I feel the F.E.A.R.

You may recall that I had the chance to play F.E.A.R. a couple of weeks ago when I was in Singapore. My impressions on the PC version are here. Well, this week, I went out and bought the X360 version of F.E.A.R. and I thought that it would be interesting to compare the two.

The first thing I noticed when I started playing F.E.A.R. on the X360 is that it seems a lot brighter than on the PC version. When I was playing on my brothers PC, it was so dark it was almost impossible to see anything. In fact, it was so dark it became unrealistic. Having said that, the X360 version is probably a bit too bright so they seem to have overcompensated.

Also, from playing the game, its quite obvious that it started as a PC game before being ported to the X360. The controls feel a bit twitchy - the kind of twitchiness that you expect from a keyboard/mouse control scheme. However, having played lots of FPSs built specifically for consoles, you become used to something a bit smoother. Ordinarily, this would make aiming in the game really hard - however, the developers have got around this by giving you auto-aim. Basically, even if you are off just a little with your aiming reticule, you will still drill the guy.

From reading the above, you may get the impression that I don't like the game. However, there is nothing further from the truth. What the X360 version has managed to retain, and also what makes this game standout, is the atmosphere. The game is just as creepy and scary on the X360 as it is on the PC. In fact, considering how I play, its actually scarier!

To understand this, let me paint you a picture of how I played this game in Singapore. It was during the day, in broad daylight. I was hunched over a mouse and keyboard and staring at a 19" monitor trying to pick out movement in the sea of black on screen. Meanwhile, my brother is sitting behind me snickering at each time something went bump on his stereo speakers.

This is how I play the game at home. Its night and the lights are switched off. I am alone in the dark. The only source of light comes from my 42" plasma TV. Meanwhile, eerie music is playing constantly from my Sennheiser earphones (How come I didn't notice the music in Singapore?). A lot scarier I'm sure you will agree! Just for those who aren't convinced - a brief gameplay example below - bear in mind that I am sitting alone at night, with the lights off and with a fantastic set of earphones constantly playing scary music!

**************************************************

I'm walking down a long corridor towards an open door. A single fluorescent tube on the ceiling is the only source of light. A loud rattle in my right ear startles me and I spin right to track any movement - nothing, it was just an empty can which I had bumped into. Gathering my nerve again, I keep walking forward towards the open door.

Blam! Suddenly the door slams shut on its own and the lights go out. I am literally pitched into darkness. I turn on my flashlight, but the small circle of light it provides is only enough to illuminate the door. Fearing a trap, I quickly spin round, my finger next to the trigger on my 10mm HV Penetrator. If it's a trap, I swear they will regret it when I nail them to the wall with 10mm nails!

At first, I see nothing. Or at least, nothing moving (the human eye is designed to spot movement so at first, nothing registers). Wait a minute. Whats that? In the distance, I see what looks like the silhouette of a small girl with long hair. Alma!

Crap!! The last time I met her, she blew me through the window of a building while flinging me 30 feet through the air! I need to get out of there and fast! I spin round again and dash the last couple of steps to the door - my only hope of survival is to escape.

Except the door is locked .....

Ethics

I meant to post this last week - even had it drafted. But for some reason, I forgot. Dunno why. Anyway, here it is - a week late. :p

You are probably wondering what ethics has to do with games. Well recently, there was a storm on Kotaku. You can read more about it here.

Basically, Kotaku had a rumor about the new Playstation Home function (which has now been confirmed as true). They went to Sony to see if Sony had any comment. Sony asked them not to run the rumor. In fact, Sony even went so far as to say that if Kotaku posted the rumor, Kotaku would be blackballed ie no longer welcome at Sony events, would have to return their debug PS3 etc.

Kotaku went ahead with the story and clearly labelled it as a rumor. And true to their word, Sony blackballed Kotaku. When the masses found out, there was a (another) huge uproar of negative press for Sony. Enough such that Sony got back into contact with Kotaku and resolved their differences ie, Kotaku are no longer blackballed.

