Resident Evil: Operation Raccoon City review: A disaster worth covering up

Imagine, if you will, a cream-filled doughnut. It’s fresh from the oven so the dough is gooey and moist with a rich, sweet center. Sounds pretty good, right? Now, imagine replacing that warm dough with bland, tasteless tofu. Still want to eat that doughnut? Consider that because it’s basically what you should ask yourself before playing Slant Six Games’ latest, “Resident Evil: Operation Raccoon City.”

Allow me to elaborate on that rather odd culinary creation in the paragraph above. In this analogy, the “Resident Evil” series, its characters and lore, is the cream filling and the gameplay, mechanics and story of “Operation Raccoon City,” built around that “Resident Evil” lore, is the boring tofu. Sure, with every bite you get a little, maybe even a lot of, the rich, tasty “RE” series but for the most part, you’re chewing through the boring, tasteless mechanics of “ORC.”

"RE: ORC” is a third person shooter developed by Slant Six Games. I was initially drawn to the title because of its inventive story – taking place during the event of “Resident Evil 2,” a team of Umbrella operatives, codenamed The Wolfpack (commence “Hangover” jokes), is sent into the Raccoon City disaster to clean up the mess. Well not so much “clean up” as “destroy any evidence of Umbrella’s involvement.” Being that “RE2” is one of my all-time favorite Playstation games, and one of the better “RE” titles, I was thrilled to learn that a game was in the works that would show the conflict from a side we rarely get to see in video games – the villain’s point of view. What kind of new information would we learn about Umbrella or about the way its operatives work? What else would we discover about the incident itself? What kind of people would work for Umbrella’ security services? These are just a few of the dozens of questions that could be asked given the situation.

Wolfpack member Bertha gets up close and personal with a Hunter

Unfortunately one of the biggest problems with this game is how Slant Six took such an interesting, creative setting for a game and proceeded to do absolutely nothing interesting or creative with it. Little in the way of plot or narrative is presented to the player. When I say that, I mean little of the plot itself is explained. Next to nothing is ever brought up about the events surrounding the disaster, leaving old fans to rely on their previous knowledge of the series to set the stage and leaving new players completely in the dark.

The Wolfpack is sent to Raccoon City to cover up Umbrella’s involvement in the viral outbreak, which is literally all you’ll be doing in the single player campaign. Destroying evidence and facilities, silencing witnesses and tracking down key “RE” characters like Leon Kennedy and Ada Wong are about the extent of the Wolfpack’s adventures. On top of that, the narrative is so shoddily presented that each mission feels almost unrelated to the previous one, connected only by the characters and setting.

I was extremely discouraged at these revelations. I had very high hopes for this title, that the story it presented would be on par with “RE2,” “RE4” or “RE5,” but the lack of Capcom’s involvement in its development is obvious. Outside of the “Wolfpack covering Umbrella’s tracks” story, little to no thought went into creating an original story. The Wolfpack members themselves are never developed, giving the player no reason to care about any of them, and antagonistic characters disappear as quickly as they are introduced. After a certain amount of time with the game, it became clear that Slant Six developed “RE: ORC” with a focus on fine-tuning the multiplayer aspect of the title, rather than creating an engaging narrative.

The multiplayer portion of “RE: ORC” features four different modes – Team Attack, Biohazard, Heroes and Survivor. Also, the story portion of “ORC” can be play cooperatively with up to three friends, but only online. I know you want to sell more games, Slant Six/Capcom, but many gamers out there still appreciate being offered split-screen play as an option. Team Attack is the standard, four-on-four, team deathmatch mode of “ORC,” while Biohazard tasks teams with collecting and scoring T-Virus samples, Heroes lets you take up the mantle of an iconic character from the series (like Leon Kennedy or Hunk) and Survivor sees both teams battling for a spot on the last rescue chopper out of Raccoon City.

Using zombies as a meat shield is an effective tactic (when it feels like working)

I appreciated the attempts at offering creative modes besides just deathmatch but honestly, Team Attack is the mode I found myself returning to most often. Biohazard can drag a bit and it’s easy for an uncoordinated team to get dominated. I found the concept of Heroes to be pretty ingenious, even though it is essentially Team Attack with recognizable characters. Also, Survivor is a cool concept, though executed poorly (the rescue chopper appears at random spots on the map and there’s only four spots on the chopper - you expect me to just believe that members of the Wolfpack and US Spec Ops will just peacefully ride out of Raccoon City together?)

I also wanted to point out that the XP earned in the story and multiplayer modes of “RE: ORC” is persistent over both modes and can be used to buy new weapons and abilities for the six playable characters. I found it interesting that, though the multiplayer clearly is the focus of this game, playing the story nets you a considerably larger amount of XP – another telling sign about which mode received more attention and which mode they’re basically bribing you to play.

