Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 [PS3] Review

Superhero games have always been a strange thing to me. Sometimes, you get to play a game starring your favorite superhero and the execution is very well done and appropriate (like Capcom’s Marvel Super Heroes fighter, Data East’s amazing Captain America and the Avengers or Konami’s fantastic 2-screen X-Men arcade game)…most times though, you have to force yourself through a generic action game with comic book characters thrown in and the experience is average at best.

Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 however is probably the best console superhero game I have ever played…In fact, I’m still playing through the game (to unlock as much as possible) and not only is it a fantastic game, it’s probably my favorite PS3 game to date.

The game’s story revolves around a “Super Hero Civil War” in which S.H.I.E.L.D. and the U.S. Government want super heroes to register with the government and be monitored at all times…otherwise they face imprisonment…or worse. Eventually the player comes to a point where they must decide which side they believe in more and from the there on the game splits apart to provide two different storylines. If you’re not a fan of Marvel, there’s no reason you should even be checking this game out…so making non-comic fans happy isn’t what this game is about. If you’re a fan of ANY marvel character in the slightest though, you’ll enjoy the intricate story and gameplay options that allow you to play as your favorite character(s) while you team up with some of Marvel Universe’s most iconic heroes and villians.

At its core, Ultimate Alliance 2 is a beat-em-up game. And why shouldn’t it be? Super heroes are all about physically affecting the world around them and trouble usually only goes away when they push back. What makes UA2 stand apart from other generic brawlers though is that the excellent story, pacing, visuals, enemy variety and character choices provide every player with a unique gaming experience.

For example, early on I found myself wanting to use Iron Man exclusively (because I always liked him). When the story changed and I was forced to pick another character to take his place (when Iron Man went off on another part of the plot) I found myself using Gambit mostly. Then, when I got the chance I started using Captain America. Finally, on my first play through, after trying out many characters I decided on DeadPool as my main character because frankly, he kicks butt. Not only is he a wise-cracking, borderline-crazy masked-hero, he’s also incredibly fast, can teleport (JUST like you see in X-Men Origins: Wolverine), do ranged-attacks with guns and is deadly with his dual katanas. On my second play-through, my characters were different and I often found myself using Thor and Hulk most of the time (Thor is super powerful).

In short, Ultimate Alliance 2 allows gamers to play through the game using a customizable cast of characters that would make any Marvel Universe fan happy. It also doesn’t hurt that the game features elements of role-playing games like experience points, stat customization and party line-up choices. Now, don’t expect the depth of Final Fantasy, but do expect an action game experience where you feel like the developers made an effort to let the players do more than just the linear, predictable point-A to point-B gameplay. It’s not quite perfect in execution or incredibly complex, but the RPG elements are welcomed for sure.

Let me say again how well done all of the characters were handled…every time you try a new character like Storm, Thor, Spiderman or Thing you actually feel like you are playing as them. The way they take damage, the speed at which they move and dodge attacks and even the ways you inflict damage all feel accurate and unique to each character. If that weren’t enough, you have the ability with each character to join powers with another character to create super powerful “fusion” attacks that can affect all enemies on screen, a certain section of the screen or can be directed at will for a short duration. Each character has their own unique special attack and with two dozen characters to pick from the possible fusion attacks number well over 250 (even though the animations/presentations for them often are repeated). Fighting hordes of enemies is also not as bad as you might think because the variety and presentation is so well done. Every level and area seems to feature a new enemy type or dangerous obstacle to overcome, breathing life into what could have been a mind-numbingly repetitive action title.

The graphics in the game are extremely well done and look extremely faithful to the comic book characters you grew up with. There are slight framerate and screen tearing issues here and there but overall the game looks wonderful. Seeing your team of four characters take on 30 enemies at once in high definition is amazing to say the least. Even the menus, art style and cutscenes look great (they use in-game characters…something I’m always a supporter of…though the pre-rendered video encoding quality could have been better). Plus, I’m glad the game featured such a large variety of different levels to explore…no one stage looked like any other and it made exploring them much more interesting.

