Step away from the keyboard, nothing to see here

This year’s writing contest was always going to be different from the first, for several reasons.  Not only were we allowing entrants to submit reviews rather than just opinion pieces or straight-forward articles, but we made one subtle difference that would allow us to target a specific demographic and cut down on the number of ‘compers’ entering the contest.  Our reasons for doing this were that we wanted to make sure that everyone entering was a genuine gamer and not just someone who trawled Twitter all day looking for prize giveaways, and because we knew that, in doing so, it would make life easier for us when it came to selecting a winner… right?

Wrong.  While it’s fair to say that we did certainly achieve half of what we’d hoped, insofar as avoiding the flood of entries from compers, the flip-side to this was that it impacted what I’d call the ‘quality ramp’.  Rather than having hundreds of entries where the standard of writing and subject matter varied from poor through to excellent, plotting a steady increase from one extreme to the other, we were instead left with what I could really only describe as a ‘quality precipice’ whereby almost every article submitted was of a particularly high standard and the few which fell short, only did so because of the high calibre of the other entries and not because of lack of ability.

To put things into perspective, there were around sixty entries last year that didn’t get as far as the judging process because they were either poorly written, didn’t read the requirements of the contest at all, or weren’t what we could consider actual entries.  Some were mere pleas for the prize while others sent only their address, along with the obligatory “Thanks, I hope I win!” message.  After discarding entries such as these, the hundreds that we were left with could be whittled down based on content, delivery, and grasp of the English language.

This year, however, all entries got through to the judging process.  The overall standard was so high that it meant we had no immediate stand-out piece, so the first question we asked ourselves was “which of these would we not publish on the site?”, thinking that this would dramatically cut down the numbers… and it did… by only four. It was at this point that we realised we’d made a rod for our own back because we’d gone out of our way to target a specific demographic this time around, separating the wheat from the chaff before the send button was even pressed, and in doing so it became all the more difficult. To that end, each and every entry had to be re-read several times until, eventually, the pile of considered entries started to decrease.

As with last year’s contest, selecting the ultimate winner was the subject of much debate.  A final four entries were selected and, typically, this somehow increased to seven as there were those that couldn’t easily be discounted and so were brought back in as contenders.  This final seven were again re-read, several times over, along with a few hours of discussion, until finally we reached a position of stalemate. And so, with only a couple of hours until it had to be published, our decision was made.

Lorna’s thoughts…

From the shameful mess the office was left in, it is safe to say that the dust has settled on another successful GamingLives Writing Contest.  Amid the empty mugs, chocolate wrappers, ice cream bowls, and glasses are strewn countless papers, scraps of notes, and contest entries, all of which had been printed out, neatly stapled, stacked in smart piles… and are now decorating every surface imaginable as if some explosion of gaming writing just happened while we were sleeping.  Technically, I suppose you could say that it did.

When we launched the contest, we had some idea of what we were in for.  After all, last year we were inundated, but the range in quality of entries varied as much as the number was high.  This year, we never expected the quality of what was sent in to have jumped, or that our jobs would become suddenly much harder.  The last time we debated so much was about who ate the last chocolate biscuit, and whether ‘lizard’ is in fact crushed by ‘rock’ or defeated by ‘scissors’.  It swallowed an inordinate amount of time, but was somehow worth it.  It wasn’t just the quality of what was written that caught our attention however, but the diverse range of topics that seemed to have filled our inbox this time around.  Of course we had pieces about shooters, gaming life stories, and rants and we enjoyed them, but subjects leapt out that we had rarely seen, from the woes of Nintendo to the self-entitlement of franchise fanboys, the defense of much maligned games such as Brink, and pieces on the Xbox Live Indie scene and e-sports.  To sit and read something and think “I never knew that/thought of that/considered it like that” or to have your previously held opinion sway a little, or just to have someone put down in words exactly what you’ve secretly thought about something is a wonderful thing.

So, while the room may be temporarily sealed away as a disaster zone – my phone is in there somewhere, I’ve all but given it up for lost – it was worth it.  If these passionate, well written, intelligent, and diverse pieces of writing are even a tiny example of the thoughts and capabilities of today’s gamers, then it only further goes to underline points made by the winning entry and give the naysayers, the ignorant, and the Daily Mail reactionary types all the more reason to hang their heads in shame.

Congratulations to…
Alex Hawksworth-Brookes with “Marginalised, Mistreated and Misunderstood: Video Games and the Fight for Recognition“, winner of the 2012 writing contest and the prize bundle.

Runners Up…
While we swore we wouldn’t have runners up this year, it was just far too close to call at the end and so we succumbed once again. Congratulations should therefore also go to, in alphabetical order:

Adam Leonard
“Next-Gen. High definition: check. Full online support: check. Community: che… wait a second.”

Chris Peebles
“Video Games Tell Amazing Stories”

Ellis Spice
“Indie Games’ Forgotten Step-child”

Keegan Spindler
“Challenging The Online Pass”

Mark Lawson
“Fanboy Loyalty or Cowardice?”

Oli Jacobs
“Nintend’oh!”

I’ve had enough of video games being relegated to the dustbin of society; banished as some form of unpleasant, cultural other; video games deserve a better place in the world, as do the people that play them. Whilst music, literature, theatre, sculpture and painting all receive (and deserve) recognition as art forms, video games often lies forgotten, occasionally with a feeble cry of ‘me too!’ before the tight gag of taboo is firmly re-attached. But, as I said, I’ve had enough. The days of video games being nothing more than clumpy blocks of pixels, offering solace to nerds and social outcasts alike, are gone. In my eyes, video games are just as worthy of being referred to as art as a Jane Austen novel, Spielberg film or Pinter play. And there’s nothing wrong with the people who play them, either.

The look, part pity part abhorrence, that people give me when I say that I’m the video games editor for my student newspaper, is the least of my grievances. Such looks give me the impression that, despite my entirely ordinary appearance, the fact that I play video games makes me the sort of closet weirdo that masturbates to the thought of elves and Uzis. Stereotypically portrayed as either acne-ridden, nasal-voiced adolescents, or awkward, overweight, balding men, the common categorization of ‘the gamer’ is just as juvenile as the stigma that it perpetrates. Even worse is the association between gamers and abnormal behaviour. “Games turn children into killers!” they cry. Sure, Anders Brevik played Call of Duty. So do millions of other people. Anders Brevik also ate toast, as do billions of other people. You can see where I’m going with this.

The vast majority of people are quite capable of differentiating between the fictitious scenes on their TV screens and real life. I’ll admit it; I’ve played games where you shoot people, in the face, with a gun. I can also guarantee you that I’m not going to do that in real life; the thought of owning a real-life gun scares me. The thought of using said gun to shoot a real-life person with a real-life bullet is almost incomprehensible to me, and that won’t change, no matter how many hours I put into whatever FPS is currently incurring the Daily Mail’s wrath.

Certainly, a lot of games are just loud explosions and warzones, but so what? It’s exactly the same kind of mindless entertainment as The Only Way is Essex or LMFAO, and nobody has a problem with those. Just as film has its Die Hards and books its chick lit, video games have their mindless shooters. The crying shame is not that fact that such games exist, but the fact that they so often distract from the industry’s true achievements.