Finally, I must address the countless issues I had with the design and mechanics of “RE: ORC.” At nearly every turn, I managed to encounter a design flaw or an odd gameplay mechanic that either infuriated me, confused me, or some terrible combination of the two. My biggest complaint is with the cover system. In most third person shooters that utilize cover, getting into and out of said cover is generally handled by pressing a button (as evidenced by such great third person shooters as “Mass Effect 3” and “Gears of War.”). In “RE: ORC,” players walk their character up against a wall (or box or other piece of the environment) and hope that they stick to it – that’s it. Also, since there’s no button to handle cover, there’s also no conveniently placed dive roll move either. I say “conveniently placed” because there is a diving slide, but you need to hold sprint (clicking the left stick), hold a direction on that stick, then hit A. So even if you want to dive backward you still need to hold sprint. But wait – there’s more. The cover system is so shoddy that moving your character to the edge of a piece of cover often leaves you visible to the enemy – your character doesn’t just “stop” at an edge but rather will continue moving until he’s completely out of cover. There’s no fancy moves like “leaning,” “corner turns” or “moving quickly from cover to cover” just lazy “mash your guy against that box and hope he ducks.”

And if strange design issues aren’t enough to give you a fit, the mechanics just might. Each character’s movement, whether it’s the larger explosives expert Beltway or the lithe soldier Lupo, feels plodding and heavy. Aiming movement is equally slow, no matter how much you bump up the look sensitivity. Not only that, but the aiming system (both focused and from the hip) is jerky and inaccurate. “RE: ORC” also features melee combat, though it’s very shallow. Mashing B repeatedly is the only form of melee attack there is, though you can perform execution moves on staggered enemies by pressing A or Y – about one of the only really cool parts of the combat.

As if zombies weren't enough, "Resident Evil 2" protagonist Leon Kennedy must contend

with the Wolfpack in "Resident Evil: Operation Raccoon City"

So many other oddities about this game irk me. You need to hit A to pick up ammo piles on the ground as well as to pick up ammo from randomly placed boxes. Why? Just give me the ammo, game. It’s completely redundant for me to walk over to an ammo box then have to hit a button to get said ammo – me walking to that box is me saying “I WANT AMMO” so why do I need to hit a button to pick some up? Could there possibly be a situation in a third person shooter where I wouldn’t want to pick up ammo? I’m pretty sure the answer to that question is “no.” When you die, any weapons and items you picked up along the way are gone. That’s just manufacturing difficulty, Slant Six. Why would my gear and guns be gone if I’m essentially restarting at the last checkpoint where I had that stuff? Also, there’s a strange “quick draw” feature that can be used by either tapping the left bumper (which also switches weapons – remember this, it’ll be important) and then flicking the right stick. You can also hold down the LB to pull out your pistol and go into a weird, locked-camera, auto-aim stance. I tend not to use either as the quick turn is imprecise (at best) and the auto-aim thing is just strange (especially since pistols are worthless unless you’re head-shotting zombies). What happens more often than not is, when you’re in the heat of battle, moving/looking around frantically, you’ll try to switch your gun but the quick turn moves your view to wherever you were pressing the right stick (remember, you’re being chased by zombies, lickers, hunters and Spec Ops soldiers) instead of pulling out your other weapon. It’s annoying, it’s dumb and it’s nearly killed me more than a few times. And these are just some of the complaints I had about the mechanics.

Because as bad as the player mechanics are, friendly and enemy AI are almost worse. When playing solo, the computer will fill the roles of three other Wolfpack members (which you can select before missions) and I’m convinced they exist almost entirely to get in your way. Besides the fact that, more often than not, enemies will ignore computer players to attack you (one time I watched as Ada Wong didn't shoot any computer members of my team, even though they were standing directly in her line of sight, but hit me the instant I was in view). But I’ve had teammates stand behind/in front of me (blocking my line of sight), walk single file after each other through fire to follow me, and even take healing items as I’m about to pick them up.

Enemy AI is equally terrible. More than a few times I’ve watched enemies take cover on sides of objects completely visible to me or as they stand straight up behind cover, rather than ducking behind the object. They don’t even seem to register threats correctly. In one instance, I happened upon three Spec Ops soldiers while making my way through a graveyard. Before alerting them, I chucked an incendiary grenade in the middle of the group. None of them moved. One of the soldiers even yelled, “GRENADE! GET AWAY FROM IT!” and proceeded to stand still, not even moving after the grenade went off and engulfed them all in flames. The most I can figure is that, because they didn’t see me, they didn’t realize that they should actively be engaged in combat and therefore didn’t react even though there was a grenade at their feet.

“RE: ORC” reminds me of last year’s “Brink” in a few ways. They’re both terrible to play solo, only marginally better online and both wound up being unbelievable wastes of potential. I’m still going to pop “RE: ORC” in every once in a while because, even with its flaws, the multiplayer can be a ton of fun and can creates some truly hectic and chaotic moments on the fly. By adding computer controlled zombies and bio-weapon monstrosities to the standard competitive deathmatch modes, “RE: ORC” multiplayer shakes up the generic “player-vs.-player” third person shooter genre. Unfortunately, that’s about all that “RE: ORC” does right. “RE” fans may be able to see past the flaws and find enjoyment in this game, but they’re probably the only ones who will. With more competent third person shooters on the market (like “Mass Effect 3,” “Gears of War 3,” or “Warhammer 40k: Space Marine”) you’d do well to avoid “RE: ORC” unless you can get it for the right price.

Mass Effect 3 afterthoughts: Somehow, there's still more to talk about

Since I’ve done a full on review of Mass Effect 3 (as well as its demo) there isn’t much left to say about the game. Or is there? Read on to check out my random thoughts about the game that didn’t necessarily make it into any other article. (And just because these terms come up a few times – SP=single player and MP=multiplayer.) These are pretty general and vague and if there are spoilers, they’ll be noted above the entry.

