Blogs - Medici

Never, in the whole gaming history, has the strategy games area suffered a major blow in 2009 than ever before. This claim is due to the launch of the now called "Double-Disaster", the two games considered the worst in strategy history: StormRise and Stalin x Martians.

First of all, it should be asked: Why are they considered the worst? First, take on with the similarity of both: Broken animations, terrible camera management, horrible sound effects, poor-quality textures and very faulty controls which ruin the gameplay. Not to mention the lack of planning for scenarios and single-player missions and episodes. The difference, only one: StormRise had the promise of an original and pleasant storyline. Stalin x Martians didn't. It all shows that, whether they like it or not, all strategy-game developers must admit that standards in this game genre aren't being met.

But this isn't the matter of which I came to discuss with, simply reviewing two awful games, but to wake up all areas of gaming and modding community to the crysis ahead. To this, I'd like to refer to the high-quality work shown in StormRise months before it's release, very well made compared to the mess of the released game. This simple fact shows that these "intentions of causing good impression" last for three or four weeks and then they're replaced by the interests of the corporate executive areas. Now, the very meaning of strategy game development is at risk of being called a "money-gaining preservation method" for the giants of corporate game development. StormRise is a symbolic example, but far symbolic yet is the people's reaction after the critics: A minute of silence was made, and then the work kept going on. Nothing changed.

For years there was talking in changing the methods of strategy game development, when the brazilian developer Continuum released the game Outlive with the mechanics Starcraft used, four months right after the game was released, in which people reacted calling it an "immitational suicidal move". Now, with the release of StormRise and Stalin x Martians, most believe that the strategy genre has definitely reached the far bottom of the humiliation pit. Wrong. The far bottom was far ABOVE us. We already have banalized the meaning of strategy when Earth 2160 was released by Zuxxez, which ruined a very promising saga due to horrible sound effects and story, and than it was heard again the same story for a need of change in development methods. On the release of Ancient War: Sparta in 2007, it was all heard again. The release of Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars, did managed some relieve, but it wasn't enough for the hardcored fans, meaning it only lacked a bit to reach perfection and restore the strategy game meaning. When Red Alert 3: Uprising was launched, it was revealed that EA focused more on time schedules and reaching the young and un-familiar public than keeping what they already had. A message to Sega: It may take several years to make a good game, but incompetence is daily. And everyone's reaction, be they game developers, critics, simple gamers or people who never heard on it, is the same. It's made one minute of silence, and the work goes on. Nothing changes.

People no longer judge concrete things, they judge abstractions. They consider gameplay, and not fun. They consider graphic arts, and not original concept. It seems talking about original concept doesn't catch anymore. It's said that simple fun of playing is obsolete because, in the mouth of some gamers, gameplay IS fun. I remember once in an EA Battlecast Primetime episode that the anchors referred the importance of people's constructive criticism for the development and betterment of games. It sounds the gamers pretended not to listen, because they kept on un-constructive complaining, using illegal references, cracking, cheating into multi-player games, i.e. weaking the support of the developers who want to provide the fun the gamer wants. In the modding world, there's no education that every gamer opinion, this very basic right of expression, is responsible for helping the developers make something better. And thus, this only serves to rise even further the statistics of incompetence.

In the end, it's all the same chaos and it'll be the same chaos time and again, until a radical move is made. I've done mine. I've issued this wake-up call. Thank you.

In all the recent years that have passed, we witnessed the launch of the newest additions to the Command & Conquer franchise. Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars, it's expansion Kane's Wrath, Red Alert 3, it's expansion Uprising, and a new FPS-game called Tiberium, which promised to deliver a far more dynamic sight into the dark, green crystal-based universe than the first FPS, Renegade, did. But all of these weren't done by Westwood, but by it's 'sponsor', Electronic Arts, that practically merged Westwood into the fold.

In spite of the hatred of most people for EA's famous reputation for taking good hit only in sports games, they have managed to make C&C 3 a great success as Red Alert 3 nearly did as well.

Recently, however, there were also several mistakes done by this large multi-national game-development corporation concerning the Command and Conquer franchise. Two of these mistakes I would like to specifically appoint are the recent fiasco of Red Alert 3's expansion, Uprising and the cancelling of the promised FPS, Tiberium. Uprising did nothing more but just add and add more to other factions and the game itself, while Tiberium "had just too much bugs for them to handle", a context that it'd take too long for them to release. Most claim EA is incompetent and that's why these games failed to give the fun players so much wanted when they bought it. I think otherwise.

The real problem is they make about every game, not just C&C-based, under pressure and hastily, trying to overcome the old saying "Haste makes waste". It's then when the gamer has every right to complain about it. The Dutch-based Guerilla development studio has taken three years (Ever since the launch of Killzone: Liberation) just to develop Killzone 2, and thus, despite it's failure in bringing a stronger, solid story, it became a huge success for FPS addicts. In EA, for a long time, there's been the costume of announcing and developing new games in four to six months per year (That is, excluding all and every sports games they make.). But this also isn't a problem for fresh developers who want nothing but mark their fame in games, like the case of Greg Kasavin and Michael Pedriana, responsible developers for Uprising, who just didn't get the time to really understand the way of making games. Acting under pressure and hastily makes developers imitate things from other games and then forget it all, until the next critic wave, which comes stronger. Until one day, a critic Tsunami rises and wipes it all away.