This is because most negative portrayals of video games come from uninformed assumptions. I would bet that the vast majority of sneering bystanders, ready with the old familiar jibes and stereotypes, have never played video games, at least not enough to be able to comment fairly on the topic. If you are one such person, then I have a few suggestions for you – a few titles I would like to recommend. Mass Effect, Witcher 2, Deus Ex – all of these titles boast incredibly nuanced stories, all of them alterable based on the player’s actions. Yes they all feature violence. One of them even has elves. But if you can look beyond that you will find incredibly well developed and imagined worlds, full of award-worthy plot and performance.

The fact that players can shape these worlds themselves adds a whole other layer – video games are not passive, they’re interactive art. Still not convinced? Play Legend of Zelda: The Windwaker, play Braid, play Skyrim. Each of these games is artistically brilliant, featuring some of the best, and most diverse, graphics in the industry. These games don’t just deliver brilliant gameplay, they also present it beautifully, with emotive and intelligent music to boot.

If you’re still not convinced, then try Dead Space 2. Behind an incredible amount of gore and horror lies an interesting critique of religion. Dragon Age contains messages about social and racial inequality; Fallout poses moral dilemmas to the player, Deus Ex: Human Revolution presents thought provoking questions about the nature and limits of humanity itself. Of course, you are quite welcome to play all of these games as simple action-fests, but if you scratch beneath the surface, you’ll discover worlds as developed and intriguing as those of any novel or TV series.

Video games have grown up a lot over the past twenty years, as have the people who play them. The industry is now worth more than the music and film business, and is slowly being recognised as a valid form of artistic expression, with award ceremonies such as the video game BAFTAs adding to this sense of validity. I’m not saying video games are perfect: they’re not, but they are a lot better than many people often give them credit for. Most people would be horrified if someone had never seen a film, read a book, or heard music. The same horror should apply to those who haven’t played video games. Hopefully it’s not too long before such a scenario becomes reality.

This gave him a rather, erm, ‘delicate’ constitution, so he roamed around Europe, searching for the best place to settle down and write his, often nihilistic, thoughts down. Towards the end of his life, Nietzsche lost it completely – before his death in 1900, he and his admirable moustache were shipped off to a psychiatric clinic in Basel after he broke down on the streets of Turin and lovingly embraced a horse. He also claimed he had been “crucified by Germans” and “was Jesus”. Mad.

So what’s this got to do with gaming? Nothing really – I just like telling people about how this genius of a man played out the end of his life. If you’re going to go mad, do it properly, right? But beyond this superficial view of the man lie his ideas and his well-documented philosophies. In life, some of the things he has to say can be very interesting to take on board, but when applied to gaming… they seem to fit oddly well. There are a lot of people out there that revere Nietzsche as an idol, and some people will think that applying his thoughts to gaming is a horrible dilution of everything he stood for.  But after thinking about it, it’s hard not to see the parallels.

Now a symbol for remembrance and suffering... the man would have surely gone crazy (crazier) for this symbolism

For example, some of the main principles in Nietzsche’s philosophy were centred around hardship and difficulty, and our capacity to deal with life’s challenges. Nietzsche effectively claimed “difficulty is normal” and that we “experience pain because of the gap between who we are now, and the person we believe we could be at the end of the task”. I agree with this, both in life and in gaming. If there’s something I can’t do, I get irritated and grouchy – as Nietzsche puts it, I “experience pain” because I know I possibly could achieve what I wanted. So, by experiencing failure, I am enriched when I succeed; the path through hardship has made me into a better person. Nietzsche liked to use the metaphor or flowers to illustrate his view – to paraphrase him (massively) he said: plants have ugly roots. If you go through the trouble of hiding the roots, you can expect a beautiful flower to bloom in the end. Not quite as elaborate as the man himself, but it’ll do.

So if we take Nietzsche’s botanical view of life and look at it from our perspective – a gaming one – there are certain pieces of advice we can subscribe to. Take, for example, his view on envy. Nietzsche doesn’t see envy as a particularly bad thing – he believes that if we experience envy, we channel all the negative emotions that it brings into something constructive; envy can spur us on to compete with a rival, furthering our own sense of achievement.

One of my greatest gaming achievements, for example, is climbing to seventh place in the Soul Calibur IV ranked leaderboards. To me – a sad individual who feels virtual achievements represent valid social worth – this was beautiful. It was a bragging right, it was a benchmark against which all my other gaming achievements could be measured – it was a monolithic status symbol.

Nietzsche would say that I couldn’t have achieved this without failure. Without hardship. Without complete, debilitating humiliation and defeat. And he’d be right. In the online lobbies and in the bouts themselves, there were certain names that always cropped up. Names that always beat me (and, sadly, sent gloating messages when they did). So I practiced more and more, investing a steady amount of (probably unhealthy) hours into the game, seething with envy at their skills. Eventually, like the protagonist of some haggard Kung-Fu movie, I managed to beat them, and I have achieved happiness and joy from the end result.

Nietzsche would argue that I couldn’t have experienced the core emotions that success imparts if I hadn’t had to struggle first. And I agree. It goes deeper than just “enjoying the challenge” – it’s the generation of emotions that compound each other – envy and success clash against each other so vibrantly that they draw the other one out more. Nietzsche wasn’t just saying I’d enjoy victory more if I struggled to get there. He was saying I actively couldn’t understand the depth of success if I had just been awarded it, effort-free.  Unsurprisingly, Nietzsche also has a fair few views on anxiety. In a painfully concise nutshell, he argues that anxiety might lead to panic, or, if you cope with it effectively, it could blossom into an accurate analysis of what’s wrong, and lead you on the path to solving it (10 points if you noted the flower metaphor again. The man was obsessed).

A man who knows all about pain... much of which, let's be honest, he has doled out himself

If he were alive now, and someone had managed to treat him of his terminal insanity and sit him down in front of a console with you, he’d tell you this: “play Gears of War 3.” (It’s all about survival of the fittest, he’d love it.) Why would he tell you to do that? Because there will be one map on the Online Versus you actively despise. So, he’d tell you to boot up Versus, play a few rounds and wait for that map to load. The anxiety or dread you feel when you see the top-down illustration of the map (let’s be honest, it’s usually Rustlung) would usually have you think, “right, let’s get this over and done with” and just play until it was all over, enjoying precious little of the 15 minute match.  Nietzsche would attempt to redirect you. He’d probably advise you to take stock of your situation and sniff out all the best spots on the map; learn the weapon spawn locations, find the most defensive (yet strategically placed) cover, remember the best place to plant grenades. Nietzsche would argue that your anxiety would take you to an accurate analysis of what’s wrong, and work on trying to remedy it.

It all sounds a little bit obvious, and chronically patronising, but after considering the blasphemy of applying Nietzsche to gaming, I tried this method on a fair few maps/games. For example, I was stuck in a section of Halo: Reach on Legendary, and after countless attempts at bursting through the Covenant lines (I believe it was the various nightclub clearances in New Alexandria), I took the time to deconstruct why I was having the problems I was, and re-piece them strategically. After that, aside from some Grunt launching a spammy plasma grenade at me, I beat the mission promptly, with minimal amounts of dismembered Spartan decorating the landscape.  It’s worth a shot, at least. It’s worked for me on Ultimate Marvel Vs. Capcom 3 on the hardest difficulty, it’s helped me get better online at Gears, it’s almost let me complete Reach on Legendary, and I think I’m just about to break through with how stupidly hard Arkham City is on New Game+, top difficulty.

