Sharp HT-SB40 Power SoundBar and Wireless Subwoofer

Posted by BinaryMessiah on 05/16/2013
Posted in: Hardware. Tagged: , , , , , , , . Leave a comment
61b87pBFb6L._SL1500_

Manufacturer: Sharp

Release Date: 3/11/2013

MSRP: $299.99

Wattage: 310

Sound systems for TVs are pretty expensive, and when I was wandering the aisles of Fry’s Electronics, I honestly didn’t know what to look for. I’m more of a video guy, so the sound was new to me. I was tired of hearing everything from my plasma screen’s speakers and wanted something to bring my games and movies to life. After looking at the PC speakers, I found out that they aren’t really designed for digital audio, despite being much cheaper. The other route was to get a receiver box and then buy expensive speakers that go into that. What was I to do? These things caught my eye, and it was one of the best purchases I ever made.

61b87pBFb6L._SL1500_

Soundbars emulate surround sound and 3D audio. It’s not as great as a 5.1 or 7.1 system, but the average person won’t notice a difference. First things first, don’t ever buy a soundbar with the subwoofer built-in. It distorts the sound and drops the quality of the audio significantly. These tend to be the lower-budget soundbars that are in the $150 range. The Sharp HT-SB40 has a separate subwoofer that’s made out of wood and not plastic. It gives the bass a rich and vibrant sound rather than being tinny. The 310-watt speaker is plenty and enough to blow anyone out of your house. Compared to the average TV speakers, which are about 20–25 watts, The sound is crystal clear, and there are some nice features here.

The whole system is easy to set up. If you don’t want to constantly swap cables, just buy a separate optical audio cable and plug it into the back of your TV. The power bar has 2 HDMI inputs and 1 HDMI output, which is actually quite a lot for a soundbar. There is an aux jack as well for plugging up MP3 players and other devices. Thankfully, the subwoofer is wireless, so there’s no hassling around with cables and keeping them close together. I didn’t even have to pair anything. I plugged everything up, and I was ready to go.

There’s not much to fiddle around with once you start using it. The bass is very loud and booming. Even with the subwoofer and bass turned all the way down, it was still pretty bassy. People who live with whiny neighbors in apartments need to watch out for this. The sound coming out of the bar itself was rich, and some of the best audio I heard made it sound just like you’re in a theater. Speaking of which, on the remote, there are many audio presets like cinema, gaming, night, sports, news, etc. Cinema really sounds the best because the others sound too tinny. I also love the 3D audio button. There are two presets, and the speakers don’t sound very good with them off.

There’s also an option for AV sync, which lower-budget soundbars don’t have. If you hear stuff before you see it (video delay), then you can turn it up to adjust the delay. You can even dim the display on the power bar and put it in standby mode.

With all that said, this was worth every penny. The power bar is even wall-mountable, which is nice. This thing is long, and you don’t want it on the floor. My only complaint would be that it doesn’t come with screws to mount it on the wall, and it’s very cumbersome and big. Other than that, I don’t think I’d want any other system.

Nintendo Wii U

Posted by thatgamereviewer on 05/15/2013
Posted in: Hardware, Nintendo, Retro Consoles, Wii U. Tagged: , , . 1 Comment

Manufacturer: Nintendo

Release Date: 11/18/12

Basic MSRP: $299.99

Deluxe MSRP: $349.99

Colors: White/Black

The Wii U is a system I swore up and down I would never get. My girlfriend brings one home, and I’m standing there looking at the thing, like after you had an awkward fight. There’s Injustice: Gods Among Us sitting there in its tantalizing glory, waiting for me to play it. I pull open the box and hook it up. Setting up systems is a nice feeling and doesn’t happen very often.

After setting it all up, I realized that the first feature that really got me to like the console was the TV remote feature. It’s really neat, and it’s not something that has ever been implemented into a console before. After I create my Nintendo account and pop in Injustice, I start liking the system. The gamepad is easy to hold and super light. This was key to making sure that long periods of playtime didn’t cramp your hands. The dual analog sticks are very nice, and the button layout is perfect. The ergonomics of the gamepad are just spot on. Anyone in doubt, even hardcore haters, just know that this is one of my favorite controllers. The DSi XL stylus comes out, and that even surprised me. The triggers and bumpers in the back are laid out perfectly. I applaud Nintendo for getting this right. It’s so useful! There are so many possibilities with this thing, but the system is only 6 months old.

