Progressive Victory

I have been playing Polyphony Digital's Gran Turismo 5: Prologue recently and, as you'd expect from someone who is a massive fan of the franchise, I have enjoyed it immensely.

Returning to the series is like riding a bicycle; it wasn't long until I was comfortable with the controls and completely immersed in the racing I was doing. As an experienced fan, I was paying attention to the new features such as Gran Turismo TV or the online play, as well as more aesthetic features like which cars were included (nice to finally see Ferrari) and of course those stunning graphics.

Making my way through the game's series of events, I came across a race that was quite hard. Not in the frustrating or annoying sense, just difficult in achieving the gold medal in the time required for the event. It was three laps around Fuji Speedway with the goal being to finish first after starting at the back of the grid. Conveniently opponent cars got in the way through some corners, impeding and slowing progress that ultimately hurt when it came to catching and then passing first place. It took multiple retries before I was successful and while attempting it, a thought came across my mind -- why do racing games always expect the player to win, in order to progress?

Now I could have easily settled for second or third place. The game would have given me the respective medal, classed the event as passed and I could have continued on into the next one. Most games have a similar system where a podium finish is enough to pass an event, but these are video games we're talking about, we're meant to win if we are to claim that we have successfully beaten a racing game.

That's fine, race drivers in real life all aim to win and it's a goal we as players should be happy to strive for, but the thing is, it's easy to strive for victory but it's another thing entirely to actually achieve it in the real world. It is literally impossible for someone to win every single race they participate in due to the random and unpredictable nature of motorsport. Drivers could be involved in a crash, a race could be canceled, a mechanical failure could mean that a particular driver's race is over or, more likely, your opposition could surprise you and be better than you on the day, be it due to skill, luck, or the fact that his team had the better car setup suited to that particular track. It's just the way it is in Motorsport.

Which is precisely why it strikes me as a little odd that racing games, particularly ones designed to simulate real life and/or the various official championships out there, rely on the idea that every race must be won in order for that game to be completed 100%. It is both a good and bad thing. It's good because as much as they are representing the real world, these games are not real life and outside of your own expectations with a given title no one else is going to care whether you have successfully obtained every Gold medal or whether you only nabbed half of them. On the other hand, it's bad because they are representing the real world; they are designed to provide players with the chance to race cars from their favourite manufacturers or Motorsport categories, around their favourite real life circuits and to enjoy it since, obviously, the majority of people won't get to do such a thing in real life. If the intention behind these games is to provide players with that experience, then surely the ideal goal of winning everything is a misguided one since it would be easy to assume that someone interested in such an experience would already be aware of the fact that winning every race is impossible? Most of these games already feature a championship mode of some sort so using it and structuring player progress with other, more realistic and clearly defined goals over the course of a given championship seems like a better option to pursue than the 'win everything' mentality that racing games currently follow. It could even be combined with another prominent mode in these games, the career mode. Generally, these are designed to loosely simulate how a driver rises up in the ranks, starting out in the lower categories with cars that are usually slower and gradually progressing into the faster, more popular cars as they gain experience and reputation. Combining the two could see a driver (IE: the player) climbing the ranks as (s)he completes multiple championships, their reputation and invitations to drive in new and different categories based on how they have performed over an entire championship rather than by the fact they won one or all of the races. Instead of the goal to win everything, have more realistic goals such as finish in 5th place or better in the overall championship standings with the player being able to progress if this is successfully achieved. If not, then it wouldn't be such a bad thing to have them compete in the championship(s) again as it's quite common in the real world for drivers to compete in a championship multiple years in succession until they have achieved their individual goals or because they enjoy the particular category. This would further add to the realism that these games are trying to portray, hopefully in turn providing players with a more enjoyable experience.

Of course, it's a fine line to manage -- what should and should not be included to provide a simulated experience but one that is also enjoyable, both to the intended audience and also to one that may decide on a whim to try it out. Too much realism can alienate potential audiences, putting them off the game, the franchise and even the genre. Not enough realism alienates the core audience and leaves them feeling unsatisfied. This reliance on victory to dictate a player's progress throughout a racing game seems like a move that would only further alienate players and their enjoyment, which is why I believe it's time for developers to find other ways to effectively show a player's progress whilst not imposing unrealistic expectations upon them. The example above is just one possible direction, I'm sure there are plenty of others and I hope to see them one day in future racing titles.

