The Inconsistencies Of Australian Videogame Classification

Note: This post is the first of hopefully many in which I respond to something I've read that has been thought-provoking, intriguing or just generally interesting. I read a lot of articles about games, both in magazines and on blogs, so naturally there are times where I read something and form a response to it in my head. Most of the time though, I never get to make that response anywhere. I don't like this and, using this post, here is my attempt to change that.

No doubt by now you are well aware of Left 4 Dead 2's banning in Australia. Much has already been said about this particular banning, as well as the many previous ones this country has seen over the years. This post isn't about the latest game to be refused classification specifically, but rather the inconsistencies made apparent over the various games that have been banned.

Like most of the bans we've had previously, I'm not too concerned or affected by Left 4 Dead 2 being refused classification. Sure, it sucks, and now Australians will probably end up with some edited version of the game, but even so it doesn't bother me all that much. What does bother me is the inconsistency of our classification board (previously known as the OFLC) and how, ironically, they are confusing the general public with the refusal of certain videogames. Allow me to explain by breaking it up into three categories: excessive violence and gore, illegal products such as drugs, and, of course, sex and nudity.

Violence/Excessive Gore

Apparently Left 4 Dead 2 was banned due to the excessive violence contained within, particularly to do with the use of melee weapons. While I haven't played the game or seen its content, it still baffles me how the ratings board can refuse a game like Left 4 Dead 2 when the original game passed through fine and, more pertinently to my point, franchises like Gears Of War and Ninja Gaiden are currently sitting on Australian retail shelves. I'm curious as to how Left 4 Dead 2 can receive a ban when the Gears Of War series contains excessive violence and gore, including the fact that you can chainsaw someone in half, with the blood and remains staying on the ground thereafter for all to see. In interviews conducted with the classification board in the past, I've heard explanations that these games get through to retail shelves because the more horrific violence being inflicted is usually against alien species, zombies (hello irony!) or other, more surreal enemy types -- thus being completely fictional and "non-realistic". Yet, in a simple counter point, the aforementioned chainsawing in Gears Of War doesn't just apply to the Locust species found in the game, it also applies to the COG -- or, in other words, the humans. This can be done either by the Locust in the main campaign or by other humans in competitive multiplayer (such as Wingman in Gears 2) -- meaning that the explanation about non-human enemies loses its merit and doesn't justify the inconsistency that we've seen. Other games such as Ninja Gaiden and God Of War depict violence and extreme gore as well and while yes, the context they are viewed in is different to that of Left 4 Dead 2, the overall content isn't really all that different. For someone like me who follows the industry closely, I might judge a game's content individually because I'm aware of how the game(s) might compare to others, but for the average consumer out there who bought Left 4 Dead and Gears Of War 2 last year and who now wants to buy Valve's sequel this year, the specifics of the ban don't make sense and is confusing as a result.

Drugs/Alcohol

Drugs and, to a lesser extent, alcohol are another common concern, as you'd imagine, and yes, there are inconsistencies seen here too. The middle of last year saw the wonderful Fallout 3 banned briefly due to its inclusion of the drug Morphine. Once the drug's name was changed to Med-X, the game received the MA 15+ rating (Australia's highest rating) and we got to enjoy it like the rest of the world. This happened fairly quickly so really, what's the problem? Well, as a matter of principle, the game shouldn't have been refused classification over a name. Not when other games containing drugs have passed through fine. The most recent and arguably best example is Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars on the Nintendo DS. Aside from exploring Liberty City and participating in Huang Lee's story, the main thing players would be doing in GTA: Chinatown Wars was drug trafficking; buying and selling various drugs all over Liberty City in order to make a profit. The issue here is the simple fact that these drugs didn't contain fictional names: they were named exactly as they are in real life. From Cocaine to Meth to Heroin -- it was all present and accounted for, and the game was released in Australia without a fuss. Intriguingly enough, previews of the game in the media even assumed the addition of drugs would cause controversy, bringing the issue into focus regularly if not aiding the potential backlash a possible ban would have caused. This potential ban didn't eventuate though and the game was released without any dramas. There was no controversy (here, at least), and furthermore, there was barely any hype surrounding the game despite raving reviews. The game didn't sell as well as expected and now developers Rockstar are releasing it on the PlayStation Portable and the iPhone in an attempt to muster a few more sales. It will be interesting to see whether those releases also fly under the radar or indeed spark the controversy that everyone was expecting. As you can see, Fallout 3's ban was rather ridiculous. The fact it got edited quickly is beside the point; it is simply unfair for one game to be banned over a name while other games pass through fine.