I think Nietzsche would have liked gaming, in its current form. All the “evolve or die” tactics used by online players are a sort of pseudo-homage to him, and he would just adore some of the thematic narratives told in games like Mass Effect and Assassin’s Creed (especially with his cynical view on Templars – I mean, Catholics). Nietzsche said that weak, untrustworthy people are “addicted to a religion of comfort” and loathed what he referred to as “small, mean people, who hide in forests like shy deer”. In his day, he was talking about the cowardly politicians and public figures that used shrewd tactics to influence others. In our day, he’d call them “campers”.

It’s safe to say that everything written here is diluted, vague and very brief, and doesn’t tap into the deep well of knowledge Nietzsche had. But it proves that gaming is like any other art form, and can be deconstructed as such.  I don’t know… Nietzsche may have even hated gaming – it was he who famously quoted “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger”.

He’d obviously never experienced a spammy headshot.

My own personal collection started some twenty-two years ago as my best friend at the time, and fellow geek, Graham, arrived at my flat bearing the usual bag full of the latest games, one of which was the soon-to-be-classic Pinball Dreams from Digital Illusions.  Before long, we were graced with that familiar image of a proud griffin spreading its wings as it sat atop a green marble plinth – it was the 21st Century Entertainment logo, and it quickly became the sign that we were about to have a great night.  In hindsight, I have no idea why the decision was made that one of us would control the table flippers while the other would take ownership of the space bar in order to produce the much-needed table bump, but that’s exactly what happened.

The results from this tactic were varied. Quite often, the bump provided just enough of an advantage and allow the ball to pick up the speed required to pull off those special moves but, more often than I care to remember, the bumps were inappropriately timed and would invariably cause the ball to go careering into the nearest bumper, sending it in entirely the wrong direction.  Regardless of how inconsistent the results were, we continued playing in this manner whenever we hung out with Pinball Dreams as our game of choice.  Having played the game on various platforms since, including my ‘phone, I can honestly say that there is no physical limitation that would prevent one person from taking full control on their own – it’s three buttons, after all – and, it has to be said, it’s much easier to kill that high score when you’re not relying on someone else slamming the table for that extra push.  The thing is, as annoying as it was, it’s still a very fond memory and one which jumps to the forefront of my mind whenever I hear mention of that beautifully-perfect game.

Skipping past the countless years spent in a band with a couple of musicians who, even after years of playing the same songs, would always make the same mistakes at the same point… and pull the same disgusted faces as they realised, once again, that their muscle memory betrayed them with meticulous accuracy, we come screeching up to date with the lastest of my foils: Pete, aka Bearhugger70.  As much as I love the guy, I can’t help but admit that he is a walking in-game liability.

There’s a rule I like to live by when playing Command And Conquer with friends, and that is that we decide beforehand how we’re going to play the game. This could mean we go for all out war in a typical no-holds-barred approach or, as in most cases, we have the understanding that we’ll take the time out to actually savour each aspect of the gameplay so that, rather than rushing in with a fleet of Auroras before the other has had a chance to build a Strategy Centre, we allow ourselves the opportunity to take time over the base building.  Even with such a structured approach to the session, there will be times where a wandering unit finds themselves in enemy territory and will be attacked – it’s how the game was written, and it’s unavoidable unless you monitor each and every unit and stop them from attacking.

"So, no superweapons... agreed?" "Agreed!"

This is, as I’ve just said, an accepted part of the game mechanics.  You will, without question, lose several units through nothing more than curiosity or expanding your base to the point where you become within range of your opponents’ base defenses.  Should this issue arise, the generally-accepted approach is that you let nature run its course or move your own units out of harm if they’re mobile.  Unfortunately, Pete sometimes gets a little carried away with himself and conveniently forgets the temporary peace pact, taking this opportunity to unleash his fury on whichever of his opponents’ units are doing the attacking.  It’s not until the once-sporadic “unit lost” audio notifications become more like a crazy rap song that you realise there’s more to this than just accidental death, and a quick jump to the affected area usually shows a horde of some description laying in to some poor unsuspecting squaddie that happened to be standing too close to a cluster of palm trees when Pete decided to throw his towel on to the sun lounger.

Sorry dood, I don't know how that happened!

Taking this a step further, however, there was one time where Pete himself made the suggestion of having an “infantry-only” match.  It wasn’t something that we’d ever done before and so, not wanting to under-think the situation, I asked for clarification and was told that it was exactly as it sounded: nothing more than armed personnel.  Fair enough, I thought; it wouldn’t be as much fun on a tactical level, but it would be an interesting exercise nonetheless.  What Pete neglected to mention, typically, was that “infantry-only” meant something entirely different in his mind, and it wasn’t until we ultimately engaged in war that I discovered this… as my foot soldiers made their way across a sizeable map and were almost-immediately wiped out by Pete’s automated base defenses.  Whenever this particular episode is brought up in conversation, there is always the same wry smile coupled with the look of feigned innocence as he pleads ignorance.

From the first moment we played Borderlands together, however, this level of facepalming has increased to the point where I have often found myself staring at the screen in silent disbelief.  Anyone who has ever joined Pete in Pandora for a co-op session will attest to the fact that allowing him to drive while you take the gunner seat is not a viable option if you don’t have enough cash to justify a respawn.  To say that his driving was poor would be like saying Andy Parsons enjoys a simile here and there.  Yes, I know what I did there.  If the road is straight and smooth, Pete will endeavour to find even the most minuscule of imperfections, and hit it at just the right velocity to flip the vehicle over… and it’s usually when there are just enough enemies around to make it near-fatal if you manage to survive the crash itself.

If you’re lucky enough to grab your own vehicle or live long enough to climb out of the gunner position, there is still the chance that you’ll find yourself facing an oncoming enemy horde with little, or no, backup from our beloved Bearhugger70.  It was always surprising just how difficult some of the later levels were in Borderlands, especially given the perfectly balanced skills of my character and the carefully-selected choice of weaponry, yet I would still die with my wingman standing next me.  I say “standing next to me”, because that’s exactly what would happen.  I’d be in the middle of a bleed-out, trying to pull my gun around to catch an enemy in the sights with a view to killing them and getting my second wind, and I’d see Pete’s character standing there admiring the view with the sort of nonchalance you tend to see in an old lady as she roots around the bottom of her bag for a bus pass while the ten or fifty people behind her get soaked in the pissing rain.  Then, just as the inevitable respawn occurs and a fucktonne of cash is syphoned from my inventory, Bearhugger springs to life again and rushes forward to rummage through the spoils. MY spoils.

It wasn’t until one particular evening that I discovered why this was happening on a regular basis.  We were playing split-screen co-op in total darkness on the Xbox through the projector rather than on two separate machines and yet, with Pete sitting to my left, I still ended up bleeding out as his character stood scratching his balls.  Using the respawn wormhole effect as a convenient time-out, I took the opportunity to glance to my side to ask what the hell he was playing at when I saw his face light up.  No, I’m not speaking metaphorically.  The fucker was busy texting some woman, with his face brightly illuminated by his ‘phone screen, and when I gave that “what the fuck” look and shook my head as I explained how I kept getting killed… the response was a less than enthusiastic “Hmmm?  Oh… sorry dood” and if it was acceptable to actually voice the word “lol”, then I’m sure he would have.