Festival Of Fun

It's dark. The sun is rising. The dark orange glow glistens over the desert, making it look mildly serene yet eerily daunting too. In the distance multiple rock formations of varying heights and sizes are towering into the sky. This is Monument Valley, a vast expanse of desert with little to no life to be seen anywhere, just dirt, mud and gravel as far as the eye can see. The sun continues to rise, revealing the rock formations in their majestic, gigantic beauty. Down on the ground a dirt bike and a buggy are speeding along a dirt track below, weaving in and out of a few camper vans. More rock formations pass by as our helicopter flies above and then over them. Then, it hits you; flags, flashing lights, cars parked down below, crowds surrounding a stage, crowds watching cars circle around small dirt tracks as well as watching bikes performing jumps and stunts -- there's clearly an event happening here, deep in the desert and boy is it packed.

Welcome to MotorStorm.

The above paragraph is a rough description of the opening clip of Evolution Studios' PlayStation 3 launch title and is, quite possibly, one of the best introductions to a game I have ever seen. It begins with a slow and subtle tour of a largely desolate, yet awe-inspiring stretch of desert with wondrous rock formations towering all over the lifeless ground below. It ends with the complete opposite, a loud and proud convergence of man, machine and spectacle. It hints that something is happening before ramming it in your face and you know what? It instantly puts you in the mood to play. This continues as you reach the main menu where, over a PA system you hear someone yell "Welcome to MotorStorm" followed by the sound of the crowd cheering. Immediately afterwards one of the game's licensed songs begins to play -- in my case Slipknot's Before I Forget and then Pendulum's Slam -- coinciding with further footage in the background of cars racing, tumbling down a hill, bikes going over jumps, people walking between tents, crowds cheering for a band playing live and even a damaged car being towed. It's an overwhelming introduction but within minutes you are motivated to play, inspired to race and have a desire to be part of this spectacle of an event.

The fact the introduction can get you excited to play is significant -- How many games can get you into the mood to play them within minutes, hell, seconds of you putting the disc into the drive? It's a good feeling.

This continues as you start playing, with the racing in MotorStorm being thoroughly enjoyable and even strategic as you realise that the game's various tracks contain multiple routes, each suited to certain types of vehicle. Speaking of which, there's a good variety of them ranging from bikes and rally cars to racing trucks and big rigs, each handling differently and being a joy to drive. There are jumps, pools of mud, ditches, car junkyards and other obstacles all over the tracks, some of which are set high on mesas with their routes running parallel to the cliff side, the sharp drop and expansive desert totally visible below. It's thrilling, intense stuff and an absolute blast to play. I enjoy all my racing games for various reasons, but it's not every day that I enjoy one simply because it is fun. The last time that happened was with Burnout Paradise and that came out in the beginning of 2008.

It may be a launch title, it may have a sequel set elsewhere and it may not be as popular as other well-known racing franchises, but MotorStorm is a fantastic arcade racing game that is really fun to play. If you like arcade racers and you own a PS3, it comes fully recommended from me. I will be back soon to delve deeper into why it's so fun to play as well as discuss other elements not mentioned here, but for now please excuse me. I have a date with the desert to attend to.

Anticipated Disappointment

2009 is passing by at an extremely fast rate. E3 has just passed giving us a look at what we will be playing later in the year (and beyond) while gamers around the world are currently playing games like inFamous and Prototype. Others again are playing older games such as Resident Evil 5, Halo Wars and even Flower. I'm in this latter category, playing games in my collection that either come from the holiday rush of last year, or, from years previous that the industry has quickly forgotten. We move on fast in this industry and before we know it, we'll be in the holiday season once more where, despite caution to prioritise games this year, I still expect to be overwhelmed with the amount to play. This industry loves seeing the next big thing and while the future is bright, the past is colourful so it's disappointing that we don't spend more time focusing on it. But, we move on this way because we're habitual creatures and can't resist the hype. The discussion stemming from E3 alone proves this, and will continue to do so each and every year.