I then notice that the game is playing on the screen. Even if you hate Nintendo, it will make you giddy. It’s a really cool thing to see. You can take the gamepad, plug in headphones, and play while someone’s doing something else on the TV. Why wasn’t this around 20 years ago?! This is only for games that don’t use the gamepad for much, though. My only major complaint is the battery life. Nintendo made this huge oversight, and it needs to be fixed.

The Wii U was designed for people who already own a Wii; that’s obvious. It comes with a Wii sensor bar, but no Wiimotes? Pretty stupid, actually. I do like that it emulates the Wii menu, and you can still use the Wii Shop channel. It’s nice to see Wii games upscaled into HD—not as crisp as the Wii U games, but still nice.

This is also Nintendo’s first HD console. They are behind at times (they always are), but the Wii U looks razor-sharp on my 50″ 1080p plasma. The colors are rich and vibrant, and some of the games look pretty good. The only issue is that the Wii U has weaker hardware than current-gen consoles when it comes to processing power. Nintendo fanboys can scream all they want that it’s a next-gen console, but in terms of power, it isn’t. This is what the Wii should have been.

The Wii U has a tri-core 1.24 GHz “Expresso” CPU. Sad. I think Nintendo was trying to keep costs down, but the gamepad seems to have cost them more than the unit itself because it seems like two systems in one. The Wii U has a 550 Mhz GPU “Latte” that is AMD-based and totally custom-made. Combined, the Wii U is about 4x as powerful as the PS3, but that’s not that big of a jump. The GPU has a slightly faster clock and BUS speeds. The Xbox 360 has a tri-core 3.2 GHz CPU, while the PS3 has an 8-core CPU (1 PPE, 7 SPEs), so right now the Wii U is only about 4x as powerful as the current-gen consoles. It’s not the big jump that everyone expects. It’s like going from the GameCube to the Wii (the Wii was only 4x as powerful as the GameCube). It isn’t nearly as powerful (about a fraction) as the top PC rigs, Xbox One, and PS4. The big disappointment is that the Wii U doesn’t support DirectX 11 architecture like the Xbox One and PS4 do. Don’t expect to see Crysis 3 or any other DX11 game on the Wii U. The Wii U has 4GB of DDR3 RAM at 1600Mhz which is about slightly above the average RAM speed that people use in PCs. 1GB is held off for system stuff so developers still only have 3GB to work with. Still better than the 256MB that’s on current-gen consoles, so this is the only leg up the Wii U has. It’s still 10x as powerful as the Wii, but that’s not saying much.

In the end, it comes down to games; right now, the Wii U is lacking. There are quite a few high-budget ports, but they’re ports. These games have been played on other consoles. Thankfully, there’s a huge Wii library out there you can play while you wait, but even the eShop is pretty much empty. I’m impressed with the hardware, but not so much with the software. All we can do is wait and see.

 

Brothers in Arms: Road to Hill 30 – 8 Years Later

Posted by BinaryMessiah on 05/12/2013
Posted in: Microsoft, PC Reviews, PlayStation 2, Retro Consoles, Sony, Steam Deck Unsupported, Steam Deck Verification, Xbox. Tagged: , , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

Publisher: Ubisoft

Developer: Gearbox Software

Release Date: 3/15/2005


Available On

World War II shooters were everywhere, but Ubisoft and Gearbox took a dangerous risk and released one so late in the game. 2005 was a year when WWII shooters were at their peak and when gamers hated them the most. Brothers in Arms proved to be a more authentic and smarter shooter and won fans of the genre over.

Gearbox painstakingly recreated Carentan and many parts of France, where the 101st Airborne Division landed on D-Day. The game also uses squad tactics and realism, unlike any other WWII shooter out there. You will notice when you play how well the guns feel when you shoot them and how you can’t nail an enemy from 100 feet away with a Thompson. You have to flank the enemy, or you die. It’s that simple and that difficult. Red circles will appear above enemy squads. You can issue commands to your squads to suppress them. Their circle will turn gray, and then it is safe to move up and find cover around the area to flank them. It sounds simple, but it’s not. Your squadmates can die, and so can you if you aren’t careful. You have to watch out for MG fire, which will kill you in an instant, and sometimes even tanks.

gfs_54765_2_1

This realism and authenticity can’t be done without good AI, and BiA delivers and is even more impressive today. The only issue I had with AI was with tanks. Sometimes they wouldn’t go around each other or go the other way to follow a command. The game also requires a lot of patience. Sometimes even trial and error. You can’t just rush every enemy, like in Call of Duty, and save the day. You can order squads to rush and attack while your other squad suppresses, and then you can charge in with them to kill them all. You can also order squads and set positions that you want, so you have total control. It feels good and is a key part of the game. Without mastering this, you won’t get very far.