The sound is excellent as well and large cast of voice actors in the game is a huge plus (it really feels like a big alliance of different people working with or fighting you). The story is helped immensely by the fanastic voice-overs for Captain America, Iron Man, DeadPool and Nick Fury specifically. The music is also great and features a highly appropriate and catchy superhero theme through many parts of the game, making those climactic battle/key cut scenes even that much more spectacular. In short the game sounds amazing and is exactly what you need to hear in a superhero title this. The *only* thing I wished for was the dialogue in all aspects of the game to be spoken (not just be text), but that’s really nitpicking.

The control in the game is great overall and very fun to try and master. Like I said, all of the characters control differently and their individual powers and attack styles can greatly affect the way you approach certain enemies, obstacles and stages in general. It’ll take you a lot of time to discover the strengths and weaknesses of them all and don’t be shocked if you find yourself picking a select group of characters and playing with them through the entire game (you’ll grow that attached to them, their controls and their wisecracks). Every day I’ve played Ultimate Alliance I have been excited to play as whatever character is on screen because of how polished and accurately they are presented. If I had to mention any faults for the controls, it would be that sometimes the action gets so chaotic on screen you lose your focus on the character you control and that sometimes your CPU-controlled allies just stand there and do less than they could while you attack enemies (like bosses).

To make it clear once and for all, Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 is an excellent game that you need to go out and buy immediately — especially if you are a comic book fan. The sheer amount of characters to play as, the variety of levels and enemies to encounter and depth of the storyline to absorb (the game is well over 15 hours long…even longer if you play through both sides and collect everything) make this game have a replayability and entertainment value level few games can match.

Graphics: 9 | Sound: 9 | Play Control: 9 | Fun Factor: 9 | Final Score: 90%

Batman: Arkham Asylum [PS3] Review

Batman: Arkham Asylum is being hailed by many as the “best Batman game ever.” Over the years the Dark Knight has been in his fair share of so-so games…but unlike Spiderman, X-Men or even Superman, Batman has never been in a truly awful game (well…at least based on the ones I’ve played…they may have been flawed, but not complete garbage). That being said, I think I would have to agree with gamers who say that this is the best realization of Batman in videogame form to date. When I say that I mean that it has the graphics, the story, the dialogue, the action and the characters to make every Batman fan happy.

But, while Batman: Arkham Asylum is a very good Batman game…is it necessarily a good game when you look beyond the license attached to it? That’s a tough one. Overall, Batman: Arkham Asylum is a highly polished, engrossing, fun game. But once you get down to the details (and hey, let’s face it…the details are what separate the great games from everything else) Batman: Arkham Asylum has more than its fair share of flaws.

Before I talk about the negatives (which it seems critics don’t want to do nowadays for fear of backlash I suppose — either from advertisers or readers), let’s quickly go over the high points. For starters, the game looks good and seems to take advantage of the 360 & PS3 well. The voice acting for the most part is well above average with Joker and Harley Quinn easily taking the award for most satisfying banter (and most satisfying characters as well). The controls are easy to understand and pick up so there’s no steep learning curve — and in an age of every single button being used for five different actions, this is a good thing. The enemy character models and many parts of Arkham Island look great and make you feel as if you really are in Batman’s world. Last but not least the game is enjoyable overall from start to finish so there’ll never be a very long period of gameplay* when you feel like you’re wasting time or wanting to skip ahead. (*Except Killer Croc’s repetive, slow-paced, boring section…yuck.)

Now, let’s talk about why Batman: Arkham Asylum isn’t as great as everyone has made it out to be.

First off, the graphics have major issues. For one thing the game shares so many similarities with the visual look of Bioshock and this summer’s Ghostbusters it’s downright eerie. I mean, most interiors on Arkham Island look like different parts of Rapture and certain parts of the game (like when you fight Scarecrow) look EXACTLY like scenes from Ghostbusters: The Video Game. I mean, sure…no one has ownership to a “look”…but for me to feel like I was playing as Batman in Bioshock should have sent up red-flags at Eidos/Rocksteady at some point in development. If only there was a way to lessen that nagging sense of “been there, done that…”

Oh wait! There is! Let’s have the player go through most of the game in “Detective Mode” where everything is much easier to see and enemies/secrets are shown without effort. Seriously, I’m not joking. After the first few minutes of the game you’ll realize it’s easier to just play the game and get around using the nightvision-esque Detective Mode than by trying to find landmarks as you do in other games. Finally, I think it was so lazy for the developers to put all of this crazy work into the Batman, Gordon, Joker, etc, 3D character models only to recycle the same 4 or 5 thug models through the whole game. Am I the only one who caught that? I had no idea so many psychotic prisoners looked EXACTLY alike!

