level has Juliet and Nick take a trip through an arcade. In this, you get to reenact old school video games such as Pac-Man and Pong. Although these aren't anything special, I still enjoyed these nods to classic games and a break from the lackluster level designs.

While zombies can pose a problem due to sheer numbers, there's nothing about them that should cause you to worry about difficulty. They do provide a variety of zombies from ones that fly, to ones that spin around like a vortex, or even ones that spit fire or shoot guns. However, they just aren't that hard to finish off. The same can be said about the boss battles which are also uninspiring but I was always curious as to what musical genre that boss would be based around. Sadly, Josey (the funk zombie), had his gimmick played out in Saints Row: The Third. Auto tune for a character is no longer funny. Sorry Josey.

Of all the disappointments, there was one that hit me the hardest. It was the look of the game. Lollipop Chainsaw isn't ugly by any means, but...once again...there's nothing to make it stand out. Instead of keeping this clean but bland cartoony look, they should have went the route that they did with their loading screens and some cutscenes. Focus more on the comic book appeal that this game could have brought. I would have found this game much more interesting to look at had they went for a Ben-Day dot approach to the look of Lollipop Chainsaw. Had they brought in panel transitions and maybe speech bubbles from time to time to exude the goofiness that this game could have been, I would have paid more attention to character and level designs. I will continue to look to the future for a Comix Zone reboot of some sort to fulfill this game fantasy I have.

Looking back over this review, it seems like I focused on a lot of the negative parts of the game. Trust me, there's a lot of improvement this game could make. But I really did enjoy it. I do like a more cartoony approach to games as the more serious realistic art style has grown tiresome. The combat was solid, just nothing worth noting in terms of making it any better than other games out there. The game has some quirky funny parts, but it also has a lot of face-palming moments. Character interactions are great, but sadly it's only one character that makes them great. For every positive thing that I can say about Lollipop Chainsaw, there's something that it can improve on. In an industry that seems to shy away from loony and goofy story ideas, this game could have been a real blast. Instead, it turns into a slight bummer. The bummer of the summer.

Looking Ahead to E3 2012

This time next week will be one of the most exciting moments in video games to happen this year. Between June 5-7, E3 will be taking place in Los Angeles. Like most people, I will not be there. Instead I'll be paying attention to the various news outlets who will feed us numerous videos and articles prominently featuring important (and not so important) news to come from E3. What I wanted to do was pull a reverse-Mr. Caffeine and look ahead to what E3 more than likely has in store.

*Doodly Doodly Doop*

*Doodly Doodly Doop*

• Sony - After the *ahem* lackluster performance of the Vita, it will be no surprise that most of their press conference will revolve around selling their new handheld system. They will probably show more of the connectivity between the PS3 system and the Vita by showcasing games like Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale (which was recently announced for the Vita as well as PS3) and a game we haven't really seen since last year's E3, Ruin (now titled Warriors Lair). Of course I'm sure they'll have PS3 games to show as well including God of War: Ascension, The Last of Us, Dust 514, and LittleBigPlanet Karting. Wouldn't it be nice to see some Grand Theft Auto V footage here? If there's a conference to have it, I'm going to go with Sony. Those expecting a new system announcement...I'm guessing you'll need to hold your breath.

• Microsoft - I think Microsoft has sort of fallen under the radar for E3 this year since most people can really only name Halo 4 as something they will show. Alan Wake was rumored to have a sequel underway, so that's a possibility, along with Forza which seems to be a staple almost every year. It would be no surprise to have Kinect shown for a while with more application uses and games, but I think Microsoft will try and go with exclusive content for the main serving of content. Since the Resident Evil demo was a timed exclusive for the 360, I'm guessing there may be some gameplay footage shown at this conference. And of course, don't count them out of holding out exclusivity for Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 as well. New console here? Nope. Hold it just a little longer.

• Nintendo - Here's that new console you were wanting: the WiiU. Although most people were looking forward to it last year, there wasn't a whole lot to go off of. I would say we can expect to see a price for the system, to see the system itself, and perhaps...a name change. Mario and Pikmin have already been announced for WiiU so those should be seen, and remember that mention of Smash Brothers last year? Maybe a quick video of that will be shown as well. Then some name drops of games coming out for the system and finally the time period it'll be released. Maybe not an exact day, but I would say "Winter 2012". But before all of that, expect a lot of 3DS games, including ones mentioned last year. Luigi's Mansion seems like a no-brainer along with the New Super Mario Bros. 2 game, but I have a feeling there may also be a new Kirby game in the works and some sort of RPG shown at the conference as well.