This is a good thing, though. The convention's insight into the future brought surprises, spectacle and excitement, and information on games we were already anticipating. For me, three games in particular cannot come soon enough: Assassin's Creed 2, Mass Effect 2 and, of course, BioShock 2. I loved the original games and can't wait to see their stories continued in the sequels. Like any fan would be, I'm eagerly awaiting the release of these games and jump at any piece of information I can find referencing them. I can't help it, it's how I've been brought up by the industry.

But it's the other occupants of this industry, the other fans of various franchises, that have been on my mind recently and whom are the subject of this post. These people are following the exact same trend I am and are anticipating whatever upcoming titles take their fancy. There is nothing wrong with it and I am glad they have something to look forward to. I see a problem, however, with the audience's anticipation for certain games and what their reaction to them will be. It just so happens that these particular games also happen to be the ones I've mentioned above.

All three franchises are pretty big names these days, but none more so than the inspiration for this blog's name, BioShock. The original game set in the underwater city of Rapture was both critically and commercially acclaimed, with fans enjoying multiple aspects including the experimentation with Plasmids and weapons; the exploration of the city; the implied history and the narrative. Naturally anticipation for BioShock 2 is high with everyone eager to return to Rapture, to see what is new while revisiting the familiar; as a fanboy of the game I too share this desire to get my hands on the sequel. But what I think separates me from a lot of these other people is that I'm looking forward to it realistically.

Speculation is rife about what will happen in the game, with people discussing how what has already been revealed will relate to what was experienced in the original. This discussion is fostering an excitement and level of expectation for BioShock 2 that, I think, will eventually end up in massive disappointment and perhaps as a result, backlash and maybe even hatred towards the game. This is an unfortunate, yet expected by-product of the insane hype that surrounds big-name titles before release. So why am I writing about it? Well, I think people are expecting BioShock 2 to be as impactful and effective as the original was by providing a story that continues on with the brilliance of the first game, giving new locations within Rapture to explore and fall in love with as well as new Plasmids, weapons, enemies and unexpected surprises around every corner. Arguably this is an understandable expectation, but to me this will only lead to disappointment for those who have such high expecations.

To be blunt, unless 2k Marin end up pulling something special off, BioShock 2 will be a disappointment. I'm not saying it won't be a great game because I'm sure it will be, but it won't be what everyone wants it to be and it's this that will unfortunately see BioShock 2's reputation be mixed, resulting in what will essentially be a love/hate game. I am, on the other hand, anticipating BioShock 2 with more realistic expectations. Sure, I want the game to be everything it can be and as good as the first game, if not better, but I have set myself up so that if this is not the case, then I won't be as disappointed as others will be. To put it simply, all I want from BioShock 2 is for it to engage and immerse me in the same way the original did; for me to be drawn right back into the allure of Rapture, to be entertained with the continuation of the story regardless of how much it relies on predictable, or not-so predictable plot twists and for me to still enjoy the experimental gameplay the series is (or should be) known for. If it can achieve this, then I do not care if it doesn't contain the "OMG" moments, or whether it's as successful as the original in terms of advancing the medium or whatever.

Basically, I want to return to Rapture and revisit a place that feels like home, a place that feels part of me and one I've missed ever since leaving in late 2007. What's the harm in that?

On a side note: it'll be interesting to revisit this post once BioShock 2 is released in late October.

Replay Value

Lately, I have been pondering a question that I can't seem to shake -- Should we play through games multiple times, in order to fully understand the experience and points they are trying to convey?

Playing through a game once is usually enough for us to know what we think about it. Genre or what takes place during the game does not matter; we'll know whether we liked or disliked it, and we'll know whether we found it frustrating, relaxing, intense, atmospheric, compelling or any other adjectives that could be used to describe the particular game we've just finished. So why then, would we need to play through it again if we are already aware of such thoughts?

Well, we wouldn't, but in my experience I have always gained a better sense and understanding of my thoughts on a particular game with a subsequent playthrough, and it seems I'm not the only one. By playing through a game for a second or perhaps even third time, I'm allowing myself to enjoy it again, but more importantly, I'm also opening myself to potential elements, mechanics or features that I may have neglected the first time around. I may notice how the game's combat helps or hinders the overall experience, or, I may see a subtle addition to a room that adds context to the narrative or a certain character, giving me a better understanding of who or what they are.