Nudity/Sex Scenes

Nudity and sex in videogames is also a regular concern when it comes to our ratings system here in Australia, but personally I feel the issue is a little more controversial overseas than it is here. Take, for example, the drama that surrounded BioWare's Mass Effect and the mild sex scene contained within. A fuss was made over its depiction of sex, and questions of whether it was suitable for videogames or not were asked. The reason I feel that sex is more of a point of contention overseas is because of some games that have been released here. Quantic Dream's game Fahrenheit was released here in Australia containing both sex and nudity and not once was it spoken about. Meanwhile the American version, Indigo Prophecy, had the scenes edited out, for reasons unknown. It could be argued that the inclusion of sex in the game was ignored because it flew under the radar a bit, but even so the inconsistency still applies and the contrast between a fully-fledged sex scene and one that is mild and shows nothing is significant, if not worrisome. Preview footage of Quantic Dream's next game, Heavy Rain, also shows nudity and it wouldn't be hard to assume that a sex scene of some sort will also feature somewhere, due to Quantic Dream's attempts to tell a realistic, mature and adult story. It will be interesting to see the reactions to the game after its release sometime next year.

When Australia's classification board refuses to classify a game, for whatever reason, it doesn't just confuse Australian consumers; the industry gets confused as well. With each ban the line is blurred a little more, and by association, the moral standards of what should and should not be allowed in videogames are increasingly unclear. Even more so when a country renowned for being strict compared to the rest of the world allows content to pass through fine when such content poses a problem in a usually more lenient country. The ramifications for this are serious and new standards really need to be set so that developers, publishers and indeed, consumers alike are clear on what videogames are allowed to portray; but when big name companies like Rockstar feel the need to submit edited versions of their games (in this case, Grand Theft Auto IV) for classification in order to ensure their games are available everywhere, the future looks unfortunately hazy. A shame, then.

Looking Forward

I've been in a very contemplative mood lately, considering a variety of things and deciding how I feel about them, what needs changing, what should stay the same, and so on. Naturally, games are included and in particular, how I should approach the forthcoming rush of titles that will see out the rest of the year, not to mention the incredibly packed 2010.

The first aspect of this is the potential purchases I could make in the next few months and where I stand with them now, as opposed to a month or so ago. For a while I had been of the mindset that I would be buying roughly 5-6 games at the end of the year. This was a list I was happy with, after already considering it and making an effort to prioritise titles after overwhelming myself with releases late last year, something I've harped on about enough here. For the record, the games were: Forza Motorsport 3, Assassin's Creed 2, Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, the Metroid Prime Trilogy and Brutal Legend. There are, of course, more games than that being released that I'm interested in and eager to play, but my line of thinking was that those chosen would be suffice and that I could catch up with the rest at a later date, much like I've been doing this year. But, in my recent re-evaluating of what's important, I realised that even that bunch of games would overwhelm me. Maybe not as much as last year, but it would still be enough and it's just not a feeling I'm keen to revisit any time soon. So with this in mind I lowered the list to just three titles: the Metroid Prime Trilogy, Forza Motorsport 3 and Assassin's Creed 2.

