The World Ends With Chu

Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon First Impressions

2009-02-16T20:54:00.004-05:00

It's been awhile since I've posted anything on this sad excuse for a blog. So, without further ado, my first impressions of the newest iteration in the Fire Emblem saga.

Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon First Impressions

Fire Emblem games tend to go by the same formula- someplace or other falls under siege, your hero gradually picks up a motley crew with a decent amount of what you might call advanced "chess pieces," and you and your companions must fight, turn by turn, click by click (or, in this case, tap by tap), to regain control of your kingdom or, in some cases, fight for freedom. The story, no matter how much "Intelligent Systems" attempts to make it different, always follows the same basics that started the series.

Luckily for you, if you're playing a portable game like Fire Emblem, chances are you don't care about the story.

What Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon (herein referred to as FE:SD) lacks in creativity and story it makes up for in its gameplay. Like every Fire Emblem game in years past, FE:SD is one of the few turn-based strategy games on the market. Unlike other games in the genre, however, Fire Emblem can captivate you and, in a way unlike any other game, it allows you to think without truly making you think. Though it may punish you severely for being bold, you never have to worry about losing units if you understand a few basic concepts.

One of the great additions to this title is the ability to see every block on which your opponent can attack you with the press of a button. Through a touch of the "Y" button, your map is painted red with the classic Fire Emblem gameplay element, advanced for convenience. In games past, you had to highlight every enemy individually, then remember where they could move to and who they could attack. With this new feature, you can lock their attack range into place so you can maneuver your units out of harms way.

My last comment is about the AI. This game blows previous games out of the water with enemy smartness. Now, not only do they attack your weakest unit, they will attack whichever unit they can do the most damage on. It no longer feels like you're playing many separate enemies; it's as though it's a 1 vs. 1 contest of human and artificial intelligences. Just through playing through the first few chapters I've noticed this, so I can't wait until I get farther into the game.

I'll write a full review if there's any interest whatsoever, but my preemptive summary is as follows-

Recommend- Great gameplay, deep characters, amazing A.I., lasting appeal through Nintendo Wi-Fi connection.

Stay Away!- Sub-par story that seems overused, no support conversations, some other staples of the series from present games missing.

Verdict- A must buy for any Fire Emblem fan, or anybody who wants a hard core first-party DS game. If this is your first venture into the Fire Emblem series, steer clear; Sacred Stones would be a better investment. At first glance, an 8.5/10.

Closing Remarks

So there you have it- my first foray into game previewing and reviewing. If you have any questions, you can find me at chuban@rocketmail.com. For tips on big stories that you think are worth being investigated, email me at the address mentioned above.

-Chuban

Oh Sh*t, Rant time!

2008-12-05T20:38:00.003-05:00

So, Nintendo, where's the hardcore you promised me? Does this "Blue Ocean" include me, too, or am I left to dry out here in the f***ing desert?

Okay, if you've read this blog then you've realized that I used to be a pretty hardcore Nintendo fan. Yeah, that's right. I would not have bought an Xbox 360 for the life of me. Talk about money whores! They make you pay for extensions to the game after said game comes out!

It all makes sense now.

Brawl is boring. No, it hasn't always been boring. I used to play it religiously, actually. It used to be the game I looked forward to playing every day when I came home from school, the game that I ran my clan off of, and the game that I went to forums for. No longer, Nintendo. I can only put up with the same for so long.

What has Nintendo done for the fan community? Have they given us new stages? New characters? New story elements for SSE? I don't think so. We've had the same game since the day we bought it, and I'm blaming the Wii for taking the easy way out and going for the "less is more" route.

Why can't we have DLC? Why don't we have storage solution? Why do we have shovelware pushed up our a$$3s (See what I did there)? You could always give us a USB peripheral, more 3rd party developers, and a patch to do the simple things like... well, patch games. Remember the whole Guitar Hero III thing where there was only Mono sound? Yeah, you could have saved money and earned yourselves some at the same time. How does that sound?

I finally see why things like Hard Drives are so important. It makes games not get old, and it also makes them not broken. Nintendo, we already know that you've lost the hardcore in general. Please, please, don't lose me.

(This is unedited, by the way. I'm a little mad right now.)

The Console Wars- Fanboys Unite (Or Don't)!

2008-10-27T19:59:00.008-04:00

Fanboys piss me off. Badly. I can't stand talking to them. They're all about their console, and they're close-minded enough that they won't give anything else a chance (albeit without a grain of salt).