Another flaw of Batman was the sound. While the voice acting was good for many characters (Batman, Joker, Harley Quinn, Scarecrow, etc.), many were boring or forgettable (Killer Croc, Zsasz, Poison Ivy, Cash, etc.). When you factor in the truly lackluster music (*yawn*) you have an audio experience that is both above average and lacking at the same time.

Now, I want to talk about a big irritant of mine: The combat system. Some people may say Batman: Arkham Asylum has a great combat system, but they’d be wrong. You can say that it is an easy to pick up and play combat system…but it is far from good. There’s absolutely no depth to it whatsoever beyond just moving your analog stick in the correct direction after landing a move and pressing attack again so you can start/continue a potential combo on another assailant. That’s it. It’s a glorified button masher with plenty of unblockable hits (that you can’t counter since you are in mid-strike with another enemy) and cheap enemies who are apparently immune to everything but a specific attack pattern (for example, one guy needs to be swiped with your cape to become vulnerable while another needs to be dodged just right so you can hit him from behind). Luckily in the single player game the fights end quickly enough (on normal mode the difficulty is an absolute joke) but in the Challenge Maps mode expect to tear your hair out trying to defeat 50 or more enemies in wave after wave without getting hit once…just so you can get a high score.

Oh, and let’s not forget my biggest issue with the combat system: Boss fights. Batman: Arkham Asylum…like so many games now…falls into the predictable routine of making a boss fight more difficult NOT by making the boss have more attacks or be smarter in any way but by simply throwing a stupidly-simple/straightforward boss on screen and surrounding it by 20-30 baddies to defeat AT THE SAME TIME. The challenge doesn’t come from going one-on-one with an enemy who is smarter than you…nope…the challenge comes from not dying simply because you are totally overwhelmed by attackers.

Honestly, I am so tired of this trend in games. If it’s one or two enemies…fine…but if you expect me whittle away at an important character’s health because they are a major part of the story, why the heck am I spending MORE time trying to defeat throw-away bad guys during the battle?

Also, am I the only one who thinks Eidos/Rocksteady got the “point” of Batman WRONG? I mean yes, he can kick your butt in any one of a number of fighting styles he’s mastered…but Batman is supposed to be the World’s Greatest Detective…NOT the World’s Greatest Combo Attacker. He has a genius level intellect…so why do you constantly have to fight enemies head-on in this game? Isn’t he smarter than that!?! His thing is also making criminals fear him…and the best way to make someone fear something is by staying just out of their reach, tucked away in the shadows. In the moments of the game when you are doing that (perching atop gargoyles while prisoners heartbeats are racing in panic mode), Batman: Arkham Asylum is phenomenal. Unfortunately, too much of the game focuses on being a standard beat-em-up with fancy 3D graphics and a Batman license to play with. I found this aspect especially disappointing.

I also want to say that Batman: Arkham Asylum feels a lot like Mario 64 / Banjo Kazooie to me. It’s a collect-a-thon game where you are basically forced in many ways to uncover secrets here and there to move forward at a reasonable rate through the game (nevermind how the Riddler sealed his trophies behind solid rock walls in the time between you arriving and Joker escaping [if you factor in Riddler escaping once Joker starts his plan]). I also thought several times how much the game reminded me of Banjo Kazooie because the strange color palette and neon-ish outdoor areas looked like they belonged in that game (not a Batman game). Oh, and before I forget, since when did Batman become “Vent Man”? If there’s a sequel, crawling through vents has got to go. Man that got repetetive.