Sticking to just three titles will allow me to focus on each one a little more instead of trying to balance a whole host of titles at once. You will notice, however, that one title is a re-release of games that are not new; the Metroid Prime Trilogy is a bundle of all three games in the Metroid Prime series, with only minor changes and the inclusion of Wii controls. Why then, is this in the list when it's a package of old games and could wait in favour of a brand new title? Well the answer is simple, I'm a Metroid fanboy, but it goes beyond that too as I have not played the third in the series, Metroid Prime 3: Corruption. This is simply because I did not own a Wii until recently, and when I made the purchase I decided to delay buying Corruption until the Trilogy was released.

As much as I'm looking forward to finally playing Corruption, the Trilogy also allows me to revisit the original two games, which brings me to the other aspect of my re-evaluation. Despite having already played through both Metroid Prime and Metroid Prime 2: Echoes countless times before, I'm really excited to do so again. Why? Because I plan on discovering why I love them so much and then writing about it here, analyzing what makes them tick and why I resonate with that kind of experience. It will be the first time I've made an effort to really get to the core of the (my) experience and I look forward to taking on such a challenge. Metroid is not the only game that is giving me the chance to do this, however; an Xbox Live Arcade port of the original Perfect Dark is coming out soon and before Metroid Prime came along, that was my favourite game ever, so I am, of course, looking forward to playing through it again. Last but not least, the recent announcement of a new Okami game for the DS (which I might add is looking wonderful) has reinvigorated my love for the original on PS2, so I'd like to revisit it via the Wii version and again rediscover why it resonates with me so much.

Basically, my contemplative mood has seen my priorities change and as a result, this year's impending releases aren't as enticing anymore. Sure, I want to get the games as much as the next person, but I've realised that I can wait for them too. I've got plenty to play right now anyway so really, there's no rush. Going through this process has certainly been interesting and ultimately, I think anyway, rewarding. I've considered what is important in my life and now the moves are in motion to ensure that I can continue to enjoy it, instead of getting caught up in the rush and grind that can come with following the crowd. So while everyone else enjoys the awesome games that are about to hit, I'll be sitting on the sidelines playing some older titles like Super Mario Galaxy. I look forward to playing them and I also look forward to hearing about your experiences with the new games, so don't let me down. ;)

Digital Games Round-Up

Second round-up then, this time focusing on the other three digitally downloaded games I have been playing recently. I originally intended to write about each of them in separate posts, but I figured I'd lump some thoughts together in one post and then move onto the other posts I've been intending to do lately.

Wipeout HD -- I don't even know what to say about this game, I simply love it. First and foremost, it looks absolutely gorgeous. The tracks are packed with incredible detail that is largely unnecessary when you consider how fast you'll be flying past, while the environments are futuristic but realistic in that game sort of way. Put simply, it's a visual treat, but the ears also get a work out with the sound being, in a word, amazing. This is one of those games that you would use to show off your new sound setup to your friends, it's just that good. And while I don't have a decent sound setup of my own yet, I want one because of this game. Throw in an electronic soundtrack that really compliments the game's aesthetic and represents the intensity of the racing and you have a game that really plays to your senses. Thankfully, it's not just the superficial side of the game that is fantastic as it plays really well too. The racing is fast, frenetic and at times, strategic (via the inclusion of weapons Mario Kart style) and it makes for one incredibly intense experience. It's my first Wipeout game so I can't speak about the others in the series, but I have played F-Zero GX and consider that to be my favourite racing game ever. So when I say that Wipeout HD is pretty much on par with that game in terms of enjoyment, well, I think you know how much I love it. Look out for a more in depth post on it in the future.