• Ubisoft -  What do you honestly think? They have one of the biggest games coming out this year in Assassins Creed 3, so there is no doubt that it will come up for a lengthy amount of time during their press conference. The same with Far Cry 3 which was also shown last year and seems to be another of their core game they want to push. Rayman Legends has recently been announced and the predecessor had time devoted to it last year, so there's a good chance it'll be shown. They also announced Shootmania to be shown at E3, and it seems like something that would find it's way into their conference as well. The crux of their presentation will depend on if they have Mr. Caffeine do the hosting. Despite how terrible he was, I found enjoyment in all of his bombed jokes.

• EA - I would say EA should have a strong appearance at E3 this year. They have Madden 13 to show and all the various updates to the game that seem to be receiving some praise, Crysis 3 which was recently announced with lots of high-tech bow and arrow action, and Medal of Honor may make an appearance with Warfighter. Also, remember that ending of Mass Effect 3 that caused the Internet to implode with hatred? Well, I expect them to show hints of the "true" ending DLC that they said they would make on the fans behalf. With Katy Perry having some sort of The Sims involvement, maybe they'll even treat everyone to a performance by her as well! Oh yeah, and that new SimCity game that they plan to drop on PC's next year. You remember that game right?

Side notes of confirmations, rumors and speculations:

• Skyrim DLC: Dawnguard - It's already been announced and...that's about it. If they want to show gameplay of it (or anything else for that matter), there would be no better time than at E3.
• Epic & Unreal Engine 4 - Epic plans on revealing Unreal Engine 4 and minds will be melted. In so many words, that's what has been promised upon the showing.
• The Last Guardian - I said it last year, and I'll say it this year. Eventually I'll have to be right...right? But after Fumito Ueda's departure from Sony, it may speed up the process. But I didn't add it to Sony's press conference...just in case.
• Overkill & Valve - Earlier this week there was talk of a collaboration between the PAYDAY: The Heist and Left 4 Dead crews. While it may seem early, it would sure be nice to see what kind of collaboration is taking place exactly.
• Kingdom Hearts - Tetsuya Nomura may have put his foot in his mouth by saying Kingdom Hearts is due for another console game. Whether this an HD collection or Kingdom Hearts 3, he may want to do some calisthenics if nothing is mentioned shortly. He said we may know if we finish Dream Drop Distance (releasing in July), but that's soooo far away.
• Just Cause 3 (and 4?) - Well, since Just Cause 4 already has web domains in the works from recent news, that could mean Just Cause 3 is underway. That could mean an appearance next week at E3. Hopefully someone from Eidos parachutes it in.
• Half-Life Episode 3 - You can't have a rumors and speculations section without including this game. No real basis for it...but yeah.

Up until doing this, I was kind of hesitant about E3. This year in general has felt somewhat underwhelming in video games other than an occassional few. The constant push-backs in release dates aren't helping at all with Bioshock: Infinite, Aliens: Colonial Marines, Tomb Raider, etc now shipping in 2013 instead of 2012 have caused me to feel a sense of sadness from how big this year was going to be. In truth, this year still has potential for being a pretty amazing year. There's a lot of games lined up that we know about, but may not think about all the time. Then there's the ones that still haven't been announced. Add in the potential of the WiiU being released by the end of this year and 2012 doesn't look half bad. Sometimes it just takes a list to see that.

REVIEW: Binary Domain

Having been let down by the demo for Binary Domain, I was hesitant to play the game. While the mechanic of amputating various robot body parts with my bullets was fun, it was the recoil of the shooting that turned me off of the game in general. While I feel the recoil can be a bit much in the game that caused me to have some spastic shooting, Binary Domain excels in other areas that made this a game I had a hard time putting down.

Unlike most shooters, Binary Domain weaves a story that was both interesting and thought provoking. Set in the somewhat near future, you play as a two man wrecking crew brought into Tokyo, Japan to stop a robot manufacturer who has been charged with breaking "clause 21" of the New Geneva Convention. Along the way you meet up with some other members from the same organization that sent you to Tokyo and work together to bring in Yoji Amada, the man who broke clause 21.

You find out relatively early about Clause 21. It is to prevent robots from being manufactured who...in so many words...don't know they are robots. They are programmed with human emotions, human memories, human everything. These individuals are referred to as "Hollow Children". To them, they are not robots, they are humans. That is until half of their face gets blown off and they can see for themselves they are indeed robots. Some of the best cut scenes revolve around the realization of who these people really are or the people who never knew in the first place and the reaction they have of finding out this long time friend of theirs was never truly human.