Let's start with the 360, since that seems to be where most of my frustration comes from;

"Graphics make a game. Gameplay's only half, but if it looks pretty and plays like shit, let's give it a chance anyway since we can take some pretty screenshots and rub them into people's faces. Oh, and while we're on the subject of rubbing it into other people's faces, let's just be total assholes over our amazing online because we can be and they'll never know who we are."

You all know who I'm talking about. They're not as graphics-crazy as the PS3 fanboy, but every time somebody brings up the Wii in a conversation, they will be sure to jump on the chance to dis the graphics of the less-powerful console. They also tend to lean towards the pseudo-hardcore, calling any shooter or sports title their game of choice.

They think it makes them seem cool to play something for adults, and they feel as though any other type of game is for 5-year-olds.

"Littlebigplanet? Who would ever want to play a game where you have to be creative? And that sack thing? It's so cute I want to make it bleed. Blood is good! Oh, and this- this?!? Why the hell would I ever play a game where you run around planets and collect stars? All Mario ever does is save the princess! There's no reason to play it!"

Right, and I'm sure saving the earth from the flood is much more important. Let Noah do his job, 'aight? If blood matters so much, then why is the best rated game of all time on the N64? I'll confess that I'm big on story too, but it doesn't make the game. In all honesty, have you ever played Soul Caliber or Super Smash Bros.?

Xbox fans, I hate to burst your bubble, but it comes down to gameplay. If your game sucks, admit it. If it looks pretty, don't brag. We can see for ourselves if we feel so inclined. You whining about it will not get other people to see it your way, nor will being stubborn when a fan of another console tries expressing their views.

PS3 players, did you miss me?

You guys are, plain and simple, tech whores. Your console has a few good games, yeah, but you don't have to tell us that. We'll admit that we like Metal Gear Solid and Uncharted. But that's not good enough, apparantly. You have to show us side-by-side comparisons of your 1080i blu-ray playback compared to the DVDs of the 360. You're also too good for the Wii, of course. Nobody wants a console that isn't HD. It's pointless.

Come on, now. Where are the games? Where is the gameplay?

"We have Littlebigplanet! We can make our own!"

Guess what? I have a computer and flash. Spend your time earning money, dipshit, and stop showing off to your friends. Creativity's good when it's used in the right places, but believe me, it's so much more worth it when it does what you want it to.

Oh, and what happened to your Six-axis? Did the Wii steal your idea? No, I think you guys might have added that at the last second because your competitor had it. Thanks for making Factor 5 look like idiots. They had to give "Lair" actual controls for it to be a good game! Wow, who would have thought it! The Six-Axis is not a flight stick, so don't make us use it as one. We have the Wiimote for that.

By the way, Home's a glitchy mess. Get over it.

Now for my little buddy, the Wii.

Nintendo faithful, I'm not blaming you for this. I can't. Nintendo's been getting on my nerves recently with this whole "expanded audience" thing, and if you read my past entries you'll realize that.

Move on. There's a decent share of games on the console, but if you're a real hardcore gamer you'll need more than just this. I've realized that by now. Nintendo hasn't given us decent online, nor have they given us many core first party games

No, Reggie, Animal Crossing does not count.

I like me some Mario as much as the next guy, but even I, the former Nintendo purist can only take so much. It makes the Xbox 360 law of "Blood = Good" look nice. Give me something that will get my adrenaline pumping. You guys can do it; Zelda and Brawl kept me interested for hours. The thing is, I need you to stop making me (and the billions of other Wii owners out there) feel like a priss. Fireballs catch people on fire. Swords don't do damage- they slice people in half.

I realize that gaming is a hobby meant to get us away from our normal lives, but a bit of realism wouldn't hurt (no pun intended) every now and then. The wii remote's a nice gimmick; in fact, it's great. But you guys have Gamecube controller ports and a classic controller for a reason. Push them to the level where you need them for the console, and keep the Nintendo innovation you've always had on the software side (at least until we can shut those other guys up for good- then add some more waggle).

Me?

I'm a Wii60 guy. I hate to steal that from a T-Shirt I saw on the internet, but I must. I feel that you have to have a Wii and one of the powerhouse console to get the best gaming experience you can get. If not, you're really missing out.

I like innovation. People who complain that the Wii makes you tired are apparently retarded (and not to mention fat). People who say the 360 has the same games repeated over and over again (shooters, that is) have apparently never given the console a shot (Well... that pun was intended).