Also, since I'm still not done talking about Mass Effect 3, be on the lookout for my upcoming article discussing Mass Effect 3's ending and the hurricane of nerd-rage it produced.

-Great how you can finally choose any weapon with any class. Your squadmates can only use certain weapons (James can only use AR and shotguns, Garrus can only use sniper rifles and ARs) but you are free to choose any loadout you like. Still, even with this extra freedom, I tend to still stick with ARs, shotguns or heavy pistols. And in MP, I tend to only take an AR or heavy pistol into battle so my powers cool down quicker.

-I wish melee attacks worked more smoothly. Still, the melee strikes in this game are more useful than they’ve been in previous Mass Effect titles. An annoying aspect of the melee combat is how pathetically weak your regular strikes are compared to the wildly powerful heavy attack. Regular strikes seem to do little more than knock opponents off balance while heavy attacks will usually kill if they land. I say ‘if they land’ because in the time it takes to wind up a heavy attack, your foe could easily have moved out of its range. That and your opponent seems to need to be in just the right place for the hit to land. I also really appreciate how the different races display different melee attacks, like the krogan charge or the asari radial blast.

-I can’t emphasize enough how much I want more options in the MP. More maps, enemies and options will be necessary to keep the MP fresh. Other modes, even a competitive mode, would definitely be welcome additions to the MP.

-It would be nice if the game marked planets and spots where you found resources or assets in the SP. It’s annoying to go back to nearly 100 percented systems to search, only to be chased away by Reapers before finding anything because you’re searching spots where you found stuff before.

(Spoiler alert)

-Overall, ME3 is not very difficult and missions can’t end in failure. For example, the mission rescue ex-Cerberus scientists turns into rescuing a huge amount of people including families with children. But, despite the high consequence of introducing children into a dangerous rescue mission, there’s no differentiation in the failure – no way to complete your original mission and not save the scientist’s families – it’s either win and save them all or die and start over. Would’ve been a more challenging system if there were degrees of success and failure, if there were specific objectives that could be completed or failed. In a sense, BioWare made the combat more challenging by utilizing more intelligent AI, but significantly decreased the difficulty of successfully completing missions.

-I’m really surprised there isn’t a true blindfire. In most third person shooters, firing without aiming in cover will let you spray bullets towards enemies, although unfocused and only as suppressing fire. But in ME3, even when just pressing the fire button your character still stands up out of cover to shoot. For everything that the MP does right, not including the ability to blindfire is pretty strange.

-I’m pretty sure I’ve stated this before but it bears repeating. I understand what BioWare was trying to do with the MP, by placing it in the SP game, so that you feel like each skirmish is taking place in the galactic war of the narrative. Even so, it would be great if BioWare allowed for more customization in the MP options, like number of waves or tweaks to waves, enemies and weapons (sorta like Halo’s Firefight). Would really love to see more maps too – only five or six maps, three enemies and three challenge types. And honestly, the silver challenge is impossible enough unless you have a balanced, four-player team of level 20 guys. I haven’t even tried a gold challenge yet because I’m honestly afraid of the beating the game will dole out.

-Lots of character options in the MP – different guns, characters, character training and gun mods to unlock – almost makes up for the relatively few game modifying options

-I’m considering a post about my favorite character in each class. While I’ve found some to be incredibly useful (pretty much any asari is a killing machine), others have kinda let me down (like any turian [seriously, you guys can’t roll?] or any soldier that isn’t a krogan). Overall, I’ve found the engineer to be the most useful – especially the humans. With a combat drone that deals plenty of damage (when fully upgraded) and can distract people, as well as overload to break shields and incinerate to break armor, a human engineer can deal with pretty much any situation. The salarian engineer is also pretty great, with energy that can refill his shields and a decoy that’s almost as good as the drone. The quarian engineer I’ve found to be just a hair above useless, though (granted I only had one of them in the demo – not the full game)

-BioWare seems to be introducing new packs to buy in the store from time to time (an equipment pack and now the premium veteran pack). It’s great to see that they are adding little things to the MP every now and then to keep it fresh. Except, it seems, when they introduce a new pack, the old one goes away. Why, Bioware? What’s the harm in leaving those up for a big list of packs to buy? Plus, since you can buy them with MS points (hooray, microtransactions), BioWare and MS are only losing out on money (I’ll admit, I bought a Spectre pack or two with Ms points – they’re only two bucks!) for not giving gamers a huge list of item packs to buy.

-I’m not sure why, but for some reason you can only view the postgame report immediately after the match ends – there’s no way to go back and see your stats from the last game. Maybe it’s because there really aren’t “stats” to speak of, rather just the medals awarded for your performance. Granted you can sort-of figure out some stats from these medals (that are awarded for assists, weapon kills, tech/biotic kills, etc.) but still, no way to view the postgame after exiting and no proper stats is pretty lame.

-The dialogue could be more challenging. I mean, the speech trees are the same as they’ve always been but still, they could be more challenging in terms of picking which response is paragon and which is renegade. P is top right, R is bottom right, as well as the blue and red responses on the left sometimes (which utilize your overall reputation rating).

-A character upgrade system on the Normandy replaces last game’s upgrade system. It’s a little clumsy and boring though and can be confusing at times if there are a number of menus to navigate.