screenshot_pc_brothers_in_arms_road_to_hill_30009

You also can’t just use an M1 Garand and snipe an enemy’s head while he’s in cover. It just doesn’t work that way; you also can’t kill an MG unless you flank them. This isn’t a Medal of Honor. This gave a great feeling of realism, but it was also very difficult. I died quite often because I chose the wrong tactic or flanked the wrong way. Sometimes my impatience got in the way as well. I even found different weapons to help in certain situations. When I finally got the Springfield sniper rifle, it was a weapon from God. After all the inaccurate weapons that couldn’t hit crap, this thing made life easier, but only for a few levels at the end.

When it comes to looks, BiA looks great, even to this day. The lighting looks real, the grass flows, and the models and textures are pretty high-res (for back then). You will be impressed. The game holds up and is still better than a lot of shooters today. My main concern is that the game feels the same throughout. I just went around killing everything and maybe planting a few charges. I could mount an MG sometimes and ride the back of a tank, but overall there wasn’t much variety in the game, which I find the biggest issue.

brothers-arms-road-hill-30_11_ss_l

What’s here is one of the most authentic shooters around, and fans of the genre won’t be disappointed at all. The game looks great, has smart AI, and tells the sad story of Baker Company and the 101st Airborne.

Reviewed On

Keyboard & Mouse

Medal of Honor: Rising Sun – 10 Years Later

Posted by BinaryMessiah on 05/11/2013
Posted in: Gamecube, Microsoft, Nintendo, PlayStation 2, Retro Consoles, Sony, Xbox. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

Publisher: EA

Developer: EA LA

Release Date: 11/11/2003


Available On

Pearl Harbor was one of the worst terrorist attacks on the US and was what got us involved in World War II. EA decided to leave the frontlines of Europe and head to Hawaii at Pearl Harbor and into the Japanese and Philippine frontlines. It’s a nice change of scenery, especially back in the day when WWII shooters were coming out nearly every day. The problem is that Rising Sun is a reskin of Frontline with a lack of polish and detail and just doesn’t feel complete. Rising Sun needed about 6 months more of development before being anything remotely decent. What we have here is a sluggish, boring, and mediocre shooter, probably one of the worst shooters of 2003.

The game actually starts out pretty nicely. The bombing of Pearl Harbor feels epic in this game, you are just a nobody sailor who gets woken up by the bombings. After you see the poorly pre-rendered cutscene you start controlling your guy and it feels very similar to Frontline—too similar. Right off the bat, you realize the control issues haven’t changed. The aiming is really sensitive and finicky; there are no iron sights aiming, and the controls just stink. Once you run around the boat trying to escape your notice, you can save at checkpoints. This is actually one of the only two major issues that were fixed by Frontline. The missions are very long, and you no longer have to start at the beginning of every level when you die.

80508_full

Once you get out, you notice the framerate is worse than Frontline. The FPS drops to single digits often, and it actually affects gameplay. Trying to shoot someone when the game is chugging along at 5 frames per second is nearly impossible. It doesn’t help that the aim is already wonky. The change of pace in the beginning, using the turret on the boat, and shooting down planes is fun. I also have to mention that the only great part of Rising Sun is the music. Medal of Honor has a fantastic score across all the WWII games, but Rising Sun needs more than that to save it.

Once you start the next level, you realize the game is just so bad. The level design is abysmal with confusing mazes; it was cute for EA to try to make you feel like you have multiple paths, but you really don’t. It just makes things more confusing. There are also secondary hidden objectives this time around, but they are nearly impossible to figure out; hell, even the regular objectives are hard to figure out. Items don’t flash, so you can’t tell if they’re part of the scenery or something you need to interact with. Most of the time, you just get lucky when a prompt comes up on the screen when you pass something.

moh-ea3

I like the new selection of weapons: the shotgun, Type 99, Sten MKII, and a few other Pacific Theatre weapons. That’s probably the only other great change from Frontline, but the guns control themselves so horribly that you won’t care. The most annoying part of Rising Sun is the forced and failed implementation of stealth. During one of the last few levels, you get recruited into the OSS and have to infiltrate a Japanese summit at a hotel. The game gives you the Welrod, which is a one-shot silenced pistol. Sure, that’s fine, but Rising Sun wasn’t built for stealth. I shot the first few people silently, then all of a sudden I was being attacked. I had to run around the whole level with just a pistol and the Welrod. Not very fun. The hints say to stick to the shadows and stay in the column areas. Yeah, sure, what shadows? The stealth is just completely broken, but at least healing items give you more health, so the game is a bit easier in that regard.