In terms of the Challenge Maps mode, I will say that they will add a significant amount of playtime to your experience. It’s sorta fun to see how well you compare to the thousands of other gamers who have stats online…but I must also say that I hated the combat challenges. I already felt like the combat system in Batman was flawed and lacking before I finished the one-player mode and I had no doubt the challenge modes would consist of the same button mashing only at a faster pace for longer periods of time. I was right. The best Challenge Maps, like the best parts of the single player game…are the Predator Maps. In those levels you need to accomplish certain objectives and knock out your enemies in the fastest way possible. The fun part comes from trying to find creative ways of doing 3 objectives very quickly by doing the right action at the right place at the right time. Even though this mode is far more satisfying than the mindless combat levels, you’ll still get frustrated here and there by a simple mistake in the level completion process on your end or a cheating CPU enemy that went left instead of right and threw off your whole plan.

In closing, I know it sounds like I didn’t like Batman: Arkham Asylum…but I did. It’s a fun game overall, despite its flaws. I think it’s one of the better superhero games to come out on any system and will surely satisfy fans of Batman in general. When I look at Batman: Arkham Asylum compared to other titles outside of the superhero niche though I see a game that has problems in all major areas and falls just short of being truly great. If that weren’t enough…I honestly don’t see this being a game I will ever play again once I put it on my shelf (well, not the single player mode at least), so that’s got to mean something too.

Graphics: 8 | Sound: 8 | Play Control: 7 | Fun Factor: 7 | Final Score: 74%

Crystal Defenders [PS3] Review

After playing the demo of Crystal Defenders I knew that I had to buy the game. I loved the art style, the simple gameplay and the interesting twist on the strategy/turn-based genre featuring Final Fantasy-ish characters and settings.

Sadly, after playing the ACTUAL GAME for well over a dozen hours or so though I must say that Crystal Defenders THE GAME is not very good. The DEMO is fun and easy to get into but challenging enough to make you use your head to win. THE ACTUAL GAME though propels the difficulty to astronomical levels in outright frustrating/infuriating ways.

The basic premise of the game is that you need to position different types of characters (soldiers, archers, mages, etc.) on the screen next to paths that enemies will travel on. When you finish setting up your troops and tell the game you want the enemies to proceed, there’s not much one can do once 20 enemies come streaming out of one side of the screen to another. If you are unable to kill an enemy before it escapes to the exit onscreen you lose a crystal (or more). If you lose all 20 of your crystals, you fail and the game ends.

Crystal Defenders ultimately fails because of the massive jump in difficulty one experiences when they move from the first third of the game (designated ‘W1′) to the second third of the game (called ‘W2′). It’s like the developers wanted to piss off players between those two sections so much that they would start thinking of ways to blow up their PS3 to teach it a ****ing lesson. I really don’t understand it. Even the first stage in W1 (which the demo is based on) is much more difficult insomuch that you can’t even use the same strategy from the demo to beat it…you basically have to rethink your strategies from scratch for each part of the game (W1, W2 & W3).

To further explain how this game is frustrating I’ll break it down for you: As I said previously, inbetween enemy “waves” you can deploy and position troops where ever you wish in the allowed areas…now, that’s all fine and dandy…but once the wave starts…if one of your troops is one grid square to the left of where he should be…it’s entirely possible you may let one or more enemies through to the exit. And with resources so limited (much of your ability to defeat enemies relies on you quickly deploying thieves near heavy enemy kill zones [they double the gold enemies drop when they die…and powerful characters require LOTS of gold to get maxed out), you have very little room for error in your gameplay.

In fact, that’s what makes Crystal Defenders so aggravating — the idea that your success is based so much on picking the right character, upgrade or place to position it every turn if you screw up even ONCE in 31 waves of enemies on any given stage, you could potentially make it impossible to win. There’s also no friggin’ “go back one round” option…so if you accidentally upgrade a soldier or deploy too many archers before a certain wave of enemies…well, screw you. You need to restart the ENTIRE campaign all over again and mimic what you’ve been doing in hopes of slightly modifying your tactics in the next go around. Honestly, you should get used to restarting levels over and over…and over again.