Developers from EA constantly complain that schedules are "too tight", and they must wreck brains heavily for creativity under this timeline. People who formerly worked in Westwood, now stationed in the Petroglyph Studios, recognize that many of these timeline issues were made under the principles of the "longer timeline, higher cost" theory that executives from EA take to the letter. And the worst of it is that it all is EXECUTIVE decision, it can't be questioned by lower ranks, unless by unprecedented decision of all developers, which, constantly, EA executive boards refuse to listen.

Therefore, it's suggested several changes in development strategy, global conquest modes, in order to provide players both linear single-player story and dynamism started by Dawn of War: Dark Crusade. Imitating several mechanics and unit designs from Starcraft II, to prove EA is better than Blizzard? "Make up something inventive!", ask the executive board, development makes satires, mechanics, units. But of course they don't want to be checked out periodically on development, but who takes things relatively obvious from other known games isn't a developer, it's an IMITATOR.

Another thing that must end urgently is this famous mentioned discussion between development and executive boards, in which executives blame developers for 'inefficiency in development' as much as developers blame executives for 'forcing hands on more and more time records.' But it doesn't matter, for in both cases, it all comes down on the head of the independent, contributing gamer that preventively doesn't buy the game under the constant fear of EA's poor quality, thus not generating the funds EA needs for better development. Now, it's all up for EA to make either another expansion or make a Red Alert 4 too early in order to overcome the fiasco Uprising was.

But out of all things that contributed to the colossal failure of the Red Alert 3 expansion, none was more clear than the limited availability imposed by EA when they stated that it could only be arranged by buying and downloading via internet, in an attempt to fight piracy. It must be noted that this protectionist move was all for nothing, as, a few days after the launch of the game, Uprising was already available in P2P sites and Torrent downloaders and free for all gamers. Therefore, it was a worst move than releasing retail, DVD versions as not only players will never be able to enjoy the competitive multi-player action promised by EA, but also it didn't generated enough funding for EA to support it, as internet payment can only be done via credit-card. In other words, EA let down it's main source, live money made by selling original DVD, in the name of protection from piracy. A subtle, but failed move.

For the Evidence:
Gamespot.com

Something happened today: a miracle. Despite the bribing and usual manipulation EA makes around the great game sites like IGN and GameSpy, Gamespot has marked a 5.0, a MEDIOCRE rating for the junky expansion Uprising is for Red Alert 3. Gamespot's reborn this time.

Haaaaaaaaaaallelujah!!! BROTHERS, THIS IS A DAY OF GLORY!!! LET US FEAST UPON EA'S INCOMPETENCE AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF IT!!!And thus, the Prophet Medici has spoken, xDDDD.

A few weeks ago, I was searching for a few more hints on 3ds Max magics, but accidentally (or by luck of fate), I got hold of a new, innovative and curious FPS game: NecroVisioN, due to be released May 15th. I played it and, strangely for my little attention to FPS, I liked it.

The game itself uses a creative mix of vampires, demons, a bit of resident evil zombie touch and the desperating ambience of World War I. In NecroVisioN, you take the role of Simon Bukner, a young wanna-be-hero who joins the British forces to fight the Germans. However, like any war veteran would tell you, you soon face the reality of war: Destroyed buildings, mutilated soldiers, vicious violence and guts spread everywhere. But it's only the beginning of it. Pretty normal for the WWI-loving player so far.

However, as you spread far into the storyline, you discover the worst of it. Far beyond the trenches of the Great War, you cross your way through german experiments in secret genetic labs with ghosts, monsters and zombies, only to find yourself in the middle of an ancient secret war between vampires and demons, which has begun to spread through the human world. In the end, there's that usual cliche of saving mankind and bringing WWI to an end through an unthinkable-for-most alliance.

The story, though inspired by H.P. Lovecraft, is a bit over-the-top in terms of storyline, but it's not that important. The ambience, realism, creativity and breath-taking combats more than make up for it. You want to live in this dark underbelly of the already horrid Great War. The game is nothing if not dark. You see desperation everywhere, even to the point of soldiers killing themselves to forget these horrors, included in high quality graphics and cutscenes. Music is well made, where either you feel the tense of entering the fortress before the German Artillery destroys you or facing limitless armies of zombies with nothing more but your hands. You also get to use the real weapons used in WWI, from the infamous Luger pistol and the Gewher 98 and it's bayonet to powerful demonic artifacts, vampiric technology and visceral melee. Places like a german fortress are historically accurate, making you feel like if you're there.

In first sight, it looks like a traditional combat FPS with a few copied elements, like the adrenaline mechanic, based on Max Payne. You know, that thing of accelerating time to deviate shots, slow enemies and all that Matrix-like thing. Also, when being shot in the head, you only lose a small hit points while shooting your enemies like that grants you a bonus and kills them instantly. A bit un-realistic.