80503_full

Let’s finally talk about graphics. The game is butt ugly, even uglier than Frontline. During the jungle levels, the developers just put the flat texture of a forest on the walls. Yeah, good job, you lazy jerks. The game is just ugly and unpolished. The events in the game are so unbelievable that it’s hard to think that these things actually happened. Did I mention there’s still no blood? The last thing to go is the terrible AI. The friendly AI just stands there while they’re being shot and completely ignores enemies. The multiplayer is also as boring as ever.

Rising Sun sold millions of copies, but it couldn’t live up to the quality of the previous game. With ugly graphics, horrible framerate, terrible AI, bad level design, and various other issues, Rising Sun stands as one of the worst games in the series.

Reviewed On

Medal of Honor: Pacific Assault – 9 Years Later

Posted by BinaryMessiah on 05/07/2013
Posted in: PC Reviews. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

Publisher: EA

Developer: EA LA

Release Date: 11/4/2004


Available Exclusively On

  • pc

2004 was a year when WWII games were at their peak, Rising Sun was a huge disappointment, so EA went after the Pacific theater again with Pacific Assault. The game was much better than Rising Sun and was a graphical showcase. It pushed PCs to their limits back then and was a solid shooter. The only problem was that it didn’t advance the series’ formula at all and was just another shooting gallery. It did have some great cinematic moments and showed what the Medal of Honor could really do on better hardware. The consoles couldn’t handle what Pacific Assault was able to do, so it remained the last PC-exclusive MoH game.

pacificassault_screenshot

The game starts out with the storming of Ottawa Atoll Beach on November 20, 1943, 8 months before the French D-Day that is so famous. The game takes you through the jungles of Japan in some pretty gnarly guerrilla warfare. There’s lush flora on your way, and the Pacific Theater was a huge change of scenery from all the European battles everyone was tired of. Many new weapons were introduced, like the Japanese weapons and some others, like the Riot Gun. One scene has you carrying an MG to set up an ambush along a river. You can pick it up and move it. It’s nice to see things like this in WWII games, but there just aren’t enough of them.

Most of the campaign was just endless jungles and disabling this machine gun nest, eliminating those patrols. It repeated over and over for about 6–8 hours. The one mission where you were on a plane was nice because you controlled the rear MG and then took over the plane itself. The controls were a bit hard to get used to because the whole thing is controlled with just the mouse. The game was relentlessly difficult, like all Medal of Honor games. You couldn’t refill your plane’s health, so if you died, you restarted the entire level or your last quick save. The checkpoints are spread very far apart, so rely on constantly quick saving; otherwise, you will be angry. I also didn’t like the default control setup. Aiming was done with the left alt, and melee was done with the right mouse button. What kind of controls are those?! I had to change them manually.

6

The game is also full of bugs and glitches. Most were patched, but some still exist. The game crashes every so often, friendly AI gets in your way to where you can’t advance and have to enable the developer console and use no clip to get through them. The biggest issue is that you have a health bar and can’t refill it with health packs. Once you die, a corpsman will come to heal you, if you’re lucky. They only came sometimes, and I died often because of the stupid AI. Why not give me health packs like older MoH games? With that aside, the weapons feel great to shoot with, and the action is solid. There’s a lot going on on screen, but the framerate can’t keep up with the action. Back in the day, everyone thought it was because the engine pushed PCs too hard; now that PCs are way more advanced, it’s just the engine. I got 60 FPS most of the time, then suddenly it dropped below 20 for no reason.

1242594224_58972420040813screen005

Pacific Assault is a solid shooter, and if you missed out on this, try it out. Almost any computer can run this game these days, so there’s no excuse not to. Pacific Assault is also one of the better Medal of Honor games and really advances the series past the dated gameplay from Rising Sun and back.