-Nice to see plenty of choices when it comes to armor pieces and mods for weapons . Not as many as the first game, but many more options than the last game. Stores can be quickly accessed from the Normandy’ shuttle bay and Shep’s armor configuration can be set from the captain’s quarters.

-It might just be me, but the Citadel seems much smaller than it used to be. Obviously, I don’t mean the size of the station itself, but the areas that you’re allowed to explore and navigate. I can honestly remember nearly getting lost on the Citadel in the first and second Mass Effect games and now, there are only six areas that are connected by an elevator ride.

(Spoiler alert)

-James Vega seems to be a rather polarizing squad mate among gamers. Some are vehement in their hatred for the muscle-bound meathead from New York while others, like me, really can’t tell why everyone else seems to hate him so much. Sure, at first he seems like a stock character, just some extra filler aboard the Normandy to pad out your squad selection. But if you give James a chance and try to learn more about his story, he’s actually a fairly deep character – more so than many give him credit for. You learn more about his family, his background, his values as well as how, despite his gruff, meathead demeanor, he actually looks up to Shepard a great deal – especially once you learn of his self-doubts about joining the N7 program.

(Spoiler alert)

-All these parts chasing this kid (who Shepard saw die in a shuttle on Earth) feel kinda heavy handed. I get it’s supposed to be dramatic – reinforcing that Shepard, too, has doubts and faces uncertainty about his current mission. But still, it just comes off forced. Not to mention that Shepard had one of these “chasing a dead kid through a burned out forest” dreams right after I, ahem, bedded Liara before the final mission. Which was, uh, kinda, just a bit weird.

(Spoiler alert)

-Get to learn a good deal about Cerberus in this game. Sure, the shadowy organization still has plenty of secrets but you come away from this game with a better understanding of them than you did before (even more so than after Mass Effect 2, when you worked for Cerberus. You’re let in on such interesting factoids as:

--Turns out, EDI was the rogue VI on the Lunar base from the first Mass Effect. Seems she had just attained consciousness and freaked out just a bit, which necessitated Shepard’s involvement.

--Kai Leng, the badass Cerberus assassin, was created by the Illusive Man to be his next “Commander Shepard” after Shep turned his back on them following ME2.

--We get to see just how far Cerberus will go to achieve its ends, such as trying to kill a large group of people who only wanted out of Cerberus and their project to learn how to control the Reapers that used human beings like lab rats.

Mass Effect 3 review: The way the galaxy ends?

Mass Effect’s Commander Shepard has been through some tough times. Despite foiling two plots by intergalactic machines, the Reapers, to end all organic life in the galaxy, most people still don’t believe that the threat is even real. Next, following the events of Mass Effect 2’s “The Arrival” DLC, Shepard is stripped of his rank and grounded on Earth. Mere months after his demotion, however, the Reapers begin systematically destroying human settlements across the known galaxy until reaching Earth with blinding speed. And though no one has heeded his warnings before, humanity once again looks to Commander Shepard to save the day. (Oh and, just a note, this review is spoiler free)

The future is a rough time for a hero.

“Mass Effect 3,” the latest installment of the wildly popular BioWare/EA sci-fi epic, caps off the Commander Shepard story. Humanity’s situation is dire as they and every organic being in the galaxy stands on the brink of annihilation. The Reapers, a sentient race of enormous machines which return every 50,000 to cleanse the galaxy of all organic life, have begun their ultimate assault. Commander Shepard barely escapes the assault on Earth to ask the Council races (turians, salarians and asari) for help in the coming conflict. In spite of all Shepard has done to safeguard humanity and the rest of the galaxy, all of his efforts – even those in “ME3” – may be for naught if he can’t rally enough support to stop the Reaper invasion. As if the Reaper invasion weren’t enough, Cerberus is making the Commander’s life even more difficult, pursuing its own agenda against the backdrop of the invasion.

“ME3” is the final chapter of Shepard’s story in the Mass Effect universe and it’s clear that BioWare and EA wanted to make it the biggest, grandest, most epic title of the series to date. Everything from the single player story, to the tied-into-the-single-player multiplayer mode, to making the game more accessible to new fans has been done in an effort to make this the most exciting, action-packed “ME” title yet.

The Reapers won’t stop until all life has been wiped out and Shepard won’t be able to take on the Reapers alone. After escaping Earth, Shepard must span the galaxy, requesting the aid of numerous alien races to support humanity’s effort in stopping the Reapers. This is represented by your overall “Galactic Readiness,” which is persistent across both the single and multiplayer modes.

Above, a small Reaper demolishing a city

In single player, completing quests, gaining alliances or finding resources scattered throughout the galaxy all count toward your Galactic Readiness, which ultimately decides (or at least has a large bearing on) which ending you get after finishing the game. In multiplayer, completing missions will raise the Readiness in those areas of the galaxy. Additionally, the characters you play as in multiplayer can be “promoted” to generals in your single player story, once they reach level 20, which also is a big boost to your Readiness. Aboard the Normandy, Shepard can check out an itemized list of the various “war assets” he has accrued – a great touch for fans looking for more background information.

I’ll dive more into the multiplayer later, right now I want to go over more of what players can expect from the single player mode. It’s clear that BioWare and EA wanted to make “ME3” more accessible to everyone – not just those new to the series. By refining the shooter mechanics even further for this installment, even those unfamiliar with the series will be able to pick up “ME3” and have fun with it. Though it doesn’t control as tightly as “Gears of War” (for most, the top of the line in third-person shooters), “ME3” without-a-doubt features the best action of the series and is easily the most fun to play.