Super Stardust HD -- It would be very easy to class this as Geometry Wars in a different skin. It plays in a similar way, is as addictive as that game is and can get insane with the amount of enemies and obstacles around to shoot, but fortunately it has enough of its own unique features to justify looking at it on its own merits as well. Taking place on a variety of planets and a spherical game space, the main objective is to shoot a bunch of asteroids that continue to land around you. Three different weapons add a bit of strategy into the mix as more points can be obtained if you use the right weapon for the right kind of asteroid. Enemies appear intermittently and are usually used as a way to finish a level. There are five levels per planet, with a boss to defeat at the end of the fifth level. The short break between levels gives you information on your score, any bonuses you may have received and of course a breather from the action. Tokens for bombs, shields, weapon upgrades and points can be obtained after breaking up the asteroids and have the ability to entice you into taking risks -- Do I go for those extra tokens over there amongst the massive rocks, or do I leave them in favour of focusing on this bunch of asteroids instead? -- keeping gameplay interesting and unpredictable. Put simply, the game is great for short, quick and fulfilling bursts but can be as addictive as Geometry Wars too, so bare that in mind when preparing to play.

Trials HD -- This fits in the same category as Super Stardust and Peggle, which I wrote about the other day. It's simple in nature, accessible and immediately enjoyable, but contains an incredible level of depth that comes almost out of nowhere. Being a physics based motorcycle game, the depth comes from the physics system and how the tracks' various puzzles use that to their devious advantage. Beginner, Easy and Medium stages are all relatively easy to complete and obtaining Gold medals on each track is a breeze, but then you get into the Hard (and then after that, Extreme) stages and it's like a completely different game. Every section of a level contains a tricky puzzle that really challenges your skills, both with the mechanics of the game and your wit in solving it, and multiple retries are guaranteed. Thankfully, it never gets frustrating. Sure, it can be annoying when you realise you're retrying a section for the 200th time, but the 'just one more go' mentality prevails over any form of anger, dissatisfaction or disgust that you'd assume such a game would have. It's very addictive.

There you have it, some brief impressions on three games I have been playing recently. The three are, along with Peggle, perfect for when you are in-between games thanks to their accessible nature, but they're also worth playing for hours on end, too and it's for this reason I can see myself playing them for many more months to come. Look out for in-depth posts on each game in the future, once I've had the opportunity to focus on them individually.

Some Thoughts On Peggle

Generally speaking, I always miss the boat when it first arrives in videogame land. When something new and exciting has docked ready to offload its goods, I'm still playing with titles that shipped a year ago. This isn't always the case, I do sometimes get to play the next big thing as it arrives with late last year being a nice example, but for the most part it's true: I'm always behind the times when it comes to new release videogames. It's something I've grown to accept over the years because really, it doesn't matter when I get to play a game so long as I get to eventually, but even so I do sometimes wish I was there to see the new shipment come in.

Peggle is one of the games that I missed out on during its popularity, most likely due to the fact it was on the PC, and as a result I shrugged it off as a game I would not get to play. I did hear the news that it was coming to the 360 via the console's Xbox Live Arcade service, but as I was ignoring the game the news didn't register on my radar. Fast forward to about a fortnight ago when I was idling on the 360 dashboard, unsure of what to play next. I decide to randomly browse the Marketplace and lo and behold, there it was waiting to be purchased. Curious, I downloaded the trial version and gave it a quick go. The fact I'm writing about it now should clue you in as to what happened next.