These liabilities are outdone, however, by something which has actually transcended annoyance, shot past anger and has taken its place on the coveted Throne Of Inevitable Facepalms.  Whether being pursued by a pack of angry skags, hunted down by some twisted suicidal General, or being shat on by oversized spiders, one thing is sure to bring a smile to my face regardless of how much I’ve just been ripped off by the Respawnometer after being killed thanks to an oblivious wingman, and that is the strange hybrid emotion of greed and curiosity that Borderlands has bred in my best mate.  If his co-op buddy is only twenty metres away to the left and a red crate lies fifty metres to the right, the sight of me bleeding out and on the verge of death will almost certainly result in the same on-screen message as the life force drains away…

Bearhugger70 has opened a chest.

Does it stop me from playing games with him?  Of course not; in fact, we’ve only just started our sixth or seventh co-op Borderlands playthrough, except this time we’re soaking in the beauty of the PC version.  His foibles, however deadly they are, are as much fun for me as my own “King Of The World” or “Wouldn’t mind seeing her underdome!” antics each and every time we play.  It’s these little familiarities that make co-op gaming so much more than just a couple of people playing the same game, and that is where the longevity of these games lies; it’s like coming home again.

The internet world is full of beans right now, thanks to Capcom’s reveal trailer for Resident Evil 6. After the disappointing (but not actually that bad) Resident Evil 5, Capcom seem to be upping their game. So much so, that I turned off the video halfway through because I didn’t want spoilers. That’s how good it was! Other, desperate sites will be pointlessly debating all the implications of the trailer but fuck that; it looks like more of the same, but in Raccoon City, and ramped up nicely. Also, why are Capcom pushing it so heavily (it’s already had TV adverts in the UK) when it’s not due until November? That’s as much as I’m prepared to bother talking about it. It’s just a fucking video, man.

Anyway, that wasn’t the big news. The big news, the ubernews, the Pulitzer Prize news is that Syndicate has hit the PC. No, no, not EA’s pointless fucking FPS. The original Syndicate. The isometric, dystopian vision of an Earth turned into corporate battlefield has hit Good Old Games (our favourite purveyors of retro PC games) which means that finally you can play it on your modern PCs without pissing about. Admittedly, it seems to just be running on a self-contained install of DosBox but who cares. I downloaded it, installed it, played it, came oil all over my chops. It’s still the king. Syndicate, baby. Puts freshness on the line.

Fans of things that happened ten years ago will be happy – Rockstar’s GTA3 and GTA: Vice City have been given ratings for the PS3 which probably means they’ll be hitting PSN or something. You can’t go back. I’m just warning you. Going back one generation is always a bad idea. Go back two and it’s retro; go back one and it’s just a bit shit. For my money, the best GTA is the first one. The idea of having a points target and then just creating chaos to get there is way more fun than re-enacting Goodfellas/Scarface/Miami Vice/Boyz In Tha Hood. Running over krishnas. Enough said.

Speaking of things that shouldn’t be resurrected. Those daft cunts at Namco were already on to a loser when they decided that a port of Soul Calibur on iOS would be a good idea. On-screen buttons for a complex beat ‘em up? It’s a stupid fucking idea. Releasing it for EIGHT QUID with no trial version? That’s beyond stupid and is probably some sort of war crime. Suffice it to say, it can go fuck itself and can take Soul Calibur 5 with it. Even if Assassin’s Creed 2′s Ezio is one of the bonus characters.

Equally uninspiring is the news that Bioshock: Infinite (Irrational Games’ last chance at me giving a fuck about the series) is going to have a ’1999′ mode. This mode will make the game a lot harder and will require you to pay special attention to how you level up your character and what strategies you use in the game. One mistake and it’s curtains. Sounds like no fun whatsoever. I just bet that mode has an achievement attached too. Hngh. Anyway, aren’t they somewhat romanticising the idea that the ’90s was some sort of school for gaming ninjas? I’ll take your 1999 and raise you one 1984. Let’s see how your N64 thumbs deal with Jet Set motherfucking Willy. Dark Souls? Ha! Get through the Banyan Tree level on JSW without dying and I’m calling autistic superpowers, fool.

In stupid made-up-space-money news, rumours suggest that Microsoft could be about to ditch the Microsoft Points in favour of using real money. This was what everyone was asking for back in 2006, but these days your credit card details would be more secure in the hands of a Nigerian prince than in your Xbox, so for many people this could be the end of Xbox Live Arcade gaming unless they include some sort of voucher system. Suffice it to say that I’m more likely to put my debit card in my fucking eye socket than on Microsoft’s blatantly insecure system.

Before I leave you in puddles of your own tears, let’s see what the rest of the gaming world is into by checking out the latest UK charts.

1. FIFA 12 (EA)
2. The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (Bethesda)
3. Just Dance 3 (Ubisoft)
4. Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 (Activision)
5. Battlefield 3 (EA)
6. Zumba Fitness (505 Games)
7. Saints Row: The Third (THQ)
8. Zumba Fitness 2 (505 Games)
9. Rayman Origins
10. Rage (Bethesda)

That’s two Zumba games in the same chart. We need a flood.
Like in the Bible.

See you next time, Poppets!

Why doesn't he want to spend time with me? Whyyyy??

From the way these girls were carrying on you would have thought that a single woman had gone around, slept with all their boyfriends and cooked them ‘brinner’ afterwards. Whoever this tramp was, she was tearing relationships apart left right and centre – and the passive aggressive Facebook statuses were pouring out of the devastation like the blood from a head wound. Who was this temptress that had decimated all these relationships in the course of a few hours? In one fell swoop she had ended the true-love stories of so many on my feed, and the relationship statuses were changed to prove it [Nomygod!]. Her name? Well, she was none other than our very own Modern Warfare 3.

It’s been a good couple of months for gamers, release wise at least. Battlefield 3, Modern Warfare 3, Skyrim, Saints Row the Third; we’ve been lucky. But, judging by the angry and bitter updates that are flung out by the girls on my ‘friends’ list, the past few months have been hell for them. To list them all would be pointless, so I have provided you with a few select samples taken from my very own feed [grammar and spelling cleaned up for your own convenience].

“Seriously? What the fuck does he see in those stupid video games? They’re stupid and pointless”.
“wtf? I don’t get why he plays cod so much. Video games are so stupid – they’re for kids.”
“I can’t believe my boyfriend is ignoring me for a stupid video game?!”
“My boyfriend is so pathetic – all he does is play cod all day. He hasn’t spoken to me for ages. Well he’s not my boyfriend anymore! I don’t date losers!”
And, of course, the inevitable “COD sucks!”

Your feminine looks and chiselled cheek bones can't save you now, not from my bullets... oh shit yeah, the whole stake through the heart thing... dammit.

My initial reaction was one of rage. These girls were selfish pricks who were angry about their boyfriends enjoying a little time to themselves. Most of them (I can guarantee you) have never held a controller in their life, other than to remove it from their partners’ hands. The difference between an RTS and FPS would escape them entirely (I’m sure if I asked them the difference their reaction would be to flick their hair, remove the eyelash curlers from their view and whine “who gives a fuck? I’m far more important”). I challenged all of them, asking if they themselves had given the game a go, explaining that they might find more enjoyment in it than they would care to admit; it’s so much easier to judge something we don’t understand than to accept it. Of course they all ignored me and continued to rant about how their boyfriends were neglectful assholes and that they, quite frankly, deserved much better.