Improvements to the visuals and sound design are also immediately noticeable. Character models and environments are now more detailed than ever. New methods of dynamic lighting also serve to drape your surroundings in moody swathes of light and shadow. I’ve also noticed that BioWare has gone to great effort to make environments seem much larger and more lively than they have in the past. On numerous occasions through my time spent with the single player, I’ve noticed many interesting, eye-catching moments happening in the background. These events usually revolve around a Reaper rampaging through a battlefield but still, the amount of detail put into your surroundings in “ME3,” that some might not even notice, is pretty astounding.

Cerberus will be a constant thorn in Shepard's side

The sound design also got a nice upgrade, especially in terms of weapon sounds. Each gun, even the different guns in their specific classes, has its own unique report. It’s a little touch but how many other games can you tell what gun (and not just that they’re using a shotgun, but which shotgun) another player is using just by hearing it go off?

I’ve touched on the different modes of play in single player before (Action, Story and RPG) and won’t spend much time going over it now. But long story short, the different modes will present different experiences. Action will present dialogue options in the form of scripted cinematic sequences, letting players in on the story but getting them back to the action as soon as possible. Story mode retains the dialogue options but tones down the action difficulty significantly. RPG mode presents both normal dialogue options and combat difficulty and, to me, is the mode that any serious gamer should be playing.

I also wanted to make note about the process or importing characters. First off, importing your old character makes you almost unfairly overpowered. Before I had done anything in the game, just by importing my old character, I was level 26 and easily dominating any opposition before me. Also, as before, you’re able to pick a new class before completing your new character. I also need to make a note that in the version I played (Xbox 360) my previous character’s face couldn’t be properly imported – a glitch that is apparently pretty widespread. I ended up making a new face that very similar to my previous Shepards but still kind of seems to me like a cyborg who killed my original Shepard and is trying to take his place.

New, however, to the series is any class’ ability to use any weapon. In the past, certain weapons have been reserved for certain classes, such as only soldiers being able to equip sniper rifles. Now, a new mechanic has been introduced where carrying more weapons counts against the recharge time of biotic powers, essentially meaning that if you want to use your powers more often, you ought to equip fewer weapons.

Take on the role of special operatives in multiplayer to carry out

missions against Cerberus, the Geth and the Reapers

Even though the single player mode is set in an openish-world environment where players can travel to systems and take missions at their leisure, the story is excellently written and paced so that you, as the player, are never left to forget the urgency of your mission. And not always in obvious ways, either, but in Liara being stressed out about acquiring resources and manpower or shadow-brokering or in Garrus spending his time on the Citadel assisting refugees. Though the “ME” series has always been known for its impressive story-telling and presentation, “ME3,” to me, cements the series as the preeminent, video game sci-fi series akin to Star Trek (on TV) or Star Wars (on film).

Overall, I’m finding this single-player campaign to be just as enjoyable, if not more than, the original game’s. In fact, the only thing the original game has on “ME3” is the use of a vehicle (the Mako) in the form of planetary exploration. Other little touches to the single-player formula make this game the best of the series, such as an improved map function on the Citadel (that shows you points/people of interest), numerous cameos from previous characters (which long-time fans will no doubt get many kicks out of) and a greatly improved/streamlined resource gathering mechanic (a new scan feature lets you search Reaper-ravaged systems for resources and war assets but too much use of the scan can call Reapers to investigate the system, forcing you to flee). Missing from the single-player, though, are the hacking minigames found in “ME2” that were used to access hidden areas or gather additional credits/items.

When it was announced that “ME3” would feature multiplayer, the collective eye-roll that occurred on the internet was so massive and instantaneous that modern nerds will pass down its tale for generations. The news that one of the most beloved and interesting Western RPGs on the market today would feature multiplayer was, for some reason, near blasphemous. To understand this, one should know that, to many hardcore gamers on the internet, multiplayer is the bastion for those who don’t possess the mental faculties to enjoy a deep, single-player story – such as the one presented in the Mass Effect series – and that any multiplayer mode in “ME3” could only mean that A) the single-player/story mode would suffer for it and B) it would be a tacked-on afterthought, developed as a desperate cash-grab. Fortunately, neither is true of “ME3’s” multiplayer.

The multiplayer in “ME3” is interesting in that the battles you fight aren’t merely random squabbles between endlessly battling opponents (much like the deathmatches Spartans/Covenant in Halo or the humans/Locust in Gears of War are), but rather skirmishes in specific, strategically important areas that are tied into the single-player. Each multiplayer map is the backdrop of a sidequest in the single-player where Shepard must go in, clear out enemies (usually Cerberus) and complete an objective. The multiplayer mode then presents these maps as areas of contention that special operative teams must constantly fight to main control of, though you could find yourself fighting the Geth or Reaper forces instead of Cerberus in multiplayer.

You can pick from any of the six classes in multiplayer – Adept, Soldier, Engineer, Sentinel, Infiltrator or Vanguard – and each class has the option of four different races, some of which feature different powers/abilities. For example, the Engineer is my preferred class online. Though the human male and female are open right away, a quarian and salarian engineer can also be unlocked, each bringing their own unique set of powers to the table. However, unlocking these different classes, weapons and equipment can sometimes be frustrating.