Peggle is one of those rare games that doesn't seem like it will last long at first but ends up surpassing the time spent with most big-budget releases. Just in the last week alone I've played it more than any other game I'm enjoying combined, which is a testament to just how addictive it can be. The thing I love about it is how it takes advantage of something not too many other games do, simplicity, and uses it to provide an experience that's very accessible whilst also maintaining incredible depth, too. The simple process of shooting a ball towards some pegs is understandable to anyone, and serves as a wonderful entry point to the intentionally joyful experience it provides. Another thing that makes it immediately understandable to players is the pinball influence. Sure, it doesn't look like pinball and it has enough of its own features to provide remarkably different gameplay, but the influence is still there. The obvious comparison is the metal ball used to hit the pegs, the less obvious is dependent on which character you choose to play as: choosing the crab will give you flippers for a limited time while choosing the hamster will give you a second ball. Hitting the purple pegs in each round gives a points bonus, as does lining up various trick shots that take advantage of character-specific power-ups and peg placements. Again, arguably an influence from pinball, but also one that stems from another, perhaps unexpected source: Burnout 3: Takedown. The use of stylish maneuvers and themed Takedowns -- such as ramming an opponent into a bus or off a bridge -- and being rewarded for it made Criterion's game a lot more enjoyable and it's something that developers PopCap wanted to emulate in Peggle.* By adding stylish shots such as the Orange Attack and Extreme Slide, the game constantly rewards you in a minimal but effective way with each shot the player makes. This adds to the pleasure already being derived from the game's uniquely colorful and happy visuals, as well as the cartoon-like characters and joyous music. Put simply, everything Peggle does is designed to make the player feel happy, allowing them to have a good time and to never be frustrated with the experience.

And the wonderful thing is, it succeeds on every level. Whether I play it for ten minutes or for three hours, and regardless of how I perform, Peggle does not frustrate. It's not about aiming for a high score and having a failed attempt feel disheartening, nor is it about competing against hard opposition via the game's AI or of course, other players. While a player can choose to focus on these things, it's not about any one way of playing, it's not even about what actually happens in the game, it's purely just about having a good time and nothing more. How many other games can you say achieves that?

PopCap Games are gaining a reputation in the industry for consistently creating accessible and enjoyable games that end up being a lot more addictive than people may expect. I've heard people describe them as the Rockstar or Valve of the casual (don't get me started on that term) market and after playing Peggle, I can see why. I am extremely happy that I had the opportunity to play this game and I'm definitely eager to check out their other titles in the near future. If you, like me, missed out on this game for whatever reason then I fully recommend you check it out. As soon as you get your first Extreme Fever, you simply won't look back.

*Confirmed by Sukhbir Sidhu, Studio Director at PopCap Games in the 100 Best Games To Play Today feature in issue 200 of Edge magazine.

Demo Round-Up

As is probably obvious from the relative silence that has featured on the blog lately, August has been a busy month for me. As a result I haven't been able to dedicate any time to the things I want to do, including, unfortunately, playing videogames. The bulk of my August play-time has been with digital offerings: downloadable titles and previews that are quick and easy to jump in and out of, and don't require hours upon hours of time to enjoy. I have managed to play Tomb Raider: Legend and make a return to Fallout 3, but generally speaking my game time has been with games of the digital variety. Trials HD, Peggle, WipEout HD, and Super Stardust HD have all been on the menu lately and you can expect some posts on them over the next week or so.

I've also played quite a few recently released demos, here's some brief impressions of them.

Shadow Complex -- I'd own this game if I could afford it but as my wallet is empty (the reason for which you will find out very soon) I had to settle for the trial version. I'm glad I did because it answered a question I already knew the answer to: would my incredible bias towards all things Metroid mean that I'd love Shadow Complex? You bet it would. Favourable reviews, unexpected controversy and my bias aside, what Chair Entertainment and Epic have done with this game is impressive if the trial is anything to go by. It looks great, makes a particular type of game rarely seen these days relevant again and directly appeals to the type of player I am: a completionist and explorer. Definitely looking forward to buying this as soon as my wallet allows it.

Wet -- I decided to download this demo on whim and well, what a pleasant surprise. It's not going to be a classic but then, it doesn't need to be either. The B-movie, grainy aesthetic was done well and while it does look rough, it works for the highly stylised experience it's trying to convey. Really, it's all about the combat and versing the game's enemies was surprisingly enjoyable despite the sometimes floaty-like feeling the controls would deliver. Its use of quick-time events concerns me a little, and the demo's transitioning between the different gameplay elements Wet will provide was blunt, but this latter point is probably irrelevant to the final experience and as such, is nothing worth discussing further. There isn't much else to say as I still don't know too much about it. It was a pleasant surprise and while I won't be buying it on release, I wouldn't say no to it sometime in the future either. Make of that what you will.