However, out of all combat mechanics, it's the combos that'll give the player the edge. They can work with everything, even with ranged weapons. For example, when shooting your enemies in the head you do a Headshot combo, or when killing multiple small enemies or a large one with a mounted bunker machine gun, you do a Harvester combo. And it's not that all. Close rage also gets it's sets, from the Herr Doktor (Limited only to bayonet) to the Circus Stab (when you throw something and instantly kills the opponent). That's right, throw, you gain the right to throw anything at your enemies, even a shovel.

Of course, interactivity, secret places, bonus artifacts and a sorts of puzzles also make their debut, as this unlock a series of magic powers in which to fight the bosses easily. Indeed, bosses. The Demo even introduces you one, and it won't fight alone, there's always those pesky undead and demons to help him and help you make your fight difficult.

The real problem in concern is the overload of graphics used in the game, which forces you either to buy a monster-computer or shut down most features for a fairly good performance. Also, there's a bit of difficulty in the learning curve of the game, so early gamers will have to save often and restart the game over and again until they get the hang of it. Another problem is the difficulty of finding needed objects in tight time schedules, making the player explore the ENTIRE level to find what it needs, to the point of getting back to places just to find a closed door just opened.

In the end, if you're looking for a real challenge, with original concepts, storyline, combos and weapons, tough fights, epic enviroment and explosions everywhere, then NecroVisioN is the game for you. But I wouldn't recommended this for noobs and newbs, as this game is not for fools and weak. And please, keep this away from children, as this is not your greatfather's usual WWI story.

As you people might know, EA just announced weeks ago the launch of a new expansion for Red Alert 3, called Uprising. Meant to be a continuation from the Allies Campaign Victory in the original RA3, Uprising promised Four new single-player campaigns, one of them telling the story of Yuriko Omega, the current Commando unit for the Empire of the Rising Sun, and a new multitude of units.

It's not that I wanna complain about storyline, characters, or the current powers in RA3, they were consistent and reasonably good, gameplay and balance are excellent. It's about these new units Uprising promised, as a few minutes ago I saw the update of all the new units. And it wasn't good, not in my eyes and a terrible sight for Westwooders (People who loved what Westwood did to C&C and RA in the past).

First, let's take it up for the absurds in sight, starting with the new Soviet units, the Reaper, Grinder, and the in-sight Conscript-driven bike with sidecar. It makes even RA3 players wanna ask "What the **** are they doing???". Besides the awfulness of the design, it's a proof of lack of ideas and lack of consideration: What about the Sickel, the Apocalypse Tank's secondary ability? They'll just get thrown away in favor of these new units? These units take the role other units have ALREADY taken, for God's sake! It'd overbalance everything with the ridiculous, from gameplay to lore!

Next, the Allies, and their Harbringer, hover tank, and heavy infantry. Same case. Harbringer might take the role from the Century Bomber, but it might also transport vehicles, so I'll easy on it this time. But the Hover Tank... Oh, F****** DAMMIT!!! That's EXACTLY the idea I had for my Forth Rail Gun Hover Tank in Southern Rising. Look at that design!!! R-I-D-I-C-U-L-O-U-S. And putting small guns as primary and artillery as secondary? Wake up, EA, that's too much, even for me! And it's obvious they won't spare even this heavy infantry.

Finally, the Empire. Nothing to complain about graphics, very good, these are good sights and good concept for the Giga Fortress, it's just about consideration and ideas: The Empire was made to be EASTERN TECHNOLOGICAL, no thing about laser bowmen, which will wipe out the Empire's BASIC unit, the Imperial Warrior. To the Steel Ronin, I ask: What happened to the King Oni?

Now, let's go to the logic part, the point I wanna seriously bring in here. Even a game with absurd concepts like Red Alert must have at least a bit of logic on it. Heavy weapons plus Sickel models equal bad looking. Soviets aren't made for Grinding anything, foremost large asian robots and buildings. Imperials and Allies shouldn't have huge aircraft. The Soviet's have the huge Apocalypse Tank and the Kirov Airship because of a logical reason, they are prone to EXCESS. The Allies were once a non-violent solution but now you turn them more and more offensive? Oh, please. And the Empire is about anime robotics, not old history based units.

That's what the mod we're intended to make for RA3, Southern Rising, is determined to avoid no matter the cost. We're supposed to stick to the ideals for the factions, balance and gameplay fun. If the Allies are non-violent, we'll give them offensive units with non-violent secondary attacks. The Empire, since it has gained Psychic schoolgirls, will also get it's fair ideal share. Soviets are about larger and larger, that's what we'll do best. Same for the ideals we have for the Forth and SLIM. All, with some absurd, but with a bit of logic and balance.

If you want my opinion on this future expansion, it's a waste of investiment for terrible pay-off even an EA player will feel, as it'll do worse than ruin a franchise: It'll ruin gameplay and even the player's thirst for playing it multiplayer. But we can also look on the bright side, as this can teach EA about making terrible expansions such as this one just so they and their sponsors gain more money. Once people see what Southern Rising can do, and believe me when I say we'll work real hard on it, even the egg headed developers will feel the need for a change in their strategies.