Mar 2nd, 2008 at 16:55:42 - Soldier of Fortune II: Double Helix (PC)
Soldier of Fortune II: Double Helix|
Gamelog entry #1:
In Soldier of Fortune II: Double Helix the player controls a soldier. They compete via multiplayer with other players and try to get the highest score or complete objectives. The game is fast-paced and is very difficult when playing against other players.
While playing SOF2 your emotional state is rather intense. It is a fast paced game so you must always be looking for targets and where to go, how to get there, and what to do once you get there, all of this while not getting killed.
Characters in the game are poor. The only different is the skins of the characters or the costumes. Since the game does not revolve around individuality I do not think it plays a roll at all.
The story is the same as all first person shooters. Also the game is not bought to play the single player, it is purchased so that you can play online with other players and own some noobs.
The gameplay is very fun. As stated before it is face-paced so you are constantly being pulled back into the games magic circle. Every time you kill someone or capture something you might rest for a second (unlikely) and then are forced back into the games magic circle.
The interest of this game is completely based on the other players you are competing against. If you are the noob getting owned, chances are you aren’t having fun. But if you are doing the noob owning then you are most likely having a great time. So as long as your on top, it is fun and interesting.
There are no social interactions really in this game, it moves too fast. If there are social interactions it is usually just the quick trash talk.
I felt that I experienced the flow of the game. It pulls you in very easily and the competition and game types are fun.
Gamelog entry #2:
SOF2 is an addicting game. It is not like COD4 where you get weapon upgrades. Everyone has access to the same weapons. But each weapon has different shooting styles so the player is forced to pick one weapon to get good with. This is extremely nice and gives all players a level playing field. The only difference between players is how much time they have devoted into becoming good at the game.
I would say that the most innovating element of this game is the pace. Most first person shooters are either way too fast paced like Quake or too slow like Ghost Recon. SOF2 did an extremely good job of combining both play styles and finding a middle ground that is both fast paced and allows for slower play styles. A lot of this also depends on the game mode.
The level playing field is what makes this game a good game. It give all the players the same chance to win.
The levels are varied enough. All the levels have close, medium, and long range combat. Some have more of one than others, but the levels are all well balanced and don’t give any one team a huge advantage.
The main challenge of this game is getting good enough to beat other players. The game keeps players interested because there is always someone that you can beat, and the more you play the more people you can beat.
A good example of conflict in this game would be during the game mode of Capture The Flag. The flags are placed at the opposite teams base and you are supposed to return them to yours. The conflict is the other players defending their flag and trying to take yours. Without the players in the game, it would be extremely easy and predictable, you would get the flag every time.
The interest element of this game is to dominate other players. The more you play, the better you get, the better you get the more fun the game is.
The space in the levels of this game vary. Some are very small and are geared towards close combat while others are more sniper maps. One of the more innovative elements of this game is their RMG (Random Map Generator) these are outdoor maps that you can generate by entering a string of letters. This keeps the game fresh with the introduction of new levels. As opposed to the same few over and over again.
There is nothing I would change about the game. The game is made as well as it can be and still have a level playing field. The only frustrating thing about the game is when you run into people that are way better than you. Then you just get stomped.
Overall this game is a total blast. It is easy to play, it doesn’t take a ton of time to get good at, and the gameplay overall is fun.
read comments (1) - add a comment - read this GameLog
Feb 19th, 2008 at 17:19:36 - Goldeneye 007 (N64)
Gamelog entry #1: |
In Goldeneye 007 you play as the character James Bond. In single player you play through the story line of James Bond on a particular mission. There is also a movie Goldeneye, the game and the movie are very similar. In multiplayer you can choose different 007 characters to be and battle against your friends in different shootout styles such as: Pistols, License to Kill, Assault, Sniper Rifles, etc.
When playing single player your mind is more centered around figuring out where you need to go and what you need to do to get there or when you get there. This is kind of a role playing FPS because you have to follow the role of James Bond. The game only lets you take one path but you need to talk to certain people and complete certain objectives otherwise you will not be allowed to progress through the game.
The characters in this game are like all games designed after a movie, limited. The people you interact with will only ever say one thing. The game is old so the graphics of the characters are not that good either. But there is not much character interaction in this game other that shooting.
The game progresses like the movie. If you have seen the movie you will know pretty much what to do. The game is fun, but the story is not overly interesting.
The gameplay is good. The game is fun to play because it is very simplistic. Run, walk, crouch, shoot. That is pretty much all you do. Another added function to this game that makes it good is their assisted aiming system. If you get your crosshairs close enough to an enemy they will automatically lock on the enemy until you move your crosshairs too far away.