Section 8 -- Another game I knew nothing about. It started off well enough, appealing directly to my sci-fi interests with ships up in space, technologically enhanced suits and a very interesting way to drop into battle, but then when I landed on my feet I realised that the demo was playing out like a multiplayer game. In fact, the main portion of the demo seemed to be multiplayer based, with the option to search for matches over Xbox Live being very prevalent in the menu screens. I chose the other option provided, Instant Action, and entered a game against bots instead. For what it was, it was enjoyable with some nifty features like a hover jump included to spice things up a bit, but I can't deny that it wasn't what I expected either. I don't know what I expected, but it wasn't a multiplayer-type game. I'm not sure if it has a single player campaign that plays out differently so I will reserve judgement for now, but if it does then it strikes me as a little odd that they didn't include some portion of it for the demo, because at the moment it seems like a Shadowrun or Unreal Tournament type of game -- in other words, not really my thing.

Mini Ninjas -- My interest in this game piqued after reading an EDGE article about it recently, as well as seeing the gorgeous art direction in the article's pictures. Finally seeing it in motion was nice, but playing the demo was better. I can't quite pin-point why, but the game gave a Zelda or Okami vibe to me while playing it, something totally welcome in my book. The combat was satisfying and seems to have enough depth, especially if you include the other playable characters. That said, it was only a small portion of the game so it remains to be seen if the combat will become repetitive or not. The little bits of included humour seems like a welcome touch and yeah, I'm quite keen on playing this now. It comes across as a title that should be distributed digitally and it's unclear if it will be worth the full retail price, but regardless of that I suspect I will be buying Mini Ninjas at some point in the near future.

Batman: Arkham Asylum -- I have a confession to make, I don't really know much about the Dark Knight other than the basics and as such, have no real interest in the Batman universe. Horrible, I know, but for whatever reason Batman (and most comic book/superheroes) has never really been on my radar. That said, the mild hype surrounding the newly released (as of today) title was enough to sway my decision when it came to checking the demo out and, like Wet above, I was pleasantly surprised. The game does a fantastic job of empowering you as Batman and it feels great to control and play as the character. Combat was accessible yet enjoyable, as was sneaking around and making silent kills. Performing glide kills, using the Batarang and grappling to various objects feels as you would expect a game about Batman would, and by the end of the demo I actually had an interest in chasing the Joker throughout Arkham Asylum. Not a bad impression for someone who isn't invested in that world like many others are. Potential purchase in the future, absolutely.

DiRT 2 -- Day one purchase for me, but that doesn't surprise you does it, given my racing influence? I loved the original DiRT and this latest demo showed me that I will love this game, too. It still looks absolutely gorgeous and the presentation for the menus is impressive as well. Handling took a bit to get used to and felt a bit floaty at first, especially in the point-to-point event, but as I continued to play I realised that it felt very similar to the original game which is not a bad thing. I'm still not sure how I feel about the mix of events included in the main game and suspect that, like the original, the X-Games styled events won't really interest me all that much, but the overall experience should be great fun. I look forward to playing it next month, and I also look forward to seeing how they've offered their tribute to the late Colin McRae, may he rest in peace.

Killzone 2 -- Sony's big blockbuster FPS franchise was, well to be frank, uninteresting. It felt like just another shooter to me, which makes me feel slightly guilty given it's popularity and, of course, the insane hype that surrounded it before release. Don't get me wrong, it looks great, feels like a competant shooter and what I did play in the demo was fun, but yeah, I dunno, maybe I am just over so many shooters these days? I wouldn't say it was generic, but it was familiar and that, I have to say, was disappointing. Won't be buying it, sorry Sony.