Usually if we play a game more than once, it's because we really enjoyed the title and want to experience it again, reliving a memory or seeing a story and characters again because they resonated with us. If, however, we can discover something new in a subsequent playthrough, or appreciate the game with a fresh perspective, then how is that a bad thing? It could provide a deeper context for us to enjoy these titles, whilst also allowing us to understand what may or may not work in the intended experience. For the more critically inclined out there, myself included, I can only see this as a good thing as our analysis of a title or exploration of a particular point can be more fully-realised than before.

As an industry we spend so much time focusing on the next big thing, to the point where we either move on within a week of release or get overwhelmed with everything we can play. In doing so, we're so distracted by the current that we have no time to spend enjoying the (even recent) past. For your average title this might seem okay, but for the truly great games, the classics, surely this is a bad thing? Especially when the level of respect we have for these titles could be deeper, better defined and better understood? On second thought, subsequent playthroughs of the average and mediocre titles out there wouldn't be such a bad thing to do, either, as it would allow us to communicate why these titles are mediocre with a more informed perspective than the first (and only) playthrough would.

Don't get me wrong, I realise that playing games more than once takes away time from playing other games we may want to, or from enjoying games that we absolutely love and want to play again, but at the same time I think it's an interesting thing to consider. Would playing through games more than once allow us to justify our opinions through a deeper understanding of an intended experience? And if yes, should we then play through more than once in order to critically evaluate it properly?

If you have an answer to these questions, or something to add, then feel free to have your say via the comments. In the meantime I will be experimenting with this possibility with a game I'm playing at the moment, Uncharted: Drake's Fortune and will post the results in the future.

Cross Blog Dialogue: GTA: Chinatown Wars #4 (Conclusion)

Well, it took longer than expected but Daniel and I finally finished our experiment of posts discussing GTA: Chinatown Wars. It was a fun ride and I'm really glad I was able to take part. I believe I have learned a lot over the course of this discussion and I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Daniel for joining me for it. Be sure to check out his blog for more great discussion. Hopefully you enjoyed reading the series as much as I did writing it and who knows, maybe something similar will happen in the future. For now though, here's the final exchange, enjoy.

Need a refresher?
Cross Blog Dialogue: GTA: Chinatown Wars #1
Cross Blog Dialogue: GTA: Chinatown Wars #2
Cross Blog Dialogue: GTA: Chinatown Wars #3
----

Daniel: That’s a great summary of Chinatown Wars, very fitting. It is this stop gap in the franchise that sucks everything together and spits it out in a new and interesting way. Chinatown Wars also seems like the ideal title in the series for any newbie looking to become acquainted with the franchise as a whole. The gun club is just opposite the airport (far right hand side of the map) by the main road.

The end game is actually quite good, there’s a series of missions that build up to an exciting conclusion and the story actually ends on a positive note; the bastards get what’s coming to them - all of them. Huang gets a lead and proceeds to chase down the suspects, once he narrows it down, the game features a series of set pieces that act as boss battles. Kicks the game off on a high note. So I was rather impressed with how the game concluded.

GTA: Chinatown Wars is a contemporary incarnation of previous games and plays accordingly. It’d be fair to speculate that the framework for the original titles was built to avoid rendering the large city in 3D, if that’s the case, Chinatown Wars realizes this design and retools it. Having the city rendered in 3D makes the game feel relateable to GTAIII onwards, yet since the camera remains overhead, the feel of the original games is also present. It’s an game that balances the feel of both varieties in limbo, metaphorically represented by the camera both is halfway between overhead and low. The latter allowing the 3D models to stand out, the former to give a pseudo 2D appearance. As we’ve discussed, it’s likewise for the mechanics; a mix and match of previous titles.

What the game does differently or completely new from the previous games is what gives the title a unique identity and strengthens it as a whole. The flashy graphical style is the epitome of all this. It’s a style of it’s own that is unique to this installment. The driving mechanics are tweaked and feel inspired by other games but unique in it’s own right due to the slight assistance it provides. The narrative too, it’s lite and full of jokes yet presented in a series of transitioning renders with text. Finally, the DS interface is what marries it all together and individualizes the title more than anything else.