All in all, everything in gaming matters to a certain extent. I put gameplay over graphics, but both are important. I'm also a fan of stories, but they shouldn't take away from the gameplay or vice-versa. There's a certain level of balance that needs to be had, and it seems that every console has reached a niche that it won't be exiting soon. If you give something else a chance, you'll be surprised what you'll find.

Now go drop your CD-i off of a cliff... or something.

Ideas?

2008-10-13T20:47:00.002-04:00

If you have a topic that you think is important, I'm always willing to listen. Just post in the comments and I'll give it a look.

Are Sports Games Relevant?

2008-10-12T14:02:00.004-04:00

The first time I played Madden, I didn't like it. To be honest, I still don't. My initial outlook on the game was, and I'm quoting my 12-year-old self; "Why can't we just go outside and do this?"

It's a question that really challenges the credibility of us as gamers. I'm not saying that it can't be fun at times, but isn't the real thing better? Of course, this is in direct contrast to shooters and fighters, but I still think that we can get more out of actually being physically active.

If you really like football, baseball, basketball, soccer, or hockey, why not devote your time to the sport? The definition of the word 'Sports' is "Physical activity that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often engaged in competitively." How, then, do we have a video game genre of "Sports"?

Believe me, it's much more fun to go out and play and play a sport than to just technically 'play' it. If you have a favorite team, watch them on TV. If they're not on, do something else. It's not worth it.

A Return to 8-Bit

2008-09-26T23:11:00.003-04:00

The release of Megaman 9, an 8-bit sequel in one of the biggest franchises of all time, came and went this week. As a game, it isn't much; as a statement (both artistically and in the sense that more games should be like it), it says more than any press release or journalistic article ever could-

Games should be simple.

Sure, it's not much to look at. It's only that nostalgia factor that makes the graphics attractive. The point of the game is to show us that games could be fun, even without the realism and over-the-top violence in todays industry. They could be challenging without the human to human interaction that many games today depend on. Competition wasn't fighting to see who was the best; no, it was racing against time to see who could finish the game in the least amount of time. Whatever happened to this golden age in gaming?

The answer, as it always seems to be, is technological advancements. Games have begun to do things because they can, but most of what's in the games of today is smoke and mirrors.

Yes, there's a certain aesthetic to today's games that we couldn't have had years ago; we feel like we could actually be there. But gaming was created to take us away from the worries and struggles of the real world. It's as if people have forgotten the fundamentals of what gaming is today.

So, if you had to choose, what would you have? The games today with the great multiplayer and amazing graphics or the games of yesteryear that were made for us to have fun with the game? I'd really like to see some opinions, so post about it in the comments section.

A Culture Addicted to Music Games?

2008-09-25T18:31:00.008-04:00

Rhythm games are nothing new. They've been around ever since the Atari was released in 1977. Recently, it seems that they've caught on. Of course, some may argue that Dance Dance Revolution started the current craze, but with the release of Guitar Hero it seems that the genre's finally become mainstream. Why is it that now, after 40 years of games, that people are finally connecting that dots? A little digging through Google gives the answers.

Parappa the Rapper, though many may not see it as such, is the father of the current generation of music games. It was cool, it was clever, and it was something that people could enjoy without getting up off of their feet. Sure, it's a cult classic now, but the only reason would be the marketing and style.

After the release of this game, RedOctane had the clever idea of doing a North American update of Japanese game "GuitarFreaks". They were already making guitars for the imported game, and they saw that the market was open. Harmonix, the developers of previous music games such as Karaoke Revolution (from which GH's visuals are derived) and Amplitude (the source of Guitar Hero's gameplay), were approached by RedOctane about the project. They accepted the offer, and thus Guitar Hero was born.

(Note: As Harmonix was bought by MTV games and RedOctane by Activision, the two companies no longer collaborate.)

It was a game that people thought was cool. Dancing as a game? No, thanks. This was a game that had you strumming away on a plastic Gibson guitar! This pseudo-instrument became the keystone of the most popular music games today.

Until 2007, no competition had arisen. Rock Band was out to change it. More and more people were buying this once-dead form of gaming, and somebody else needed in on it. The game was a hit, especially for music junkies and gamers who double as musicians.