Now, I am aware that this kind of stuff happens all the time ie big corporations trying to force the press to say what the corporations want. After all, this is the job of the PR guy - trying to manage press about their company. In this regard, I understand why Sony tried to do what they did (don't agree with it but I do understand - personally, I think they should just have said no comment). However, it is the comments following this incident which really depresses me.

First off - imo Kotaku absolutely 100% did the right thing. Journalistic integrity is critical and if I ever find out that one of the news sources I read caved in to such demands from corporations - I would stop reading that news site - permanently. If I can't rely on the journalist, I can't rely on his news either.

However, if you read some of the comments - there seems to be a lot of people who believe that Kotaku did the wrong thing - that Kotaku should have caved into Sony and not printed the rumor. I just don't understand this. It seems to me that to not stand up for journalistic integrity in this case, is to basically say that news should be a form of advertising.

I don't know where these people are - but this utter lack of ethics and integrity is a very damning evidence of the state of society. As I said above - depressing.

Games (or lack thereof)

Some of you are probably already aware that my PC is currently in no fit state for games. Bearing this in mind, you can imagine my horror when my Xbox 360 came up with the dreaded 3 red rings of death (oh, the humanity!). For those unfamiliar, the 3 red rings of death on your Xbox 360 basically means you need to call Microsoft customer support to get your Xbox fixed.

It seems the World doesn't want me to play video games (either that, or its a conspiracy from my wife!).
:(

In situations such as this, a lesser man would break down and cry. Not moi! I immediately went out and acquired me a Nintendo Dual Screen Lite! Take that World!

Just goes to prove that you can't keep a good gamer down!

So far, I've mainly been playing Trauma Center: Under the Knife. Haven't got very far but from the little I've played, its a really good game and takes full advantage of the NDS's unique features.

The premise behind this game is that you are a surgeon (the gameplay consists of you performing surgery on different patients). Although it has a story, what really sells the game is the touch screen. Because the entire game is played using the touch screen, it really feels as if you are performing surgery on people. For example, when you cut someone open, you choose the scalpel and then drag your stylus across the area where you need to make the cut.

The tactile feedback you get from using the touch screen just adds another dimension to what would otherwise could have been an ordinary game and really boosts this into a must play (if you own an NDS). Definitely thumbs up!

Company of Heroes

Company of Heroes is the second game that I got to try out while I was over in Singapore. Like F.E.A.R., the game is highly critically acclaimed and has won numerous awards.

CoH is a Real Time Strategy game set during WWII - more specifically, the Allied invasion of German occupied territory. It tells the tale of Able Company and starts with their D-Day landing on Omaha Beach. Only managed to get halfway through the second mission so not really sure how far the story goes. I'm guessing it doesn't encompass the whole of the invasion but you never know!

RTS is a genre which I used to enjoy very much (back in the days of Dune 2 and Command & Conquer). However, these days, its a genre which generally doesn't interest me much. The main reason for this is that I kinda feel overwhelmed playing recent RTSs. In the newer RTSs, it just feels like there is so much going on that its hard to keep track (I know, I know - I'm getting old!). As a result, these so called strategy games end up feeling more like tactical battles.

However, when I played CoH, I had a great time. So what was the difference?

The main difference between CoH and some other RTS games I tried is that CoH allows you to issue commands while the game is paused. This lets you survey the battlefield before issuing commands to your soldiers. The end result is that, rather than running around randomly, you can really take time to plan your strategy.

The AI in this game is also done extremely well. Even if you don't micromanage your troops, they do a pretty good job of looking after themselves. More importantly, they act like they have intelligence. Example - I play FPSs quite a lot. One of the first things you learn in playing FPSs is that you never walk down the middle of the road ala Hollywood - you just get shot down. In CoH, the AI does a fantastic job of simulating this. I ordered my troops to head to a crossroads. Rather than just walking up to the crossroads, my squad of 5 soldiers split into two groups - each group hugging the hedges on either side of the road as they walked. Little touches like this really impress me and help bring you into the game.

Definitely a game which I will have to check out when I have time. Arrghh! So many games, so little time!