There you have it, all the demos I have played recently. Aside from that last one, all were released within a few days and were perfect for the quick and easy gaming that seems to be the only thing I can manage lately. I'm glad I was able to check them out and in doing so, I now have some games on my radar that weren't previously. Can't go wrong with that.

Time For A Holiday?

Tomb Raider: Legend and Uncharted: Drake's Fortune are two very similar games, the latter arguably being inspired by the the former's franchise, and playing them in relative quick succession in the past month has yielded some interesting observations. Legend was a return to form after a few installments in a franchise that was becoming a little stale, while Uncharted was something new and different for developers Naughty Dog after focusing on the Jak series on the PlayStation 2; both are enjoyable games and well worth playing if they interest you.

It's interesting to view both games next to each other, to see what similarities they share, and to see what ends up being different. Take the design approach to their levels or chapters as an example: Tomb Raider breaks its levels into different places of the world, each playing a different part in the overall story while also showing off some impressive locations and puzzles; Uncharted's story on the other hand, continues immediately after the events of the previous chapter, making the experience feel more cohesive as it plays out in real time for main character Nathan Drake. This contrast affects the flow of both games in a relatively subtle way and in turn results in the player approaching their time with each game differently. With Tomb Raider the player may choose to do just one level in a session before moving on into a different game, whereas in Uncharted he or she might instead choose to do a few chapters in one sitting due to their shorter length and the "just one more level" mentality.

Semi-related to this is are the games' approach to their overall experience and what they are trying to convey. If games like Fallout 3 and Grand Theft Auto IV become secondary lifestyles for a while, due to their expansive locations ripe for exploration and side quests, then Tomb Raider and Uncharted sit on the opposite side of the spectrum and provide an experience that is almost like a holiday. Both games take you to exotic locations that are a sight to behold and while their narratives might involve finding ancient artifacts or whatever, the levels in themselves are a good insight into what it would be like to visit these places. Jungles, snowy mountains and underground caves and tombs are nothing new to videogames, sure, but unlike those open-world games they are not places we are likely to often visit, either and as such spending time in these vast, remote locations is an interesting contrast to the city life of GTA IV, or the empty and bleak remains of a fictional post-apocalyptic Washington D.C.

On a superficial level, Uncharted: Drake's Fortune is miles ahead of Tomb Raider: Legend; Graphics, sound and, in my opinion, story are all superior in Naughty Dog's underrated gem while the title also takes advantage of familiar mechanics from games like Gears of War to make the experience feel fresh and unique. Tomb Raider meanwhile feels a bit like a last generation game, which makes sense given the fact it is one. I played it on the Xbox 360 so it looked only slightly better than other versions, but a quick glance on Youtube shows that they also look quite nice. Being released at the end of the last generation meant that, as a game from that time Legend is quite impressive and still holds up nicely, but as an Xbox 360 title it's a little dated and just cannot compare to something like Uncharted. With all this said, it's nice to see that developers Crystal Dynamics took the time and effort to ensure Legend returned the series to its form, making Lara Croft relevant once more and putting the temporary anomaly of the sub-par games behind them.

The last thing I want to briefly discuss is their narratives and range of characters. For me, I found Uncharted's story to be more interesting. I was intrigued by what would happen to Nathan Drake and Elena Fisher, as well as compelled to see where their adventure would take me next. Legend on the other hand was a little dull but that's not necessarily a criticism of the game. Instead, I think it was dull because of my own experiences with the franchise -- The last game in the series I played was Tomb Raider 3 and as that was a long time ago, I've largely forgotten the story. Combine that with not seeing what happens in between that game and Legend, and the lack of information I had resulted in a lack of interest on my behalf for the events that took place. I had no connection with the characters, no knowledge of who they were or why they were associated with Lara and this disconnect affected my enjoyment of the game. Lara is fine, I know who she is, have a rough idea of her background and do have a small connection with her. I respect Lara as a character and would like to continue to see where her adventures take her in the future, but as far as Tomb Raider: Legend is concerned, the game became more about what location I'd be visiting next and what puzzles I would have to solve than it did her story and discovery of what she was looking for. It's interesting to consider, especially if you take the questions I pondered not too long ago about the conditions with which we play our games into account and I definitely feel that it played a part in my overall enjoyment of the game.