Reviewed On

Keyboard & Mouse

Medal of Honor: Frontline – 11 Years Later

Posted by BinaryMessiah on 05/05/2013
Posted in: Gamecube, Microsoft, Nintendo, PlayStation 2, Retro Consoles, Sony, Xbox. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

Publisher: EA

Developer: EA LA

Release Date: 5/28/02


Available On

This was one of the first games that blew me away when I was a kid and made me proud to own a PS2. The opening D-Day scene took my breath away—all the explosions, the scripted scenes, the death animations, the sound—it was all here, and the production values were through the roof. Looking back at it 11 years later makes throwing an egg on the floor more exciting than watching this game. While I can’t compare it to games that came after it, even back then there were issues with the game, and they just really stick out now.

aspect1.bmp

Frontline’s realism dropped off after the opening level. After D-Day, you get recruited to do special missions across Europe and are a one-man army. It’s very unrealistic when you’re running around by yourself, killing squads that an entire army takes to take down. You’re blowing up fuel depots, sabotaging equipment, assassinating important Nazi figureheads, and various other things. The game is solid, and the scripting is still nice today, but the shooting mechanics and controls stink. There’s no aiming down the sights; instead, you just zoom in. Shooting from the hip has no reticle, so this is useless. My biggest issue with the game, and even back then, was that it was insanely difficult and there were no checkpoints. If you die, you restart the entire level, which can be infuriating.

1

You have to be careful and run around finding health packs and ammo. You can pick up enemies’ weapons and instead are stuck with what you are given at the start unless you find a placed weapon. I did like the variety of enemies, such as fat chefs throwing knives at you, engineers, cooks, butlers, and even enemies in robes. The death animations are still nice, but where’s the damn blood?! The game almost comes off as campy because it is so far from capturing the tragedy of WWII. Even back in the day, I felt this way. The pacing of the levels is also off because some levels will be really long and tough while others are super short.

pcsx2 2011-02-13 02-06-24-67

I did find that the game had some fun cheat codes, but there’s no replay value. Multiplayer wasn’t put into the PS2 version, and even the graphics are lacking. There’s a lot of aliasing, and the framerate drops tremendously during explosions. Everything does look clean, and you can tell a lot of time and care was put into the game. I just can’t get over how bad the aiming is; it’s so squirrely and hard to get a bead on enemies. The game has a pretty decent length campaign and is worth the cheap price if you have never played this game. Frontline was one of the best WWII games for a reason because it was one of the first to really have high production values.

In the end, Frontline feels very dated, but you can see why the game was praised so much back in the day. The production values still show, but the PS2 can’t keep up with the action. The aiming is terrible and the controls are all wrong, but what can you expect from an 11-year-old game?

Reviewed On

Scarlet Blade

Posted by BinaryMessiah on 05/04/2013
Posted in: PC Reviews. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

Publisher: Aeria Games

Developer: Aeria Games


Available Exclusively On

  • pc

Let’s face it, everyone knows most F2P MMOs require a lot of grinding, and this is usually what keeps me away from them. Scarlet Blade seemed appealing because of the scantily clad women, and the game just looked good and fun. I gave it a shot (which I rarely do for MMOs), and it was great for the first few weeks until I went to level 23 and the grinding had to start.

Scarlet Blade has a simple story about the Free Knights and Royal Knights Arkana, who are AI women. The Royal Guards want to destroy the creator of the Arkana in a rebellious war, while the Free Knights worship her and stay loyal. The story is somewhat interesting, but it is stretched thin over 40 levels of missions, and you end up forgetting half of it. The characters aren’t interesting at all and are basically all text that you read. The main attraction of the game is the busty women and the fact that you can buy lingerie unsealed and have your character walk around naked. The combat seemed fast and satisfying, but after a while, the grind started kicking in.

04_26_21_56_32

The game’s main missions have you just killing different numbers of respawning enemies that roam the area. This gets tedious and boring after a while, but leveling up a character is always addictive; however, the rewards for doing so are poor. You only get one EXP point per level, so it takes forever to properly acquire a good arsenal of attacks. I concentrated on 6, and even that took forever. Most mission rewards stink; they give you pet energy potions, mainly potions for yourself. You rarely get anything good, like armor or a weapon; in fact, nearly every enemy drop was useless junk that could only be sold at a store. Very disappointing loot, and even the large raid areas didn’t provide good loot. The game just disappoints on that level completely.

Scarlet_Blade_PvP_Gear

After about level 8, I had enough gold to buy all the best armor and weapons for my character, but there’s one set of certain levels. Once you buy it all, that’s it until you reach the next level. There were various other things that this MMO did that others didn’t like, like collecting cards to use like gambling, that gave you boxes of items, that you could complete puzzles every time you leveled up to unveil some sexy artwork, and things like that. It isn’t anything that would get someone to play the game; honestly, I got bored after hitting level 23. One thing that I was concerned about was that the various item ranking systems are complicated and nearly useless; there are also so many of them. You can sell your item to rank it up more, but you must unseal it to sell it. You have to use stardust crystals to level up your armor and weapons, but the stats are so small you won’t notice a difference. Honestly, the game offers very little reward for all your effort.