The game was not overly interesting to play. As I said before if you have seen the movie you will know what is going to happen in the game. The only question about the game is if you can get good enough at controlling your character to complete the game.
I started off playing single player and I had no social interactions, but when my roommate came back we were playing multiplayer and that cause more interaction.
I experienced the flow of Goldeneye or what I believe the designers intended to be the flow of Goldeneye. The game is fun and simple, it is easy to control and you find yourself moving along the story line easily.
Gamelog entry #2:
My single player gameplay was boring. The game does not present any difficult obstacles to overcome. When playing multiplayer though the gameplay shifts entirely. It resembles all those games that are designed to be multiplayer. The social interaction you have with your friend(s) is ultimately what makes this a good game.
I remember playing this game when it first came out and how this blew every other first person shooter game out of the water. Now when I look at it I find it lacking in comparison to more modern FPS’s such as COD4. But for it’s time the graphics of this game were awesome and the fact that you could compete with three of your friends and kill each other was what made this game so fun for me.
The multiplayer gameplay is what makes this game a good game. I think that within the multiplayer framework of this game the two most important aspects are the weapon setup; where you can set the game weapons to: Pistols, Assault Rifles, Sniper Rifles, Slappers Only, License to Kill, etc. Also the different maps and the weapon strengths in certain maps are another fun component. For example, in the map the Facility, Proximity mines are extremely entertaining.
The levels of the game(multiplayer) are varied to a degree. There is not a huge difference in them but enough of one that you can enjoy different play types and styles.
As far as challenges of the game I personally do not feel that there are really any worth while challenges. What keeps this game interesting is it’s multiplayer gameplay.
In single player this game creates conflict by “sending you on a mission” and giving you “objectives” to complete. In multiplayer the objective is the same as all FPS’s, be the one with the highest score, or the last one standing.
Social interaction with friends is what keeps the players interested in this game.
The gamespace is locked, both in single and multi player. The only “doors” you can open are “doors” the games allows you to. In multiplayer the levels are not entire maps, but chunks of the single player game made into a multiplayer level. So the space you are in is restricted which forces contact with other players.
Overall I would say this is just a good, clean, fun game to play with your friends. The single player isn’t much but the multiplayer can be a lot of fun and keep you interested in the game for a long time.
read comments (1) - add a comment - read this GameLog
Feb 7th, 2008 at 20:05:12 - Warcraft III -- Frozen Throne (PC)
Gamelog entry #1: |
In Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne the player picks from one of four races. The object of this game is to create units and advance your technology to gain upgrades. You race to gain upgrades against your opponent, either the computer or a friend, and try and get superior units so that you can defeat them. This game also requires a lot of strategy, you cannot just get a bunch of one unit, you need to balance your force and have some close combat and some ranged units, for example.
During the game you find yourself speeding through possibilities of what you could do and who you can use/control. One can call this multi-tasking but in the game the players refer to it as micro-managing since you are in control of many units.
All the races (characters) in this game have specific strengths. So where one race might be really strong and able to take a lot of hits they might not be able to do much damage where as another race might be really weak on the survival scale but can do more damage. This makes the game much more complicated and interactive when playing with friends on a team.
Warcraft III is a very fun game. It can get aggravating when you play someone WAY better than you and totally get stomped but for the most part it is quite fun. I feel that the main reason this game is fun is because of all the different possibilities of play. On a grand scale the game really only has one way to play; upgrade, attack, kill, and defeat your enemy. But the different ways and races you can do that with make it very versatile. For example you can use the Orc race and within that one race there are a good ten different ways, at least, to combine units and defeat your enemy.
The game holds your interest for many of the same reasons above. There is one primary interest holding aspect that was not mentioned above and that is simply increasing your skill. As you play more and more people you become more familiarized with each race and their strengths/weaknesses. As you start to know the game better you can identify the strategy your opponent will use and counter them. Then you have become the person stomping everyone and that is really fun!
The social aspect of this game is not as big as that of Pong or game like that but it is very prevalent. During the game, if you are play on a team, you must interact with your team members and coordinate strategic movements such as attacks/defense. There is little communication with the other team, at the most maybe “gg” will be said at the end of the game for “Good Game.” But usually there is no interaction and if there is it will most likely be trash-talk.
I believe I experienced the intended flow of the game. Some of the games you play with multiple players on a team can last for a couple hours. During this time you have one mindset and that is the mindset of the game and how to win. This game effectively sucks you into its world. I would recommend it to anyone who likes real time strategy games.
