You're not the boss of me:Gears Of War 2, Rise of the Argonauts & Brothers in Arms 3

When did boss battles go from being a means of ramping up the players experience to culminate in a hopefully satisfying use of the skills learned, to being game-breaking punishments?

Boss battles come in a gazillion different forms ranging from escaping ever-increasing hordes of enemies in a ever-decreasing area (COD 4), to a big alien dude you shoot stuff at its weak spots to make it roll over and die (Lost Planet). Shadows of the Colossus is an example of a game made of nothing but boss battles as the player finds way to attack an kill massive creatures, all with unique weaknesses and behaviors. All of these games create these battles organically withing the story, using them as storytelling elements to drive to plot as well as engage the player.

Gears of War 2 has one of the worst boss battles I have ever played, to the point that I actually quit playing. The battle is not only achingly repetitive and tiresome, it actually breaks the immersiveness of the game and violates the physics engine. Facing the locust villian Skorge, the player has to avoid grenades, falling rocks, explosive "tickers" and finally, massive wood columns that Skorge chainsaws through, causing them to topple.

Directly on the player.

Even if they are behind the column when it starts to fall.

I screamed cheap at the screen more than once because the developers were so unrelentingly lazy making this game that they broke the gameplay in order to make the battle more difficult. This is unacceptable. Gears 2 is a mediocre rehash of the first game at best and its makers are clearly resting on their laurels.

Rise of the Argonauts uses the same engine, as does Brothers in Arms as Gears 2, the Unreal 3 engine. Epic has often been labeled as the only developer capable of manipulating the engine to its fullest (including a lawsuit from Silicon Knights) and I am starting to get an inkling why. They are the only ones who don't try to make the engine do something its not good at. Of the the three Epic games made on the engine, they are rely on tightly controlled, small,linear environments surrounded by lush, but unreachable, visuals. Rise, Brothers, Mass Effect, etc etc, use the engine to create massive environments where you can usually go to what you can see. This engine is not made to do this, resulting is massive amounts of texture pop-in, frame-rate issues and general glitches. It makes one wonder if other developers were sold a bill of goods on the capabilities of the engine, specs that Epic itself does not have the engine do, only to have it fall short.

Rise of the Argonauts, in direct comparison to Gears 2, is receiving an entirely unfair critical drubbing compared to Gears, which I consider to be an inferior single-player game. Rise has a compelling emotional plot that drives the player forward. It does exhibit a lack of final polish in its animations, voice work and gameplay, but overall the game is fun and tells a great story. It seeks to engage the player emotionally rather than viscerally, using Mass Effect inspired dialogue trees and some very clever writing. Any fan of Greek myth should rent this game. It too has a boss battle that frustrated the snot out of me but I finally beat it, because I wanted to see what happened next. I didn't care with Gears 2. Argonauts also has babes in it, which is nice. I beat Rise of the Argonauts in 2 days of non-stop play, I liked the game that much.

Brothers In Arms 3 also draws the player in emotionally, asking us to invest in the characters, including a "Previously on..." cutscene that shows the first two games. Using a linear layout, like Gears, BIA drives the player and their squad forward against the German defenses.Reasonably smart AI (other than when it runs down the middle of the street rather than following you through back yards) drives the squads and they follow commands well. The control scheme is smart and intuitive and the cover system allows the player slightly more protection from the hail of bullets.

Satisfying and challenging without being stupidly difficult, BIA 3 is fine game that deserves more attention than it is getting from consumers. I am looking forward to beating it soon.

Bio-Shock redux

Little over an hour in now and the game is just stunning. The stylized art-deco designs mesh perfectly with the atmospheric world gone mad of Rapture. Unlike Doom III, where darkness was a more of a tech demo, the sparing use of light in this game only adds to the unrelenting tension. Vita-chambers are a god send as I am playing the game on Hard and clearly am not as L33T as I thought as I have died countless times already.

Most memorable encounter thus far: upon entering dental, an area already obscured in shadow, the lights suddenly drop out as a raving pack of splicers descend on me-lit only by the muzzle flash of my shotgun I strafe and whirl unable to discern which way is up and die multiple times.

Crazy

Bio-Shocked

30 minutes in and this is already my game of the year pick-un-fricking believable

-more to come

GEARS OF SNORE

"Gears of War" for the XBOX 360 has been the most highly anticipated 360
game for this holiday season. From EPIC, the makers of Unreal, and
boasting to have truly next gen graphics, Microsoft has positioned this
game as a killer app for this Christmas. It has garnered rave reviews
across the board for its visceral gameplay and astounding graphics.

And I just don't get it.

To put this in perspective, Gears is one of the few games I have managed
to play prior to reading any reviews (Half-life 2 is one as well) so
beyond pre-release hype I didn't really know what to expect from the
game. Almost any other game, including the fantastic but not
earth-shaking Splinter Cell Double Agent, I have made my renting or
buying decision based on reviews and my own personal tastes. Knowing
that the true cusp of next-gen hardware was at hand with this second
generation 360 game alongside the release of the PS3 and the WII I
wanted to see for myself what the big deal was about.

Now don't get me wrong, the graphics are beautiful, but it took until
the end of the first "act" of the game for me to be truly astounded.
Perhaps my expectations were too high, perhaps it's the lack of a high
def tv, or over a decade of staring at computer screens, playing games
at high resolutions that is the problem.

The gameplay itself is entertaining but I find it lacking in immersion.
I never feel I am part of the story, because there doesn't appear to be
one. Behind the flash and sizzle of the graphics, there is essentially a
duck and cover repetition to the game, wherein the onslaught of "smart"
enemies (who bellow out when they are vulnerable, most conveniently)
forces the player to duckwalk from cover to cover, popping up
frantically to fire back. While this forced used of cover is
interesting, but not entirely innovative, it is the cornerstone of the
gameplay. This, in and of itself, would not be a bad thing was there
anything else to hang one's hat on, but there isn't. Enemies spawn in
wave after wave, like FPS's of old (something both Quake 4 and Doom 3
were derided for), and meander back and forth in scripted patterns and
animations. Both FEAR and Half-life 2 on PC demonstrate the same kind of
linear run and gun gameplay, but with far more organic and reactive AI
enemies, leading to more immersive gameplay and greater tension.

Rather than an organic world that leverages the power of the 360 to its
hilt, this is an old-school shooter wrapped in a prettier package.