There are some social poses your character can buy and learn that add to the sex appeal of the game. These do nothing more than offer you something to ogle at; however, some poses can make your character rest and heal up. There were other items that I found useless, like megaphones that make your text in the chat stand out. Maybe items were useless and I just sold them; why an MMO would offer you so little for so much effort is beyond me. Two items I did require were actually useful. After a while, you get a machine you can use that uses CP points that do a lot of damage. Another item is a suit that is used in PvP only. These items were powerful and came in handy a lot.

There are various other systems like storing items, buying items, weapons, armor, and synthesizing, and even at level 23, I still didn’t have any materials to do. The game is pretty bare-bones, and there isn’t much incentive to keep playing once the grind starts kicking in. I did get a bike at level 10, which looked cool, but there are no customization features, and upgrading your bike is nearly useless. All it does is increase the moving speed by one point with every crystal you use. You can take a look at other armors and apply them to your current armor, but honestly, these systems are all useless. I tried PvP battles, and they seemed fun, but I couldn’t get any kills. The action was so hectic that I kept losing track of my mouse cursor and did not even know who I was attacking. The battles rotate every hour, and it was fun at first, but it’s not worth it. You can collect dog tags to turn into medals for the show, but once again, what’s the point?

Scarlet_Blade_Swamp

After killing thousands of creatures and grinding to level 23, I started running out of quests to keep my levels going. I had to do repeatable quests and just kill dozens of creatures to level up. After a while, I figured there are better games out there to play than there are. Scarlet Blade is a good concept, but it seriously needs more content to be considered worthy of your time. Despite all that, there are a lot of areas to explore and the game is huge. I found some challenging bosses and overall had a good time, but the nagging feeling in my mind was that the paltry rewards just weren’t worth it.

Scarlet Blade may feature sexy, busty women, but in the end, you are going to start really grinding at level 23, and the rewards just stink. The game has too many synthesizing and item leveling systems, so it becomes confusing, and overall, the game just isn’t worth your time.

Reviewed On

Keyboard & Mouse

Call of Duty 2 – 8 Years Later

Posted by BinaryMessiah on 04/26/2013
Posted in: Mac, Microsoft, PC Reviews, Retro Consoles, Steam Deck Playable, Steam Deck Verification, Xbox 360. Tagged: , , , , , , . Leave a comment

Publisher: Activision

Developer: Infinity Ward

Release Date: 10/25/2005


Available On

All those World War II shooters we endured for an entire decade felt like a war on its own. Shooter after endless shooter bombarded our systems, and then there were the really bad ones in between the Call of Duty and Medal of Honor yearly releases. Call of Duty 2 was highly anticipated because it was the actual sequel to the award-winning original. Does it stand out like the first game did? Is it full of cinematic finesse and finely nuanced mechanics? Not really.

There’s not much of a story here because it’s based on WWII. Black and white footage with a dull narrator telling you about different theaters of the war, then there’s the typical journal entry during the load screen, nothing interesting at all, and even when the game came out, I was sick of these WWII shooters. What does Call of Duty 2 build on? Nothing; it’s just more of the same, but at least it has high production values and does the same stuff right. The game has you following three different soldiers from the Russian, British, and American sides. One thing I liked was that you get to play on a different side of Normandy Beach, and that’s the Rangers. They climbed up the cliffside, trying to shut down the German pillboxes and various artillery, so our troops stopped getting slaughtered on the beachhead. Call of Duty 2 tries to tell the smaller stories of the war, which is a nice change of pace.

1

The same weapons are here that you have shot a million times. Lee Enfield, M1 Garand, MP40, MP44, Sten, and various others. Of course, not all WWII weapons are here, but I wanted to see some of the more obscure ones, like the Browning or BAR. At this point in time, it was just about better graphics and who’s weapon textures looked the most realistic. Call of Duty 2 delivers the visuals and was a benchmarker much like Crysis is now back in 2005/2006. It was one of the first games to support SLI, really pushed PCs, and made you get those $500 graphics cards. It was a must-have for PC owners and was also a GPU seller. With that aside, the textures look great even today, and the visuals really pop. The sound is great as well, with gunfire chattering in the distance and soldiers yelling all around you. It may seem dated today, but you can really see how much the Call of Duty series hasn’t evolved. There are striking similarities to the Modern Warfare series because it’s all the same: shoot anything that moves.