Those are just some of the interesting differences between Tomb Raider: Legend and Uncharted: Drake's Fortune that I observed. There were some more but they are mostly minor and don't warrant a mention here. I thoroughly enjoyed my time with both and recommend them if they seem to be something you would like to play. I have some more thoughts I'd like to share, particularly about Uncharted, in the near future so stay tuned for those.

Racing On The Edge

In all of the discussion I have had on the game recently, there's one thing I've neglected to mention in my thoughts about Mirror's Edge: the main reason why I love it so much.

I didn't realise it at first but I believe Mirror's Edge appeals to me because of some common elements it shares with something else dear to my heart, racing games. By featuring a Time Trial mode, the game instantly delivers an experience I'm all too familiar with, but it's not as simple as that either; the important reason why I think Mirror's Edge resonates with me is because it feels like a racing game.

Sounds a bit weird doesn't it? Mirror's Edge has no cars, isn't constrained to the tarmac of a track and has something most racing games don't, a story, so how can it feel like a racing game? For the most part, it doesn't. I think it'd be fair to say that the majority of players who play Mirror's Edge will only see the game's story and this definitely doesn't look, feel or seem like a racing game. The levels are made up of point-to-point affairs that are designed to service the plot and its urgency to get to places quickly, be it because Faith is being chased or because she needs to meet up with someone important. The game's main mechanic, Parkour, works with the story to provide the fresh, unique experience the game is known for and when you consider it on these merits alone, Mirror's Edge is certainly not a racing game.

Some players, however, will continue playing after the story and will test their skills in the game's time trials or speed runs, and it is here that Mirror's Edge feels like a different game. By stripping it down to the essentials -- the running, climbing and jumping -- the time trials change Mirror's Edge into a game that is all about speed, precision and shaving precious tenths of a second off a set time. Downloading a ghost from the game's leaderboards may be valuable in showing you new routes throughout any given run, but it's also the motivating factor when it comes to improving your times. Having that visual representation is important as it's an immediate indication as to how you're progressing on a run. Seeing it ahead of you drives you to try and overcome the obstacles littered throughout a run faster than before and, at times, forces you to analyse the level to find new paths that may help shave off that valuable fraction of a second. This observe and adapt approach works in Mirror's Edge in the exact same way it does racing games and in both situations, it's absolutely critical to your overall time at the end.

The speed runs also use this approach but instead apply it to the game's story levels. Their length as well as the inclusion of enemies and cut-scenes make it much harder to learn the routes, with the lack of a ghost to follow adding to this difficulty. Improving your times will come from repeated runs as you try different routes and get an idea of the levels you're working on in their entirety, instead of just a small portion of them as seen in the time trials. Eventually you will notice the flow of a level and things will start to come together but in the meantime, constantly redoing a level takes far too long and just isn't as enjoyable to play as the time trials. The levels are fine when it comes to conveying the game's plot, but in a mode where the plot and enemies are irrelevant, they're just lengthy affairs that require too much time and effort to learn.

It's intriguing to consider how DICE used the mechanic of Parkour in Mirror's Edge to deliver what is almost two different games. On the one hand it was used to convey a fresh, unique gameplay experience that I believe the industry needed, but on the other hand the mechanic was used to provide an experience that is familiar to anyone who has played a racing game. The contrast stands out when you first notice it, but once you look at it some more you begin to realise that what DICE has done is quite remarkable, particularly when you remember that it's their first attempt. For me, I can appreciate the idea that they wanted to try something different with Mirror's Edge, but once that experience is over it's nice to know that I can return to a style of play I'm used to enjoying but have it take place in an entirely new setting.