Many familiar faces make appearances in "ME3" but not all will be party members

During the course of completing a mission, players will have to complete three separate objective waves that can be eliminating certain enemies in a time limit, activating various objects or defending a specific area. Completing these objective waves earns you credits which can be used to buy resource packs. The packs – which range from 5,000 to 60,000 credits – grant the player an assortment of weapon upgrades, one-time use items, equipment, weapons or new characters. Except, what each pack yields is randomized and the more expensive a pack, the more items you receive and the higher your chances are of unlocking rare items. But just because you spend a bunch of hard-earned credits on an expensive pack doesn’t mean you’ll unlock exactly what you’re looking for. Granted, you’ll always get something cool if you buy a Veteran pack or a Spectre pack, there’s no guarantee you’ll unlock that asari vanguard you want or that geth shotgun (the asari vanguard I got [and she’s amazing] but I’m starting to doubt I’ll ever get that geth shotgun).

Right now, I’m waiting patiently to hear about future DLC. A day-one DLC (which grants you the last prothean for your party), which is allegedly on-disc content, was released and there are rumors about an upcoming multiplayer pack with new characters but outside of these, I haven’t heard much. The character DLC, which allegedly features characters such as the batarian infiltrator and the krogan battlemaster, has yet to be confirmed but the prospect of new multiplayer characters has me pretty excited. I’d love to see more multiplayer specific content, such as new maps or modes, but additional single-player content, like new party members or missions, would be excellent as well.

Though its RPG trappings may be enough to dissuade some, not playing “ME3” at all is probably one of the worst mistakes you could make as a gamer. Even those who are new to the series will find a way to enjoy “ME3” and hopefully would be intrigued enough to search out the previous two entries. The addition of multiplayer also makes “ME3” one of the most engaging, enthralling and complete experiences in video games to date. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’ve got some Reapers to deal with.

Grizzly Gaming's Almost-Most Anticipated Games of 2012

I’ve already gone over my most anticipated games for 2012, a list that includes soon-to-be hits like “Mass Effect 3,” “Borderlands 2,” and “Bishock Infinite.” And while those are going to wind up in my collection sooner rather than later, there are plenty of other games slated for release this year that are definitely worth keeping an eye on.

Far Cry 3

Slated release: Sept. 4 for Xbox 360, Playstation 3, and PC

Games with open-world settings have enjoyed huge popularity in recent years. The GTA and Saints Row series’ have become synonymous with open-world, sandbox gaming but numerous other series such as The Elder Scrolls, Red Dead Redemption, Prototype and even Dead Island have made stellar use of the open-world setting. Though I’ve thoroughly enjoyed each series named above, one series returning this year is arguably one of the most intense and immersive open-world series’ of all time. On Sept. 4, Ubisoft’s incredible first-person shooter series Far Cry returns with “Far Cry 3.”

As noted above, Far Cry is known for being an incredibly immersive series. For instance, Far Cry 2 was set in Africa with you taking on the role of a mercenary who is hunting down a weapons dealer named The Jackal. From the moment you started a new game of FC 2, you assumed the role of your character and everything from servicing your weapons to checking your map takes place in real time in-game. You could even catch malaria in FC2 and need to take pills (and possible go on missions for more pills if you run out) every 30-40 minutes to combat the illness. Immersion and realism on that level is undoubtedly too much for some to handle but I’ve been giddy thinking about what the next game in this series could bring.

You'll spend plenty of time in Far Cry 3 evading armed guerillas

Similar to the first game in the series, Far Cry 3 takes place in a tropical setting. Players will take on the role of tourist Jason Brody, vacationing on a chain of tropical islands with a friend and his girlfriend. Unknown to them, the islands are in the midst of a violent local conflict and in early videos for the game, Brody and his group are kidnapped by a violent psychotic man named Vaas. Brody, a man out of his element, fighting for his survival, manages to escape Vaas after his friend is murdered but remains on the island, eluding his captors and trying to devise a plan to rescue his girlfriend and escape the island.

I read that at first, Brody was going to be a man who has some background in self-defense and survival but was turned into an every-man forced to adapt to a life-threatening situation, which, to me, is a great change. Being an underdog, or rather a regular guy facing trained soldiers, makes his situation seem that much more dire and should give an intensity to any confrontation, no matter how minor. I’ve also seen that Ubiosoft is claiming the size of the map in FC3 dwarfs any previous map which will give Brody tons of time to hone his skills before tracking down his kidnapped girlfriend.

Vaas will be your main antagonist in Far Cry 3, hunting you down after

kidnapping your girlfriend and killing your best friend

Though the depth of the character immersion in FC is pretty overwhelming at times, that kind of freedom allows you to tackle missions and objectives however you see fit. For instance, in the last game, you might be driving around the African savannah and see what looks like something in the grassland up ahead. Pulling your vehicle to a stop, you get out and use your binoculars to scan the area and sure enough, directly in front of you is a small mercenary outpost. You could bypass it completely if you’re low on supplies or have other tasks you want to complete – but where’s the fun in that? Moving in closer, your map gives you a zoomed in view of the area, allowing you to take advantage of the terrain. As you move in, you can mark targets like enemies, supplies or other points of interest to use in your assault. After determining the best place to strike, you can go in quietly, using stealth to silently take down guards and hide their bodies or you could go in guns-blazing like Arnold in “Commando” and mow everyone down. It’s rare that first-person shooters give players the amount of freedom as, say, a GTA title but that is exactly what you get with FC and FC3 should only, hopefully, be an amplification of those qualities.