Download Call of Duty 2 PC Game (www.Greedy-Gamers.com) (2)

The game can be pretty easy at times; I could just rush into a building and blow everyone away with one clip and survive. I still find it painful to know that grenade physics are still really bad and bounce around like rubber balls. There are various things I just really can’t stand about these shooters, and that’s the lack of realism. When I shoot enemies, blood doesn’t even come out. Where’s the gore and violence? Brothers in Arms was the first WWII shooter to use this violence in the genre, but Call of Duty just feels like some sort of censored theme park ride.

callofduty_3

CoD2 had a huge multiplayer following, but sadly, no one’s online anymore. Even so, it’s just a typical online shooter and isn’t anything special. I was really disappointed to find that CoD2 wasn’t as cinematic as it could have been and just felt the same throughout the whole game. Blow up this door, defend this position, destroy that mortar nest, and kill this Flak 88 crew. It’s the same stuff we play in every single WWII shooter, and nothing ever changes. Sure, it was mindless fun, but I have come to realize why I was so glad everyone moved on.

Reviewed On

Keyboard & Mouse

Ace Combat: Assault Horizon Enhanced Edition

Posted by BinaryMessiah on 04/23/2013
Posted in: PC Reviews, Steam Deck Unsupported, Steam Deck Verification. Tagged: , , , , . Leave a comment

Publisher: Namco Bandai

Developer: Project Aces

Release Date: 1/25/2013


Available Exclusively On

I’m not really a plane combat fan, but Ace Combat has always been pretty fun. I checked out the Enhanced Edition, thinking it fixed issues from the console version, but not really. The game is a step back from other entries in the series, and I found it pretty boring towards the end.

The story is about one of the worst offenders. It’s complete nonsense that you just won’t care about. You play as three different members of a US air force squad and are trying to stop a Russian coup. Yawn, boring. Let’s go to sleep. How many of these boring military stories have been told? 100 is too many. It doesn’t help that the characters lack any personality and are just as boring to listen to. The developers also put in some awkward dialog that was probably due to the voice actors. One guy will crack a joke, and the other will try to add to it, leading to fake awkward laughter, and you’re just sitting there shaking your head.

bmUploads_2013-01-24_1089_Ace-Combat_AH-2013-01-17-16-14-57-716

At least the dogfights are somewhat fun. You can choose from a myriad of planes, like the F-22 Raptor, B1 Bomber, and all those other planes. Hey,  I’m not an expert. One mission even has you using an AC-130 ripped straight out of Modern Warfare 2. Helicopter missions were added, and two missions involve you mounting a door gun on a helicopter. This is a nice change of pace, but I wanted more cinematic action or something in these fights. All 17 missions ended up feeling the same. You just chase around planes, shooting them down, and that’s it. When you get a plane in your sights long enough, your reticle will turn red, and you can fire missiles. If you follow it long enough, a green circle will flash, and this will trigger DFM, or Dog Fight Mode. This is probably the most cinematic the game will get. You will automatically follow the plane, and all you have to do is keep it in your sights. Once the big circle turns red, you can fire your missiles, and machine-gun fire doesn’t hurt either. Sometimes the enemy can fly over you and come up from behind; this time you are the victim. Slow down enough until a green triangle flashes, and you can turn back on the enemy.

That seems fun and all, but when you do it on the 100th plane, you will die of boredom. The helicopter sections aren’t much different because you just fly around, killing everything on the ground and occasionally an Apache or HIND. The game controls really well, but I felt it had bare bones. The change in plane types was a breath of fresh air, but the best ones weren’t used often enough. It also doesn’t help that missions drag on practically forever. I would shoot 30–40 planes in just one mission, and it would still carry on; it drove me nuts. It doesn’t help that the dialog is boring and grating with the same military mumbo-jumbo over and over again. The game is just dry and dull after the first few missions. I was surprised I finished the game.

ss_8eee3ae3c842b3bc79d54b41631ce772868ec522.1920x1080

You may think co-op and online play help, but it doesn’t because no one is playing online. Think of this as a single-player game. I was also disappointed in the lack of weapons you could choose from. There were maybe 4 or 5 planes to choose from throughout the whole game, and most planes felt useless. Why pick a lesser plane when I can just stick with the best one through the whole game? Challenge maybe? I guess it’s for plane aficionados.

My biggest disappointment would be the graphics. Sure, they get a nice upgrade with slightly higher resolution textures and some better lighting, but the ground textures are just awful. When you get close to the ground, there’s nothing there. Just flat textures of grass and dirt. Sometimes a few buildings will pop up, but it looks like an unresolved Google map. I also thought the explosions lacked oomph and just looked like strange glitches in the physics rather than explosions or planes falling apart. Missile cams are dull because of this as well.

ace_combat_assault_horizon_18

Overall, Assault Horizon is a step back for the series and lacks any potential moments you would remember. The story is dull, the characters are boring, and the only fun feature is the dogfight mode, which you will get tired of quickly. Only hardcore Ace fans should play this, or anyone desperate for a flight game in this rarely approached genre.