A lot of geeky in-jokes, apparently, but I never saw any

I then asked them “How many times has your boyfriend been dragged out shopping for clothes? How many times have you implored him to sit with you to watch Twilight, or did you make him pay for you both to sit through both Sex and the City films? How much stuff does he do without question in the name of love?” By then end I was begging them to at least try gaming before they knocked it, explaining that their openly-hating-their-partners pastime wasn’t attractive and that they wouldn’t stand for it if their boyfriends publicly berated their hobbies, so why should they? How these guys could put up with such self-important and jealous partners, I don’t know.

But then I got to thinking – perhaps they’re not all too wrong. I’ve known many people who have taken their gaming to an obsessive level and have let it get in the way of a healthy social life. Let’s be honest, we’re all guilty of it to an extent. I myself have often sat down to play an hour, and looked at the clock in disbelief three hours later. So how does this affect those around us? It must be difficult for someone who isn’t of a gaming nature to understand the addictive quality of a particular release. So why then, don’t those who suffer with a jealous girlfriend try to get her involved? Games have split screen co-op for a reason. For me, there isn’t a better night in than curling up under a quilt with my boyfriend, some good snacks, and a co-op game.

How will your girlfriend understand your enjoyment if you exclude her from it? I’m not saying play every game with her, but if you help her understand what’s going on she might show a genuine interest. Get her involved, make her feel loved and share your enjoyment. And if she still doesn’t understand it? Then maybe pause the game every once in a while. Kiss her on the cheek, make her a cup of tea, send her a soppy text or tell her how important she is. She’s feeling neglected for a reason. And if your partner still can’t understand how important your hobby is? Stand up for yourself. For every hour of America’s Next Top Model [or your partner's equivalent] demand an hour of game time. It’s only fair.

Try getting your partner involved in gaming... you never know where it may lead

And it seems now that every developer is falling into the trap of hastily tacking on a QTE instead of a boss fight these days. Take, for example, the recent shooting behemoths Battlefield 3 and Modern Warfare 3. Relatively different games (particularly in the multiplayer department) with their own take on the whole ‘Russia attacks America’ story, but at the end of both single player campaigns what does the game do? Throws you in to a quick time event (which was especially annoying in MW3 as there hadn’t been a single one throughout the rest of the game and it totally came out of left field).

What happened to the final boss battle? It used to be an industry standard to have a three-part battle against a giant enemy that could kill you in one hit if you weren’t careful. They were nail-biting pieces of madness that had controllers thrown against walls while you screamed in agony about how cheap the fucker was being. Now it’s either been replaced with a QTE or it’s been completely avoided altogether (in the case of Deus Ex: Human Revolution it was replaced with standing around for five minutes, which was equally not fun).

Annoyingly, I can sort of see why this change has happened. It’s the same old bloody argument of games getting better and more cinematic, from the graphics to the story (well, only in some cases), and there’s nothing particularly cinematic about circle-strafing an enemy while blasting it with a minigun for half an hour. Switching to a QTE means that the player can still be involved in the game, while still being able to experience a satisfying end that looks pretty and is far more impressive than what you’d be able to achieve with the actual in-game mechanics.  It also means that people who were playing for the story (although why anyone other than myself was playing Modern Warfare for the story I don’t know) doesn’t have to contend with a horrifically tough boss battle; if they screw up, it’s only a short reload back to the start of the sequence.

Then, however, you’re missing out on what games have slowly stopped having over the years: fun. It’s fun to constantly blast a giant mutant/mech/alien disguising itself as the President in the hope that you can chip away at its health for long enough to reach the next stage in the battle. It’s fun to actually be a part of the action, rather than just sit back and watch as you suddenly become a spectator in a battle you’ve been building up to over the last six hours.  Yes these battles can be frustrating, but the sense of accomplishment you feel as you watch the bastard explode/fall into an abyss/turn into your dead mother and give you a big hug and a box of chocolates is overwhelming.

Of course, I’m not suggesting we need to make every boss battle a JRPG-style eight-part fight where you destroy your opponent’s health bar only to see it refill three times over. A bunch of games last year pulled off a final boss fight pretty damn well; Portal 2 springs to mind as the best one (even if it was essentially a repeat of the original, but in reverse), and while Duke Nukem Forever had a lot of bad things going for it, the final battle was pretty damn epic. It just goes to show that with a bit of thought and effort, developers can still make an exciting and interesting conclusion to their games.

I expect that we’re going to see a lot more quick time event closers in games in the coming years, as developers strive to make their titles  more like multimedia experiences, accessible by anyone, instead of simply ‘games’. But, hopefully, one of those bright sparks we call designers will say, “hey, how about we stick in a huge boss battle at the end?” and no one will reply, “nah, let’s just have them hammer A for a while.”

Snaaaaaaaaaake!

Over the last few years we’ve seen a number of changes occur within the gaming industry. The way we play games has changed entirely; with us no longer confined to a controller and a fixed position on our favourite chair.  Mobile gaming, which at one point offered nothing more than a snake in a lovely shade of grey, is now running completely rampant and has given birth to a brand new generation of developers and ideas as the boundaries for handheld devices continue to be pushed. Despite the evolution of gaming over the last few years, it’s perhaps the changes within the varying genres themselves that are some of the most interesting. First Person Shooters no longer require you to run, double jump, rocket  jump off a wall sniping someone through the head in mid-air and all that just to reach a health kit; instead the genre is now known for its cinematic experiences and ultra-realism.

Strategy games have taken balance and precision to the next level as they become the genre of choice for many E-Sports outlets; with professional StarCraft players now a common occurrence and tens of thousands of viewers tuning in to watch their favourite teams in action. It’s the digital sport of the 21^st century and it continues to grow from strength to strength.

Starcraft II, helping ESports push towards a new level.

The list continues, and it’s safe to say that the majority of genres have changed and adapted to fit in with the state of modern gaming. Consequently, it’s the Massive Multiplayer Online games that have had to undergo the most drastic of evolution, with the entire genre having gone through more changes than the whiteboard of Facebook’s design team as developers find themselves staring down at a fork in the road, unsure of which path to take.

For a genre that has some of the most hard-hitting names amongst its ranks – Lineage, Everquest, Ultima Online, Dark Age of Camalot, Eve, Planetside, Asheron’s Call , Runescape, World of Warcraft and more recently Star Wars the Old Republic – these are games that often evoke an actual emotional response from the players that dwell within their virtual worlds; games that, when mentioned, have a habit of sending many back into the mystical realm of nostalgia, so what went wrong?

There be Dragons here...

One argument points to the over-saturation of the market and, with more and more MMOs being released, it became increasingly hard for developers to keep hold of the players they had. The market became swamped with games, and the influx from the likes of China and Korea only fuelled the fire. Gamers like things to be new and fresh, and for the MMO genre that’s proven to be an often-deadly combination. As player numbers dwindled, entire game worlds have found themselves at the mercy of the dreaded off-switch, only to be remembered in the memories of players or illegal ventures, with gamers seemingly going to any length to retain their place within ‘their’ world.

More and more games have made the switch from paid subscription to free-to-play (F2P), surviving at the hands of a digital marketplace where players can opt to outfit their characters with equipment and additional aesthetics for a small charge. Early adopters had mixed success, but the evolution is now in full swing.