The feeling is therefore a combination of those from the prior games. The game feels like a huge world of mayhem contained within such a concentrated space. The new graphical flair makes the on-screen drama visually stunning, it’s a greater feast to the eyes giving the intensity of chase sequences a unique exuberance. The camera allows you to witness everything in close proximity, emphasizing the contained feel of the game. The camera locks the player away from the action. This feels a little constricting but serves to remind the player that this is indeed a portable title and there are restraints imposed. It’s not a bad thing, but it comes with the property and instills any feelings attributed to the hardware. Overall, GTA: Chinatown Wars feels like a culmination of clever concepts wrapped in a visually attractive package uniquely geared for portable play. What’s your final take?

----

Steven: My final take is a fairly obvious one given the things I have said in our previous exchanges; GTA: Chinatown Wars is an impressive game both in the technical achievements Rockstar Leeds managed, as well as how fun and exciting it can be given the completely different platform it is on. Before playing it, I did not think a Grand Theft Auto title could work on the DS and it was nice to be proven wrong. Before playing it, I didn’t know what to expect and as a result, I had no expectations going into the title. I came out of it surprised, impressed and with an even deeper level of respect for Rockstar as a whole for doing what they did with the game.

Chinatown Wars is to me, as I’ve mentioned before, a summary of the entire franchise, with Rockstar using it to make a clear and concise example of what they believe GTA is about. They mixed and matched various elements of the series to demonstrate the core of the franchise whilst also proving that it had legs, that it was open to experimentation. You could almost call it Grand Theft Auto: Greatest Hits.

Sure, not everything was as enjoyable as it could have been, with my main gripe being the story and how irrelevant it was. Characters were boring, their dialogue more so and all they were useful for was providing my next mission. Even the end of the game, while fun to play, wasn’t all that compelling (I guess we disagree there). The ending was predictable and I totally saw it coming. The story just didn’t seem to be a priority this time around, which is disappointing for me after seeing what they attempted with GTA IV. That said, it does not detract from the experience at all. Sure, it may be disappointing, but you soon forget about it once the actual missions start thanks to the unique and varied objectives we’ve already alluded to. Taking full advantage of the DS’s features proved to be beneficial to the game overall and I sincerely hope that from now on, all GTA games contain the same level of variety that Chinatown Wars does.

Overall, I am happy to have played this game and I’m eager to see where Rockstar take the franchise next. It begins with the second downloadable episode for GTA IV, The Ballad of Gay Tony, and no doubt I will have some opinions on it once I’ve played it. Beyond that, I’m keen to know if they keep offering different perspectives within Liberty City, or whether they choose to go in another direction again. I’d also like to see another DS game in the future, though after the lack of buzz surrounding the title and the lackluster sales, I’d understand if that wish doesn’t come true. I’d like to take this opportunity to thank you for participating in this exchange as well as sharing the experience with me. It was fun and I hope you enjoyed it too. Hopefully we can do it again sometime.

Catching Up After E3

Well, it has been almost a fortnight since my last post. My apologies for that. My reasoning is, of course, the week of E3. Whilst I didn't attend (that would be the day), I couldn't resist reading anything and everything to do with the show. I stayed up to watch the three press conferences, viewed countless trailers and read all the hands-on previews I could to ensure that I was aware of everything that came from the show. It is something I do every year and 2009 was not going to be any different, however I wonder if perhaps I focused on it too much because I fell behind on the things I'd usually do such as reading blogs and, of course, writing on this one.

Enter this current week which is basically over. I spent the majority of it trying to catch up after E3 and that is why I've been quiet. I am still not entirely caught up with everything, but what is left will have to wait while I get back into my routine. Expect some incoming posts on the games I have been playing recently including Dead Space, Uncharted: Drake's Fortune and Gran Turismo 5: Prologue. I also have the final post in my series about Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars on the way and I may do an in-depth post on Just Cause if I feel like it warrants it.

Returning to E3, what an awesome return to form for the show that was! I'm not one to try and decide which company 'won' the show because that would be selling myself short. So instead allow me to cheat and claim that all three 'won', because I certainly felt that way after seeing what they had to offer. For years now I have been wanting to see three games in particular: Alan Wake, Heavy Rain and Team ICO's next game -- now known as The Last Guardian -- and this year delivered. Admittedly it wasn't in the way I was expecting, with both Heavy Rain and The Last Guardian being shown (leaked or otherwise) prior to the show, but even so it was great to finally see them. Beyond those titles, I was keen on seeing more of games like Assassin's Creed 2, Mass Effect 2, and of course BioShock 2 and I was also pleasantly surprised to see unexpected announcements as well. Crackdown 2, Forza 3, Golden Sun 3, Metroid: Other M and Gran Turismo PSP were all surprises, as were Microsoft and Sony's motion control reveals, both of which show a lot of potential.