But now, the war is heating up. Rock Band 2's been released, with a new Guitar Hero on the way. They both use multiple instruments. The question is, will this success lead to a downfall of this newly discovered moneymaker? It was recently announced that the amount of Guitar Hero games will be doubled by 2010, so there goes quality control.

The games are fun, but here's some food for thought; will they be overdone? Only time will tell.

8 Hours of Halo, 1 Opinion.

2008-09-22T20:58:00.005-04:00

It started with a can of Mountain Dew at 9pm. I had 3 of my friends over, and we had one of their 360s in my room hooked into my internet connection. It was Halo time, and nothing was going to stop us.

We started up a "Team Slayer" game, three of us as guests to my friend's live account. It must have been a sight to see- four guys, eating Ritz crackers and Keebler's "Cookie Crisp"/"Cheerios" hybrid, sitting on a bed and 2 cots, and playing Halo until 5 in the morning.

Sorry for the reminiscing; no, there's a point to what I'm saying, and it comes with the people we played. Hear me out, and be sure to speak your opinion if you have one.

Shotty Snipers was our specialty; until around 2am, we were undefeated. Then, almost like clockwork, a funny thing happened; the population of people playing dropped by about 20,000 and we became like lambs among lions. There's something about the late night that attracts the gamers, which begs the question; who's really playing on live during the day? What is it that brings the best out of people post-midnight?

Of course, there's an easy explanation for this- people work. Those who are in college, everyone who can say they're great, pull out their console when they can. It's the kids and the casual players that we can beat, but that's just lucky matchmaking.

This is just an idea, but is that what hardcore gamers are? The working class, those still in school, that play when they have time? Whatever they may be, I want to join them...

...Which brings up another problem. I'm really short on cash. Like... $100 is all I have to my name. Ads will soon start appearing on the site, so click them if you're so inclined. They're not adware, I promise. Thanks for reading, guys. Hopefully I have some more interesting articles in the near future.

Nintendo; Abandoning the Hardcore Gamer, or Biding Their Time?

2008-09-17T19:27:00.002-04:00

It started 14 years ago with my first console- the NES. Back then, there was no separation between the gamer and the pick-up-and-player. No, Mario was Mario, Megaman was Megaman. Shooters like Halo weren't even a thought (blood in games? Ha!). Fighters were what the gamers would play, though even a first-timer could win at least a game against a seasoned vet. But, as time would have it, technology and greed took over.

Companies began to fight for dominance as the graphics grew better and the controllers more responsive. Games began involving more precision, more skill. By the time the Playstation and my beloved N64 rolled around, there became a defining line between the good gamers and the bad.

I'm not here to tell you a history of gaming. No, I'm here to give you my views on gaming today. From the overrated money printers to the lost gems left unplayed, I'll tell it all. Are you a Soul Caliber Fan? How about Brawl or Halo? The Conduit? Nobody's left out here. My first post follows-

Nintendo used to be the mecca of all things gaming. Be honest with yourselves- without them, there is no Metal Gear. There's no Call of Duty. But in recent years, my hope for them has dropped. I've owned every one of their consoles since the original release (minus the virtual boy and some versions of the gameboy), and it seems that while the quality of their games is increasing, the quantity of these games does nothing but drop. I can name three games for the Wii, released in 2008, that I would still consider playing to this day (Brawl, No More Heroes, Mario Kart Wii).

I'll admit, I used to be a complete fanboy. In fact, I was until just recently. But I've had a small change of heart, one that I wish I hadn't had. This idea has been planted into my head by not only my friends, but the community of gamers that I associate myself with; maybe, just maybe, Nintendo has become a company hungry for money. Maybe they saw that hardcore games weren't for them, after the bad fortune the Gamecube endured (I loved me some purple lunchbox, but I was one in few).

If you'll recall, when Nintendo first announced the Wii they said they would be using the "Blue Ocean" strategy. What this means is that there will be something for everyone. While this is true today, I can't help but feel I'm stuck in the Gulf of Mexico while my casual counterparts get the whole Atlantic to swim in.

Nintendo, at it's core, is a developer's company. That's why it's survived to this day. Sony, though they make some amazing games, jumped in because they were mad about a broken deal with the big "N". Microsoft, the other player, decided to try it's hand when the time was right. It seems that we're in the middle of a sea of change.

Nintendo still has time to reconcile with me. Just next month they're holding a press conference, hopefully to announce a slew of games that I'll add to my wishlist. Until then, I'll get ready to buy Fable II and start a Halo doubles team when I get my 360 monday...