Games that were originally operating on a paid subscription model have found themselves facing the daunting dilemma of ‘evolve or die’. Even stalwarts of the genre such as Everquest II found themselves at the mercy of such a volatile genre and, as a result, adopted a free-to-play model in early December in a bid to keep the game ticking over.  Since the changes were put into effect, Sony Online Entertainment announced that new registrations for the game have increased by 300%, with the number of people logging in daily increasing by 40% and, perhaps more importantly, from a business perspective at least, the knock on effect from this is that the purchase of in-game items has soared by 200%.

DC Universe - one of the latest games to make the jump to F2P.

Numbers like these aren’t alien to the genre, and it’s become common practice now for games to see significant growth once the switch from a subscription model to free to play is made. DC Universe made the switch-over in November last year and saw over one million new players sign up in the first week alone, with revenues up a staggering 700% during the first month.

Of course, subscription based games haven’t gone away; over ten million people still pay a subscription to play World of Warcraft, but even then it’s believed that Blizzard have started the first tentative steps towards a free-to-play model with free access to the game up to level twenty and a host of items available within a virtual marketplace. When people are queuing virtually just to buy an in-game item at a cost of £17 a pop, you’d be hard pushed to blame them for not exploring the possibility.

Last month saw the release of the biggest MMO of recent years: Star Wars the Old Republic, a game which, like World of Warcraft, works within a subscription based business model. Not to be outshined by free-to-play, the Old Republic boasted significant numbers just three days after launch, with EA and BioWare claiming that over one million players had registered, with the average amount of playtime up to a staggering five hours per day within a week of launching. As a result, it was crowned the fastest growing MMO to launch, although there’s still very much life in the old dog yet it seems.

Whether or not the long term effects of the free-to-play model continues with the level of success as it has in the short term remains to be seen, but the signs are certainly bright, especially when you factor in the on-going success of games, old and new, proving that the subscription based game is not down and out just yet. More importantly, for the time being at least, is that the MMO genre now has a sense of stability to it, a sense of direction for developers to at least look toward; the fork in the road is now clearly sign-posted. With more and more people now playing MMOs, it shows that there is a future for the genre and, as a result, the only thing that remains to be decided is which path it walks down: paid, free-to-play, or perhaps something new entirely.

A classic is born

Back in 1994, a game was released that turned one particular video game fan from the type of person who played games on their Amiga as something to do while their machine ray traced various 3D images in the background into a fully fledged gamer, booting up the computer specifically to play a game. That game was UFO: Enemy Unknown, developed by Julian and Nick Gollop and released by Microprose at exactly the right time for it to take hold in the annals of gaming history – the X-Files had exploded on to our TV screens the year before, Travis Walton’s abduction had been immortalised in Fire In The Sky, Kyle MacLachlan had taken us on a trip back to Roswell and so, suddenly, the world had once again taken notice of our friends from out of state.

Even as a 22 year old who had been intrigued by UFOlogy since the age of five, it wasn’t necessarily the alien theme that pulled me in; it was the level to which the player must go to ensure the perfect balance and maintain enough growth progression to face the alien incursion on an even playfield in the final battle. Instead of the modern gaming techniques whereby your crew are thrust into a situation pre-armed, with the option to sustain their advances using regenerating health and ammo drops, every step of the way in Enemy Unknown was a tactical decision… and there were repercussions. Running out of ammunition would mean that this particular soldier would have no defenses available to them unless the alien tech had already been researched to the point where any weaponry and ammo found on felled aliens could used. If the level of research hadn’t yet been reached then the only other source of supplies was a dead X-COM agent.

A downed team mate would either die immediately or lie unconscious until such times as someone with a medi-kit was able to revive them which, in a turn-based game, is rarely a plausible option given the amount of time units required to reach the injured soldier. In most cases, they would be dead before anyone could reach them and if they were lucky enough to have someone get to them in one move, they would invariably run out of time before being able to administer the aid. This micromanagement extended beyond the field and was the backbone of the entire base strategy, with the player being solely responsible for every single aspect of base management from ordering supplies to ensuring that there were enough storage facilities to house any artefacts and recovered alien life forms, be they alive or dead. UFO: Enemy Unknown was a game which, some eighteen years after its release, was still one of the first things I install on every new system and features gameplay that has never yet been bettered, placing it at the top of my all-time top ten and one which was crying out for a damn good modernisation.

Micromanagement was a key player in the longevity of the original Enemy Unknown game

The news that Firaxis Games was embarking on a “reimagination” of Enemy Unknown was, therefore, something that immediately piqued my interest. After all, how could a studio led by the king of strategy himself, Sid Meier, possibly drop the ball, especially as the lead designer on the project, Jake Solomon, is reported to be a lifelong fan of the series. The comfort of having this team working on the remake was temporarily brought into question after Game Informer’s Adam Biessener reported that Firaxis were “removing no small amount of micromanagement” from their version and that they were “getting rid of tedium and uninteresting mechanics”. As someone for whom the most important aspect is said micromanagement, this was tantamount to telling me that Kinect was going to be a requirement for the next Xbox console and that game studios would no longer support the PC as a viable platform.

My enthusiasm dropped to the floor immediately and, with no medi-kit-wielding compadre in sight, died before reaching the end of Biessener’s article. Would Firaxis’ reimagination go on to evoke the same disdain for the IP that 2K Marin’s presentation at E3 had done when it became clear that “XCOM” was, to all intents and purposes, nothing more than a cookie cutter shooter? The latest edition of Game Informer (issue 226) would, however, suggest otherwise. In fact, after twice reading through their eight page feature, the reality appears to be that this upcoming release not only checks all the boxes any fan could possibly throw at it, but also adds another few in for good measure.

Graphically, Firaxis’ offering is considerably different from the Microprose original but, with it being eighteen years on, it’s only to be expected as the difference in tech between then and now is akin to comparing apples and black holes.  From what we’ve seen thus far, the Geoscape remains and brings with it a more epic feel; in fact, one could almost imagine looking out from the observation deck of the International Space Station and seeing a similar sight.  A look at the top right corner of the Geoscape shows the “Upcoming Events” area where any current research or development is displayed along with an indication of how much time is left.  As one who spent a considerable amount of time researching, usually with a team of fifty scientists and fifty engineers per base, this is particularly useful as there’s no need to drop back into base management mode for an update.

As with the original game, which missions you embark on will depend entirely on the reach of your radar as well as the speed of the crafts at your disposal, and the airborne enemy incursions will result in a face off with your enemy, although screens of this particular aspect have yet to surface so it’ll be interesting to see how far Firaxis will go in terms of craft detail, or whether they’ll resort to the silhouetted style of the original.  With so many similarities in the Geoscape, it’s safe to say that their plan is to stay true to form as much as possible, and the similarities don’t end there.

We already know that the Sectoids make a welcome return and, for the most part, are identical to those in the predecessor. They still have the Psionic abilities, although lead designer Jake Solomon has said that any XCOM squad member panic attacks will not result in the utter devastation familiar to anyone playing the original, whereby one panicked unit within a confined area could quite easily take the entire squad out and remain unplayable for several turns. Solomon explains “We’ve tried to make it the sort of thing that won’t catastrophically end combat for you, but it is the sort of thing that you have to manage.” As well as the familiar grey faces of the Sectoids, we see the return of the Cyberdiscs and Mutons.