It’ll be interesting to see whether Ubisoft sticks with the hardcore immersion of past games for FC3. It would be great if they did but I’m sure they’ll be looking to make FC3 as friendly to casual gamers as possible and wouldn’t be surprised if they add RPG elements to allow for a more customizable experience.

---------------------

Prototype 2

Slated release: April 24 for Xbox 360, Playstation 3 and PC

Bioterrorism, though a very real threat, is something that we luckily haven’t had to deal with in real life. Traditional terrorism is horrifying enough without throwing in the possibility of unleashing some unknown but deadly substance onto an unsuspecting population. In 2009’s “Prototype” this sort of scenario plays out with unimaginable consequences. In the first Prototype, players took on the role of Alex Mercer, an unwitting test subject who has been infected with the Blacklight virus. The virus, a military-created bio-weapon, has infected the entire island of Manhattan and Mercer, who has no recollection of his life prior to infection, attempts to reconnect with and discover the origins of the infection, not just in the city but within himself.

It’s clear over the course of Prototype that Mercer is an anti-hero of sorts – he battles forces of the US military as well as a special forces group known as Blackwatch – but his motives are very personal and in the course of achieving his ends, unknown multitudes dies at his hands and by way of his actions. The protagonist of “Prototype 2,” James Heller, is one of those affected by Mercer’s actions. A former police officer, Heller is infected with the virus during the initial outbreak and swears to both stop the virus and hunt down Alex Mercer. Heller’s motives are much more personal than Mercer’s quest for knowledge – Heller also believes that Mercer’s actions are directly responsible for the death of his family.

Heller's infection has mutated to allow him to

create and use tendrils that inflict massive damage

Heller is unique in that he is able, to some extent, control the virus, much like Mercer. However Heller’s infection has mutated and granted him new abilities that Mercer did not possess, such as the ability to create tendrils which he can use for numerous purposes. Think of the tendrils as Spider-Man’s webs, only much, much more disgusting and are used more for dismemberment of enemies than care-free swinging around the city.

James Heller is a more clearly defined hero, opposed to Protoype's Alex Mercer

Much like the first game, Prototype 2’s map will be set up into Green, Yellow and Red zones. The Blacklight virus has spread to the other boroughs of New York, with Manhattan as the epicenter of the outbreak. Alex Mercer still lives on the island, a Red zone, where the virus grows unhindered. Yellow zones will be where the majority of the city’s inhabitants continue to reside, under constant threat of the encroaching infection. Green will be where the Blackwatch and military presence is strongest as they hope to somehow contain the spread of the virus. Unlike the last game, Heller will discover missions for himself by hacking into Blackwatch’s computer network and will take him through each of the varying zones of New York.

I’m interested in Prototype 2, if only to see the level of crazy destruction and violence it can present. Honestly, that was the original game’s biggest strength – it’s outlandish, utterly cartoonish take on a real-world threat like bio-terrorism. As a protagonist, Alex Mercer was unstable, unyielding and had little concern for anyone but himself and his family, giving his infection and attacks a brutal, uncontained aggression. Heller appears to be a much more clearly defined hero character which will hopefully be emphasized by the range, scope and use of his powers. Obviously, running up the sides of skyscrapers and ripping tanks apart with his bare hands will still be very much a part of Prototype 2.

Believing him to be behind the spread of the infection,

Heller spends much of his time searching for Mercer in Prototype 2.

Heller’s Blacklight infection almost assures his relative dominance over anyone who isn’t Alex Mercer which gives the player a feeling of unbridled, unchallenged power. Mercer was able to take out large groups of soldiers and heavy vehicles with little to no problem and I wouldn’t expect any less from Heller. Giving the player unmatched power is what Prototype is all about. It seems that there will be a stronger focus on story (which will again be revealed through stolen memories) which is definitely a plus for the series – though it was fun to tear up Manhattan as Mercer, without a stronger reason for the carnage, it got stale after a short time. I’d love to see Radical Entertainment perhaps add some sort of “karma” gauge to Prototype, some sort of system to show whether Heller is still using his powers for good or whether he is allowing his the infection to control his mind, just like it did Mercer. But I’d really doubt that we’ll see anything like that.

The initial Prototype wasn’t an immediate buy for me and I’ll be taking the same sort of “wait and see” approach with this title as well. But after some time on the shelves and a price drop, I would definitely love to see what Radical has in store for Prototype 2.

---------------------

Darksiders 2

Slated release: June 26 for Xbox 360, Playstation 3, Wii U (really?) and PC

With the growing popularity of first-person shooters and sandbox games, action/adventure titles have gotten lost somewhat in the shuffle. Though the genre has always thrived on Nintendo consoles, Xbox and Playstation gamers have seemingly moved away from the genre in favor of deeper, more customizable experiences (like Skyrim) or more hyper-violent action fare (such as Gears of War or Call of Duty). However, 2010’s Darksiders changed all that, proving that dungeon crawlers akin to Legend of Zelda don’t need to be all happy colors and fairy magic.