Gamelog entry #2:
Having come back and played Warcraft III for a second day I find myself much better at the game. There are many timing aspects of the game. You must gather minerals and build units and keep your rations high enough to support your units etc. This timing of creating/funding units can be exacted into its own science. As you start to play more and more one on one games you will find yourself losing because of one or two seconds of being idle. The game comes down to who can micro-manage better and who knows more about the game.
I played the game with one of my roommates who has the game and hadn’t played in for some time and continually stomped him. The only time he won was when we set a large time-limit before either one of us was allowed to attack the other. This game revolves around time and micro-managing. When a time limit is set the dynamics of the game are changed.
I think one of the most innovative elements of the game is their race and hero system. The races are balanced but they have different strengths, as well as do the heroes, and I feel that this gives the player some sense of individuality and allows his to “customize and tweak” his gameplay style.
This game shares a lot of the elements that make a good real-time-strategy game. But as mentioned above I feel that the most stand-out aspect of the game that makes this game good is the race/hero selection.
The level design of this game is creative but the selection is rather limited. Different maps/levels are primarily based on how many people you will be playing with. Some are more ground heavy where as others may be more air unit heavy. All the levels are rather similar because they must be balanced in order to accommodate all play styles. But another outstanding add-on that comes with the game is the campaign editor. This allows you to make your own levels and customize what style of play options are given to the players.
The main challenge of this game is the timing aspect. Seeing how quickly you can build units. The part of the game that keeps this interesting is competing with other players and testing your skills to see if you are better than them.
This game creates conflict by forcing you to compete with someone, either the computer (AI) or another person. The game keeps the player interested in the same way it creates conflict, the players goal is to get good enough that they win most of the time.
The space within the maps/levels of the game world is set. The map is a certain size and the players must stay on the map. You can travel over the map by walking your units around or by using transport vehicles.
The tone of this game is overall a competitive one. Any social interaction that springs from it usually is not polite and results in even more trash-talk.
The game is well balanced. I would not change anything about this game. If when playing multiplayer there is a ranking system to ensure that a new player does not get pitted against a pro.
Overall I feel this is a good strong game. I would highly recommend it.
add a comment - read this GameLog
Jan 25th, 2008 at 15:30:31 - Super Smash Brothers (N64)
In Super Smash Bros for N64 you choose your character and engage in battles with other cartoon/game characters. Multiplayer and single player are very similar. The objective of the game is to beat up or smash your opponent until he loses a life. If you make him lose all his lives you win.
This game is a lot of fun. It is easy to control so you don’t have to spend a ton of time learning how to move around. I find myself in the same game mode as if I were playing a 2D fighter game, but the cartoon aspect makes it a lot less serious and more fun. All the characters in the game are from previous games or cartoons and are very fun to play, some are even cute so you feel bad when you smash them. The plot of the game is not the best but still entertaining. The single player is just a little campaign mode you can do to unlock characters. This seems like a game that would best be played with two or more friends. But regardless of the story line the game is very fun to play.
For my second session of play I played multiplayer with two of my friends and a hall-mate. This was a blast. Even when you are losing you are having a good time. There is a bunch of trash talking and silliness to be had by everyone. I think this is the strongest point of the game.
All of the levels have similar design. I feel the reason for this is that without the level design being similar some levels would just be boring or simply unplayable. There are a lot of obstacles and places you can fall off, which makes the game extremely entertaining. Each character has his strong point and each level has at least one spot to optimize each characters main strength. My favorite character is Yoshi (the dinosaur) from Mario Brothers.
Yoshi is my favorite because he can swallow your friends and poop them out as an egg.
There are many games that are similar to Super Smash Bros. As I said before it has a lot of similar elements to that of a 2D Fighter. But I think the strongest aspect of this game is the social aspect. It is a great multiplayer game. I think their strongest multiplayer element besides the social aspect is the ability to fall off the level and die. You can fall, throw someone, or be thrown yourself and this can be very fun and funny.
As far as level design the game is limited. As I mentioned before the levels all have a similar design. In order to make this game work and have the characters be balanced each level must have: places where you can fall or be thrown off, a higher portion of the level you can access by jumping, and some sort of obstacle to get around.
The challenges and conflict of this game are just trying to stay alive. In multiplayer it is smashing your friends without getting smashed. The single player has the same objective for the most part except that your smashing the computer and not your buds.
The game itself does not keep the player interested. Single player is rather boring and uninteresting. It is the social aspect of the multiplayer gameplay that keeps players interested.
Overall I feel this is a good game. The strongest points of this game can be found in the multiplayer mode. This game was obviously designed to be a fun multiplayer party type game and I feel that it hit its mark.
read comments (1) - add a comment - read this GameLog
Adam has been with GameLog for 5 years, 4 months, and 7 days |
view feed xml
|Entries written to date: 6|