The Mutons have undergone a subtle facelift in that they retain their pink skin hue and green second-skin-style armour but their physical make-up has changed to bring a more brutish appearance and with movement not unlike that of an ape.  If injecting the Mutons with the latest serum from Laboratoires Gruntiere wasn’t enough, Firaxis have taken the Cyberdiscs one step further by not only making them virtually indestructible in their disc form, but also introducing a shape-shifting feature where the disc has to open up to enter attack mode and takes on a spider-like appearance.  It is during this phase that the Cyberdisc is at its most vulnerable, but in this mode it is also capable of unleashing the “Death Blossom” – a large-area attack, capable of taking out an entire XCOM squad.

The only new enemy unveiled thus far is The Thin Man which, if you’ve ever frequented the Something Awful forums, may be familiar to you as it bears a striking resemblance to Victor Surge’s creation of The Slender Man.  They are described as being incredibly agile, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound (making them particularly effective against roof-based XCOM snipers) and freakishly fast when it comes to evasive tactics, due to their ability to cover a large radius without much effort.  Should you be quick enough to catch one in your sights and take them down, the fallout from such actions could also be disastrous as their death comes in an explosion of acid, causing damage to any infantry and equipment.

The Thin Man, not to be confused with Men In Black!

While some of the original enemies, such as the Silacoid, Celatid, Sectopod and Reaper, never posed much of a threat to anyone beyond rookie status, the absence thus far of the Floater, Ethereal and Snakeman races does beg the question of whether Firaxis are playing their cards close to their chest for an ultimate reveal or they’ve decided to scrap these in favour of an all-new line-up of foes.  One thing is for sure, however, and that is that they will have to push the envelope if the feeling of panic and that inevitable cry of “fuuuuuu…” from turning a corner and coming face to face with a Cryssalid is being passed on to a new creature.  Unless you have several other units on overwatch, that guy is toast and there’s absolutely nothing you can do about it except cry as Sergeant Sergei Voronin transforms into yet another Cryssalid.

As with the 1994 release, Firaxis have opted for the procedurally generated missions and terraforming to ensure that not only are no two missions the same, but repeated playthroughs will also be like playing the game for the first time.  This is undoubtedly one of the main reasons why X-COM fans return to the game time and time again.  In terms of tactical similarities, the beautifully frightening fog of war returns with the landed craft being surrounded in a shroud of darkness, so that soldier’s first step may also be their last as the area in front of them may well uncover to reveal an alien, poised and ready to kill before the squaddie can even reach for their weapon.

Tanks will also return to the game, with the SHIV (Super Heavy Infantry Vehicles) already unveiled and, rather than having a very basic choice of a few standard vehicles, these can be kitted out with whatever tech the base has at its disposal, so if you’ve already moved on to Plasma or Fusion Ball (assuming the Fusion Ball returns, of course) then your SHIV can be armed with said weaponry.  The down side to the SHIV is that it swallows up an incredible amount of base resources in terms of research and manufacturing so it’ll likely be one of those “suck it and see” scenarios where you give it a shot just to see what it’s like but stick with infantry in the long term. One thing which was confusing with regard to the SHIV is that it’s reported that they “take the place of a squad member” which, given that the tanks in the original game took up four squad places in a craft, is particularly generous.

Contrary to what we had originally thought with the “removing no small amount of micromanagement” comment on the Game Informer website, it would appear that Firaxis are retaining as much of the functionality as possible and the familiar territories of research and development are still catered for, representing an important aspect of the ongoing growth of the base and squad.  In fact, it would appear that The Meier Influence is strong when it comes to this reimagination of Enemy Unknown if the recent description of diplomatic relations is anything to go by.  Whereas the original relied on X-COM infiltration and defensive tactics to retain the support from the Council Of Funding Nations, this new release may also rely heavily on such tactics but an element of trading has been introduced with the example being given that Japan may feel threatened enough to request that XCOM provide them with a shipment of laser weapons, so the player is then faced with the choice of either acceding to their demands, thereby taking necessary weaponry away from their own squad or assigning valuable resources to produce more weapons by reducing production elsewhere, or refuse to co-operate and continue as before. Refusing to help, regardless of how much good is being done elsewhere in the world, will invariably result in Japan reducing or removing their funding.

As well as funding, the Council have bonuses associated with each continent, providing you have complete satellite coverage.  While Africa may not be able to keep up with such financial behemoths as Japan, their natural resources more than make up for this shortfall as you’re going to need their raw materials in order to keep up with the restocking of the armoury and ammunition.  Quite what this means is, as yet, unclear but the implication is that the ability to simply place orders for additional ammunition and weaponry may have been removed in favour for a constant manufacturing process.  For those with a passion for micromanagement, this is the difference between Roller Coaster Tycoon’s “build a kick-ass park” approach and Theme Park’s more involved “don’t forget to re-order fries” mentality.  Imagine returning to your base after a successful mission and discovering that you’ve effectively run out of ammo just as another call comes in that requires your attention.  This is, in my opinion, a genius move on Firaxis’ part, although I imagine some will be put off by this level of detail and it may come as a shock to console devotees.

Squad handling has undergone what can only be described as a complete restructure and this, if anything, could be what turns fans of the original off – the time units have been removed.  As mentioned earlier, Enemy Unknown will retain the turn based strategy approach of the original but, rather than having squad members perform based on available time units, Firaxis have taken an entirely fresh look at this by introducing what they’ve dubbed “double-move”, whereby your unit will have unlimited time to explore the map but only one opportunity to move to attack mode, so as soon as your shots are fired, that particular unit’s move is considered over.  It’s a bold move and, speaking to other X-COM fans, one which has caused some head-scratching as well as a few derisive snorts.

With the time units being taken away by one hand, the player has been given an intriguing gift with the other – perks.  As before, soldiers are classless until they develop experience in the field and will naturally lean towards one particular strategy, based on how you’ve played the character.  At the end of each mission, as with the original, soldiers will have their stats increased and may indeed rank up to the next level and it’s at this point that certain units will have the option of selecting a specific perk along with their level-up, such as the Squad Sight or Snap Shot perks on offer to the sniper.  The Squad Sight perk appears to be a gift from the heavens, allowing your sniper to open fire on any enemy within the playfield as long as the enemy is within view of another squad member.  These bonuses are only available if the mission was a success, so losing any squad members in the field will still allow the levels to increase but will void any chance of gaining a bonus… a great twist, considering how difficult it can be to clear an area with no casualties.

Snipers also come with yet another perk to their class, in that they can use a grappling hook to make their way to the top of buildings in order to surveil the area and pick off enemies with ease.  This sort of tactic was generally reserved for units equipped with Flying Suits and the Alien Blaster, capable of following a series of plotted points before detonating at its final destination with more destruction than the late Barry White in a pie factory.  While this ability may stand the sniper in good stead with most foes, it’s important to remember those freaky Thin Men and their ability to defy logic and leap on to rooftops.

Although the sniper, on the face of it, sounds like they could be the ultimate killing machine, they come with a monstrous handicap: it takes an entire turn to take a shot.  Yes, you read correctly, if you want to move your sniper into position and take a shot at the enemy then you’re in for a shock because it’s one or the other.  This may sound sensible to those with the obvious mentality of “why would you want to move a sniper?” but you still have to get them to their spotting position in the first place and this gameplay mechanic means that, should they encounter any enemies en route, they would be entirely helpless and, presumably, end up as a pile of death on the ground.  It’s an interesting move by Firaxis, to create such a powerful unit and then give them such a crippling handicap, but it could prove to be a tactical coup if used correctly and snipers with a particularly high experience level will unlock the ability to move and shoot in one turn.