It's not just the mystery of "who's a Hollow Child" that makes the story interesting, it's the discrimination that happens when they are found out. There's no talking it out, because people just flat out despise Hollow Children. And while I don't think the story makes it quite clear why everyone hates them so much, there's a level of paranoia that grows regarding potential spies in certain individuals. Regardless, I found the story much better than what most shooters provide, and if that's enough to drive you to play this, I would suggest Binary Domain. It doesn't hurt that although the characters can be a bit stereotypical, they are still fun characters and they each have different interactions with each other.

The gameplay itself isn't groundbreaking, nor is it potentially bad. I did find the shooting to be rather erratic where short bursts were better than long streams of gunfire, but perhaps that's more my method of shooting that is flawed opposed to the gameplay itself. The guns themselves have little uniqueness to them other than the standard "This one's a sniper rifle, this is a shotgun, etc" to them, but the main gun your character has includes an electric pulse shot that can cause bigger enemies to pause or remove barriers in your way. Since your main weapon is upgradable, I found it pointless to switch to other weapons other than the need to use them if I ran out of ammo, except for the occasional chain gun an enemy type will drop from time to time.

As the player, you are given an option of which teammates you want to have watch your back from mission to mission. While the interactions between them are different and can be humorous, I didn't really notice any gameplay difference although the game would make you think there is. Each character has a preferred weapon that they use, but I didn't notice any missions where some would be better than others or that they were even better than others when using them. Really, it didn't seem to matter which weapons they used, because they seemed to get the job done. Which isn't a knock against the game, because very rarely do the AI seem competent enough to tag along with you.

The game also has an option to use your headset and yell commands to your teammates on how you would like them to proceed in the combat. You can run through the various command issues in the pause menu that allows it to sync with your voice so it recognizes what you say when you say it. However, too often was I yelling something that it couldn't recognize even it was clear as day. I don't know of an easier way for me to yell "Move!" into the headset without it sounding like something else I must have already said. So needless to say, it is a cool inclusion, but felt lacking when it came to performance. Basic commands can be selected without the headset fortunately, so it's not a big setback. But if you would rather someone else run in and die in your place and weed out the enemies, it would be nice if screaming "FIRE!" at the top of your lungs would register with the game correctly.

The enemy variation is something I also want to commend Binary Domain for pulling off so well. Although the main enemy type are green robot soldiers who will hide behind cover and shoot at you or aimlessly walk  from side to side without caring they've been shot, they mix it up enough to keep it interesting. They will attach these green robots to flying...well...canisters is the best way I can describe it where they will try to pick you off from the air. There's a big boy robot that will attack you with a chain gun that if you are in the open, you won't last long. There's some that prefer melee attacks and flip around like little ninjas, some that look like police robots that can take a bit more damage, and red ones that tend to be more up close and personal with their weapons. If those were not enough, you will definitely run into some that tower over you the size of buses or worse yet, buildings. Lock-On missiles, heavier firepower, better armor...these are the ones that have it all and can cause problems.

Regardless of which ones you run into, the fun comes into taking them out. This can lead to various strategies on how to defeat a horde of robots. It's a pleasure to hear the little ding and watch a robots head explode right before they turn around and start shooting other robots. This in turn causes those robots to take out that robot as well since they are deemed a threat also. Perhaps you like to cripple them by shooting out their legs and watch them scrape their way along the ground to grab a hold of you if they do reach you. Or just blow the arms off and force them to resort to a headbutt as their method of attack. Doesn't really matter which you choose because it never got boring destroying these robots.

I haven't touched the multiplayer as I was having a bit of trouble finding anyone to connect to, but I'm hoping it's more co-op campaign than any sort of death match or horde mode. This game would be a lot of fun with other people playing although it would lose out on the interaction between characters. But overall, there's not much I can say was absolutely horrible about this game. It was a pleasant surprise considering my negative outlook from the demo I didn't want to finish, and aside from some quick time events, rail shooting and sliding/jet craft riding sections, it was one of the better shooters I've played in recent memory.

Sadly, the game sold poorly. So there's little to no chance this game will receive a sequel although I would love to play another game like it. I think the game ends in a way where there's no need for a sequel, but I had a blast shooting the armor off robots and removing body parts from them. SEGA released a great, and vastly underrated and overlooked, game that more people should try out. Instead these players will continue to focus on the rehashing of mediocre Sonic games so they have something to call SEGA out on and ignore one of the best games that has been released this year. For shame.