Another game that I was not expecting but I'm happy to see is the spiritual successor, of sorts, to LittleBigPlanet: ModNation Racers. This little game was revealed during Sony's conference and is basically the racing genre's version of Media Molecule's awesome platformer. That alone piques my interest but seeing a race track created in quite extensive detail within a five minute presentation was amazing and I really can't wait to see more of that game in the future. Too bad it seemed to fly under the radar while the bigger titles hogged the spotlight.

Anyway, another E3 is done and dusted and once again I have a bucketload of titles that I am interested in, with the games mentioned above only just a few of them. Thankfully a lot of them seem to be 2010 titles, which hopefully means I won't be as overwhelmed as I was last year. I'm still recovering from that, some 8 months later. With that look into the future done for another year, it's now time to return to the present and enjoy the games I have now. Regular programming will resume with the next post. :)

Timeless Fun

One of the most common elements in racing games are Time Trial modes. It doesn't matter whether the game is simulating the real world or set in a fictional setting with outlandish characters, the mode is a staple of the genre and even expected to be in each racing game that is released. Despite this, the modes of racing games are rarely discussed and people can't seem to clarify why they enjoy playing them so with that in mind, it's time to enter my own thoughts as I explain why I enjoy setting lap times over and over again.

Time Trials are fun due to the precision I alluded to in my previous post about striving for perfection. By being precise, the player is concentrating as hard as possible on ensuring that every single corner is taken perfectly, because in doing so, the reward will be seeing their time be faster than the one that was originally set out to be beaten -- a friend's posted time, an attempt for a position on online leaderboards or their own previous record. When the word precision is used, it's easy to associate the term with realistic (sim) racing games only. They concentrate on providing realistic handling and physics so the benefit of precision is more integrated and important in those types of games. The term can, however, still summarise how a player approaches Time Trials in a fictional racer such as Mario Kart or F-Zero, as despite the tracks in these games featuring unrealistic jumps, obstacles and speed boosters, the fastest times will still come from the laps that were taken precisely. In fact I would say that Time Trials in these fictional games are more fun and interesting, as the addition of those elements ensures players are kept on their toes.

Beyond the precision element, Time Trials are also fun because of the numbers associated with the mode. The notion of beating a time is appealing for two reasons: First, the challenge with testing a player's skills and pushing them to their limits and second, the competition shared with friends or leaderboards. Both reasons are common place in gaming as a whole and have been around for many years, the difference being that instead of trying to beat times, it is usually an attempt to beat a high score. The reason why players aim to beat those scores is the exact same reason why people try to beat times in Time Trials, the end result being success in beating others or a rewarding boost to the ego as you finally improve your skills and result.

The mode in itself isn't necessarily exclusive to racing games either; other genres have implemented Time Trials to various success, adding a nice, different take on the mode as a whole. A conveniently recent example would be Mirror's Edge, which used Time Trials to separate the game's core mechanic -- free running/parkour (whatever you would like to call it) -- from the game's story and other bells and whistles. This allowed players the chance to explore the levels more thoroughly and experiment with different routes and paths across the rooftops, something that couldn't be done in the normal game due to the urgency of a countdown timer or something related to the story. Extending even more on the Time Trials were the Speed Runs, which challenged players to see how fast they could traverse the levels from the story. Including such modes gave players something to do after they completed the main game, as well as exploring the limits of it at their leisure. Being able to explore levels to find the fastest route and then exploit it to set times is a rewarding feeling and it's nice to see other games experimenting with the mode.

In summary the reasons someone like me, a massive fan of motorsport, enjoys doing laps over and over again around a track is because I enjoy aiming at the times and trying to beat them, but more importantly I also enjoy the pressure and satisfaction that comes from trying to be as precise as I possibly can. It can be something as significant as finally getting a corner right, or something as minor as taking a section of the track a fraction faster than previously -- all of it ends with a feeling that I have achieved something and while it might not mean anything in the grand scheme of things, the reward is too hard for me to resist.