Another move which requires an entire turn is the reloading of ammo.  Unlike the original game, there is no need to manufacture additional clips for each player to take into the field as the game works on the assumption that your squad has been fully stocked with enough ammo to get them through each mission.  As yet, we can’t say whether this also applies to clips for alien tech but, as it hasn’t been specified, we can only assume that this is the case. Should your unit run out of ammo, however, it’s not possible to simply reload and continue with the turn. This could either mean that the reload could be used in lieu of the attack action, allowing the soldier to move into a position of cover before switching to a reload move, or it could simply be that it does require an entire turn, so moving and reloading isn’t possible.

Instead of being able to build multiple bases, Firaxis have made the decision that the game centres around only one base, to present the player with a more strategic approach to defending the Council Of Funding Nations rather than being able to pepper a myriad of bases across the globe. The base defenses can also use alien tech, presumably similar to the Grav Shield and Plasma Defenses of old, but the base itself looks very different in this upcoming release.

Rather than taking the overhead approach, Firaxis have instead opted for a cross section much like an open-faced doll house, with the base being built on various levels rather than in a radial manner.  Without meaning to throw out an unnecessary pun, the cut-away design feels rather alien compared to the familiar top-down view from before but, as with any changes to familiarity, this will, in time, undoubtedly become second nature to use.  It does, however, look rather messy in the screen shot below.

So, where does this leave us?  In truth, in a much better position than first expected.  While there are signs of streamlining, in terms of the simplification of ammo assignment and lack of time units, the introduction of such features as level-up perks, resource gathering, diplomatic relations, and being confined to only one base with which to defend the entire globe all serve to enhance the micromanagement that was so important to the gameplay of the original.  If Firaxis can keep on track with their plans and adhere to what made Microprose’s ground-breaking title so great, then we may just have another modern classic on our hands.

Next stop, Cydonia.

Sources: Game Informer, Game Informer Issue 226

Fortunately, we’ve been able to get our hands on some of the enemy’s short term plans, but beyond the first quarter we’re looking at a potentially apocalyptic situation, and I’m not just saying that because of the Mayans! Our enemy has managed to create weapons so powerful, so infinitely destructive that we may potentially lose our free time forever!  Like many of you soldiers, I normally spend the first few months working through the backlog of red tape from the end of the year before, but I fear the enemy have gotten word of this, as the forces of evil have launched an assault unlike any they have before. I’ve received word that the first foe on our shores will be Final Fantasy XIII-2, and while some of us may have been turned off by the original, I know there are plenty of men in these ranks who’ll go nuts for the time travel storyline and the hours upon hours of gameplay. The sequels don’t stop either, with General Patton returning for The Darkness 2 – careful with this one men, it may look less intimidating than the original, but don’t dare underestimate it or we’ll be seeing quite a few of us lose heart come February. Literally.

It may feel like some of these titles are creeping up on you, or in the case of Resident Evil Revelations, shambling towards you to chew your skull, that’s natural. Just be sure that if any of the opposing forces happen to be from Ghost Recon: Future Soldier that you collect their technology so that we can reverse engineer it and use it against them. Teamwork will be crucial, as will the ability to turn invisible, but I better not catch any of you using it to sneak into the women’s quarters again or it’ll be a court martial. Besides, you might find it more useful to apply that technology to the world of corporate takeovers in Syndicate, though I’m afraid we won’t be able to supply you with your own Danny Dyer.

They’re all small fry compared to what comes after, and the launch of Mass Effect 3 is one I know we’re all excited about. We’ve been battling those Reapers for a good five years now, and I know we all can’t wait to see the back of them, but I can’t help feel that some of you are more interested in your private relationships than the fate of the galaxy. Rest assured, I better find you all on the battlefield rather than a bed come March, or the Reapers won’t be the only immediate threat to your danger.

After March is where our information gets a little… sketchier. While we have a decent idea of what fiendish tricks the industry has up its sleeves, we’re less sure of when exactly they’re planning to launch them. By then, the enemy will have unleashed their latest time-killing device, the Playstation Vita. While many of us have had our eyes on that beauty for what seems like a while, we may still have a chance against it, as sales languished horribly against our Japanese allies after the first week. I can’t promise that we’ll be totally safe, what with it coming with it’s own Uncharted title and boasting a library that’ll threaten us even on the go, but we can only hope. Where true danger may start to lie is with the Nintendo 3DS, which may finally start bringing out some bigger guns to lay siege to our forces on the move, with the deadly Kid Icarus, Snake Eater, Luigi’s Mansion 2 and Paper Mario 3DS ready to attack throughout the year. Don’t be fooled into thinking it’s just a portable assault either, as there’s still the enigma of the Wii U to consider. Will it be a flash in the pan? Will it be the biggest revolution in gaming since motion controls and touch screens? How do you even play it anyway? I guess there’s no way to know until E3.

Now, you should all know how important E3 is for us; it’s our chief opportunity to find out what’s approaching throughout the second half of the year and the year beyond. With the Wii U approaching and rumours of a new Microsoft console, it may be easy to forgot there’s still a barrage of titles that will be gearing up for attack, which E3 will be all too eager to expose, as well as some extra wonders we hadn’t anticipated. Where else will we discover when Desmond’s next adventures in the Assassin’s Creed series will be, or when Gearbox will wow us all again with Borderlands 2 and Aliens: Colonial Marines… Gamescom? Well yes, there too.

So what else is there to prepare against that we know of? Well, Valve are planning on staging a coup against FPS players everywhere with Counterstrike: GO in the future, and are stretching their dominance out towards the RTS franchise with Dota 2′s release, to boot. Max Payne is going bald and badass on us in Rockstar’s third instalment of the franchise, whilst Square-Enix prepare to unleash Agent 47 in Hitman Absolution and send Lara Croft back to the beginning in Tomb Raider.

Ubisoft are planning to welcome us back to the jungle with Far Cry 3, Alien Noir will become a thing when Prey 2 arrives, and we move out of Rapture and into the skies with Bioshock Infinite.  South Park is getting its own RPG, Halo is making a grand return later in the year, Metal Gear Rising Revengeance is planning on taking the award of “Worst Name of the Year”, and Blizzard are releasing the triple threat of Diablo III, WoW’s Mists of Pandaria and Starcraft II: Heart of the Swarm.

*takes a deep breath*

And those are just a few of the titles that we know are coming this year. There have been plenty I haven’t even mentioned, tons yet to be revealed, and two new consoles being released.  There’s simply too much!  Soldiers, I gathered here not just to warn you about the impending threat, but to make you realise something that may chill you to the bone: we may not be able to play all the games this year.

There are just simply too many games coming out this year for us to take on by ourselves. Even if we ignore all the modern concessions we face, such as DLC designed to keep us playing the story after it’s finished, or map packs to coerce us into playing another round of multiplayer, and even those damn Horde modes, there’d still be far too much to play. Attempting to do so would be madness, and succeeding may well destroy us. Some of us may have to think carefully about what they want to play this year, and pick and choose as they see fit, and maybe make some sacrifices, but that doesn’t mean that some of us still can’t try.  Just remember this:  they may take all of our free time and money, but I’m (reasonably) sure they can never take our freedom!  DISMISSED!