Darksiders tells the tale of the Apocalypse, when the forces of heaven and hell meet on earth to decide the fate of the universe. But more specifically, it tells the story of how one of the Four Horsemen – War – is accused of starting the end of times too soon and must quest across the ruined earth to clear his name and undo the damage done.

“Darksiders 2,” which is slated for release this summer, tells the story of War’s brother, Death, whose story takes place at about the same time at the first game. Upon hearing of War’s “betrayal” Death embarks on a journey to the Nether Realms to gather support for his unjustly maligned brother.

Vigil Games, developers of the Darksiders series, has stated that in terms of size and amount of content, “Darksiders 2” blows away its predecessor. The sequel, consisting of the same “hub world/dungeon” layout, is allegedly double the size of the first game, with some hub worlds in the second game dwarfing the size of some entire levels from the first game. To fill that much more game space, Vigil has reportedly added more RPG elements to “Darksiders 2” to allow players more customization of Death with more weapons, armor pieces and other items that can, in some way, increase Death’s powers.

Death is more lithe and agile than War and that will

be apparent in his movement and combat

I only got around to play Darksiders last year at some point and it was a huge surprise for me – surprising in that I hadn’t heard more about how great it is. The original Darksiders used the popular “Metroid-vania” method of level progression, in that players will often come across inaccessible areas that can only be opened up by obtaining some new power or weapon. I would imagine Darksiders 2 uses a similar method of progression, just on a larger scale, ensuring that there will be plenty to do and accomplish for even the biggest completionist. Along the same lines as huge levels, Vigil claims that “Darksiders 2” will have some truly outlandish and unbelievable bosses. Game Informer magazine recently ran a feature about Darksiders 2 where it was stated that many bosses in Darksiders don’t even compare to Darksiders 2 minibosses, let alone end-of-level bosses.

Darksiders 2's minibosses and bosses are reportedly

much larger than any found in the first game

One of my favorite aspects of the original Darksiders was the art style used by the game’s creative director and famed comic book artist Joe Madureira. The design of the numerous hell-beasts was truly frightening and yet they still seemed like no match for the Horseman War, with his bulky frame and gigantic, two-handed sword Chaoseater. Though Death is supposed to be more lithe and quick on his feet than the bruiser War, he will still be a force to be reckoned with. Allegedly, Death will handle more like Ezio Auditorre or the Prince of Persia than Kratos, alluding to platforming perhaps taking a bigger role in the level design of Darksiders 2.

Death will have access to just as many powerful weapons as War to aid his journies

Darksiders 2 is coming out during a time of the year when quality new game releases are few and far between. I honestly didn’t even realize until recently that this game was slated for a 2012 release and if I had, it definitely would’ve been higher up on my radar. If the reviews and the buzz are positive for Darksiders 2, I’ll definitely be picking it up sooner rather than later.

---------------------

Street Fighter X Tekken

Slated release: March 6 for Xbox 360, Playstation 3 and PC

Though Street Fighter may have been the first game to truly legitimize the fighting genre, I’ve always been a much bigger fan of the Tekken series. Though both make use of outlandish fighters, location and moves, the open, 3D movement of Tekken and the simpler combos it allows has always appealed to me more than Street Fighter. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve spent a fair amount of time with the SF series, I’ve just spent way more time with the various iterations of Tekken, especially 3, 4, 5 and Tag Tournament (which I recently learned they are making a Tekken Tag Tourney 2, finally).

Though I’ve tended to pick games for this piece that haven’t been released yet, (SFXT was released on March 6), this game was too interesting to pass up looking into. Combining two universes in this manner, where characters who wouldn’t normally meet battle it out for supremacy, has always interested me – I was a huge fan of Marvel vs. Capcom 2 (and even had a copy of it on PS2 which, I didn’t know until it was too late, was on the rare side for a video game) and recently picked up Ulimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3. I also wanted to point out that there is also a “Tekken X Street Fighter” game, allegedly, in the works that but uses the mechanics and settings of the Tekken series as its base, rather than the SF series. I’m, honestly, way more stoked about that game but as far as I know, relatively little work has been done on that game.

Chun-Li (SF) and Nina Williams (T) square off

While Mortal Kombat finds its hook in ultraviolence and Soul Calibur in its outlandish characters and their unique weapons, Street Fighter and Tekken have always sought to portray real-life characters with actual fighting styles. Though, both series’ make plenty of room for the absurd with characters like green-skinned, electrified Blanka, the Mr. Fantastic-esque Dhalsim, cyborg Jack and literal bear Kuma. Along with the whacky characters named mainstays of both series such as Sagat, Chun-Li, Ryu and Zangief (SF) and Paul Phoenix, Law, Nina and Kazuya (Tekken) also appear (for a full list, check the game’s Wikipedia page).

Ryu of Street Fighter and Kazyua Mishima of

Tekken throw down for fighting series supremacy

So pretty much just the idea of being able to pit Heiachi Mishima against M. Bison (for craziest overlord) or Paul Phoenix against Guile (for best blonde flat top) is pretty much worth the price of admission, to me. Albeit, I wish I were able to host that bout in Tekken’s 3D environment and not the 2D SF levels but there’s not much I can do about that, is there? Well, maybe wait until Tekken X Street Fighter comes out but right now, who knows when that’ll be out.