Reviewed On

Xbox 360 Controller for Windows

Medal of Honor: Warfighter

Posted by BinaryMessiah on 04/16/2013
Posted in: Microsoft, PC Reviews, PlayStation 3, Retro Consoles, Sony, Xbox 360. Tagged: , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

Publisher: EA

Developer: Danger Close

Release Date: 10/23/2012


Available On

Here we go again: another military shooter. First, it was World War II; now it’s the Middle Eastern War. Warfighter is the sequel to the rebooted Medal of Honor. The first game wasn’t all that great; it had some good moments during single-player but lacked the multiplayer greatness of other shooters like Modern Warfare and Black Ops. Warfighter ditches the Unreal engine and uses Frostbite 2, seen in Battlefield 3, but not as well as that game. Sure, the game looks fantastic, but it doesn’t take advantage of DirectX 11 features like BF3 did.

PC_1080p_004.bmp

Warfighter sees the old Tier 1 team coming out of retirement to stop a shipment of PETN explosives from shipping to Dubai, or one of those Middle Eastern countries. Honestly,  the story had a few high moments, but they were rare, and I could see this game had potential like the last game but fell short. There were some nice, touching moments in the story, like the stress between Preacher and his wife and kid, but it was so brief that it didn’t have time to build up. The pre-rendered cut scenes look amazing, but the story is so short you won’t care in the end. The game has a touching ending, and Danger Close could have had more here. The same goes for moments during the campaign; everything feels anti-climactic. There were some vehicle chase scenes that went on forever, and nothing ever happened. Some lasted over 10 minutes, and I was just driving around dodging traffic. One area had me hiding from a target’s security team by sneaking around in the car and hiding in spots. It was a fun game of cat and mouse, but again, nothing really happened during this moment. There were two moments when you controlled a drone on the ground, but yet again, it was uneventful.

The Warfighter campaign seems solid, but it is plagued with what shooters need to stop being: shooting galleries. The game is either too easy for a while, then you hit that difficulty spike where you die a bunch because of that one enemy. Warfighter is plagued with these issues. It also doesn’t stray from the typical military shooter norm, running around various deserts and destroyed buildings shooting Muslims; it gets old fast, and you start questioning your own morals after a while. I also have to mention the odd chase scenes on foot. You will chase a target through an area, and his men will come out to stop you, but he hides on the sidelines. Once you shoot everyone, he continues; this makes no sense. Most guys would high-tail it while their men would shoot you down. The campaign just lets you down right when you think things start getting good; the last game was full of the same thing.

medal-of-honor-warfighter-pc-1351261069-037

It seems Danger Close has some good ideas, but they don’t know what to do with them. It also comes down to the weapons; they all feel the same. I couldn’t tell the difference between one and the other. I would pick up a PKM and an AK, and one would just shoot faster and the other would, but all weapons felt really inaccurate. It was really annoying. The only weapons that felt different were pistols and shotguns. You are actually stuck with the weapons you are given for the whole mission. If you pick up an enemy’s weapon, you have to ditch it; you can’t keep it. Even the sniper rifles felt like overpowered pistols, and the steady aim mechanic didn’t seem to even work.

It also doesn’t help that the game is full of bugs and glitches. I would get stuck in railings, enemies would clip through barriers, and they even hid behind trees and small posts like they were walls. This also leads to multiplayer. With all this said, is Warfighter’s campaign worth playing? Sure, for a 4-6 hour gaming session if there’s nothing else to play. Once you finish that, you will head straight into multiplayer, which can be pretty fun.

WarfighterPC07

The multiplayer isn’t really different from other shooters, but the sense of teamwork is really well done here. There are some fun game modes that mix different ones together, but in the end, the same campaign issues travel over like bugs, and each weapon feels the same. You gain XP and level up, and yeah, the same old story here, but it’s at least fun and a little different. Is it worth the full price, though? Probably not. I would get this when the price drops below $20 and you are bored of your other favorite online shooter. As it stands, Warfighter is a game no one asked for. It feels almost like Battlefield 3, even as much as some sort of expansion. It looks like BF3 and almost plays like it, but it isn’t nearly as polished or well done. I think EA needs to just pull the plug on MoH. There’s no room for it anymore, and no one has asked for another.

Reviewed On

Keyboard & Mouse