To give you another example of the ridiculous accuracy one needs to beat a campaign, let’s break it down into numbers. Let’s say that you must kill 28 waves of 20 enemies, 2 waves of 4 enemies and 1 wave of 3 ultra powerful end-mission bosses. Basically, you gotta kill 571 enemies in one stage. Now, let’s keep in mind that you only have 20 crystals to work with…and you must have 1 crystal left in order to successfully complete the campaign. That means, at a minimum…you must kill approx. 97% of ALL enemies (weak & ultra powerful). Let’s not forget that many waves features enemies that can each steal MULTIPLE crystals…so in reality, you probably need to have about a 98-99% accuracy. That, dear readers, is ridiculous gameplay design.

Crystal Defenders looks pleasant (think 16-bit), sounds alright (average but very Square-y) and has an easy enough gameplay style to quickly pick up and appreciate (for it a cheap $10 PSN title)…but it’s not a very good game. Checking out the demo may prove to be an enjoyable 30-45 minutes…but if you buy the full game, you’ll find yourself wanting to quit once you clear all of the “easy” stages in W1.

Graphics: 5 | Sound: 5 | Play Control: 6 | Fun Factor: 4 | Final Score: 47%

My Next “Computer”…

Let’s face it. My main desktop computer sucks. It wasn’t even “high end” back in August 2004 when I got it [even though it had a very nice video card that cost $200 and was needed for Doom 3] and it’s been upgraded/wiped clean/and “restored” so many times since then I’m actually surprised it’s even working.

So here’s the deal. I want to get a nice, powerful computer device to replace my crappy old PC. Unfortunately, I just don’t have the ability or desire to spend $600+ on just a computer system (BEFORE I even add the video card). Four years ago I was in college with student loan refunds and credit cards giving me some extra $$$ when I needed it – nowadays, what I make is what I have to spend. …and, let me tell you – if you are tempted to spend $800 on a computer system (no monitor) knowing that you still aren’t going to get the best experience from many games out right now you’ll feel crappy. “Crappy” as in, “what’s-the-point”???

Seriously, I don’t even need a powerful computer anymore. The most I do is run Photoshop/Flash/Illustrator and ocassionally play games from 2004 and earlier on it. I tried last year to play Bioshock on an “upgraded” system that I added more RAM and a new video card to and it played horribly. I did this again with Crysis only to experience the same thing. I felt very cheated.

I’m just tired of it.

Then I look at the XBox 360 (which I had to get rid of last year to pay bills) and I was playing Halo 3 and Oblivion on that w/o any trouble. To play Oblivion on a PC I would have had to completely replace my system with a Core 2 system just to run it as 360-visuals quality…and the 360 was less than $300 back then!!!

So what’s my plan exactly? Well, I think very, very soon I will be getting a PS3 and just letting my desktop PC work until it dies (in the event that it dies I do have a backup, my laptop…but that sorta sucks as well since now one speaker AND my wifi have died on it…arrrgghh!!!). With a PS3 I can play the newest, most hardware taxing console games for years to come, I can surf the web (meaning I can update this blog), use keyboards/mice, hook up external HDDs, camera, printers, etc. to it…basically the PS3 IS a computer. And it’s ONLY $400. AND it comes with a BluRay drive built-in. I think the expandable HDD, built-in Wifi and BluRay drive is what made me choose the PS3 over the 360 this time around (better deal overall).

It’s hard enough finding a Core 2 Duo computer for under $400 (BEFORE taxes & S&H) and it most certainly won’t have a great video card or BluRay support built-in.

So that’s the plan…I was going to maybe try to save up next year and get some high-powered Alienware or XPS Quad-Core machine but screw it – consoles are where the majority of games are and I’m tired of trying to play “catch up” every few months with the PC world. I can never afford “the best” yet all the PC game makers constantly use “the best” hardware as their baseline specs. Anything less than ideal specs mean playing games at 640×480 or 800×600 on my 22″ 1680×1050 monitor. It looks and usually plays terrible. I’m just sick and tired of it and if the PS3 can do the majority of things I want (surf the net, download songs/pictures/videos, check my email, etc.) then I can just save my computer for doing the occasional Photoshop/Illustrator thing.