Why can't you make an awesome 3D Sonic game? Okay, that's not fair, I did like elements of Sonic Adventure 1 & 2 for the Dreamcast. What elements might those be? The parts where you actually get to play as Sonic (or Shadow)

As a kid growing up I used to love everything about Sega. I thought the Genesis had some really awesome games at the time, and on the top of my list of favorites were, of course the Sonic games. I was never into the whole "console war" aspect of things; I saved the money to buy my own Genesis then Super Nintendo myself. I just like games; it just so happened that many of my childhood favorites ended up being Genesis classics.

So every time I hear about a new Sonic game, I get excited. Im almost always willing to try them out, even after many disappointments. I hold hope that one day, they might get it right. (Im talking the 3D console games here specifically. The 2D "Sonic Advance" games released on GBA for example, were pretty good)

My first question is. Why does Sega insist on not letting me actually play as Sonic in the traditional sense for the majority of the game? I don't give a flying hedgehogs ass about the other characters. I want to play as Sonic and I want to go FAST! Remember all the old Sonic games? Sure you could play as Tails and Knuckles later down the road, but the game play stayed about the same. (Minor differences between characters at best) Plus, lets not forget that they were simply options. You could play any Sonic game from beginning to end, as Sonic in the Genesis age.

From the Dreamcast into Sega's 3rd party era and onwards every time Sonic appeared in the 3rd dimension this would no longer be the case. More then half of Sonic Adventure for Dreamcast was about other characters who played nothing like Sonic. You never got a choice about who you could use, and in the end the "Sonic Adventure" had little to do with Sonic at all. I certainly wouldn't have bought the game if it were called "Lame cat characters awkward fishing mini game". Or "Knuckles dirt digging side quest"

Is it really that tough to just give me a full, gimmick free 3D Sonic game? The reason I bring this up is because ive been trying to play through Sonic Unleashed recently. This time around, you get to play as Sonic the entire time (At least so far) only now more then half the time, you're a "warehog". Meaning, you're still Sonic but the game play is completely different. It becomes some funky beat em up, platforming hybrid. Its not bad, its just repetitive and shallow. Plus, its not what I want to be doing.

I didn't cover all the games or gimmicks here, but I don't need too. The point remains the same. I just want to play, as regular old sonic, blazing a trail through levels at break neck speed! Somehow, even if Sonic Team managed to deliver this, the game would most likely fail on a technical level. Controls, camera issues and bugs are unfortunately a trademark problem for these guys as well. (yay falling through the world!) I plan to finish Sonic Unleashed asap, then ill get more in depth on that game.

I remember being maybe 18 or 19 years old the first time I ever-played Unreal Tournament on the PC. My computer at the time was pretty terrible. I was lucky to get it up and running using the "software rendering" option. Which basically means lowest possible resolution with nothing in the way of bells and whistles. BUT! The frame rate was surprisingly good and stable. It wasn't pretty but that didn't stop me from enjoying, what would become my favorite shooter of the era, endlessly.

Time passes and just like you'd expect from any popular franchise, ports, sequels and spin offs were made. I was a member of Sega Net and actually bought the Dreamcast Keyboard and Mouse peripherals in order to play Unreal Tournament online with that machine. I picked up a copy of Unreal Championship for the original Xbox. Then finally, I got Unreal Tournament 2k4 once I had a decent gaming PC. The point is, I always loved the games and would play them on any PC or Console that offered a version.

Then nothing. I just stopped. Maybe it was a sign of the times. My attention drifted to other interests like my long-standing love of fighting games, MMO's, among other things. As consoles and computers got more powerful, newer and more innovative games took the forefront. Even Epic Games themselves unleashed new modern classics like Gears of War that seemed to trump anything Unreal related in my mind.

Then one day I was looking through my Gamefly queue. It was a little bare so I checked to see what was out there I might be interested in trying. Unreal Tournament 3 for Xbox 360 caught my eye. I didn't expect anything. In truth, I forgot about it until one day it arrived in the mail. I wasn't even all that excited.

It didn't take too long though, for that old familiar feeling to return. KILLING SPREE!!! ULTRA KILL!! MONSTER KILL!!! GODLIKE!!! HEADSHOT! It amazes me that such a simple formula has stood the test of time and is still just as fun as it ever was. The graphics are better, the controls more refined (especially for a console shooter) but it's the same tried and true formula I got hooked on 10 years ago.

I ended up buying it from Gamefly for just over 19 dollars after tax. I cant say enough awesome stuff about Gamefly, but that's a different blog entry. Most people will tell you that nostalgia is cruel. UT3 is proof that sometimes, things really are as much fun as we remember.

Civilization Revolution:
Turned out to be a pretty fun game. I must have sunk in an easy 20-30 hours between sessions. I wanted to try out several countries and try for the specific types of victories. I got a decent little chunk of achievements doing so as well, so there is that.

FINAL VERDICT: If I can find it somewhere cheap one day, ill grab it. Otherwise, im glad I had the experience, but im not really in a big hurry to play it again.

Star Wars: The Force Unleashed.
Why does nobody like this game? Sure it takes a bit to get adept at the controls but once you do? Its crazy what you can do in this game. I read complaints about how you couldn't just spam your most powerful abilities to win, really? You mean I have to think and evolve my strategies around the types of enemies im fighting? Blasphemy! Oh well, I enjoyed the game. It wasn't the be all, end all Star Wars game, but it wasn't half bad either. Plus, I really did feel like a total badass Jedi by the end.

FINAL VERDICT: Not in a hurry to buy it. Ive seen both the endings and completed all the achievements I cared to. That said, im not deleting the save file just yet.

Ninja Gaiden 2:
I love this game. The sequel I was hoping for. Everything I loved about the first game just amped up like you'd expect.

FINAL VERDICT: Plan to buy.

C'mon Nintendo, sell me a Wii.

For a company who's entire E3 presentation revolved around having something for everybody, they sure as hell missed the mark when it comes to me. Ive said before that I have no loyalties when it comes to gaming, only expectations. I expect Nintendo to deliver quality games like they always have in the past. So where are they?

Oh wait that's right; they seemed to have confused games with gimmicks. The casual game market might be a huge untapped resource, but as a fan I cant help but think they are going the wrong direction. I saw, maybe 2 things that looked interesting the entire presentation, and neither are good enough to sell me on the Wii.

The rest was rehashed garbage. Super Mario Galaxy didn't sell me on the Wii, so its sequel doesn't stand much of a chance. The 4 player Mario game might be good, but presenting this as a new and innovative concept is insulting to anybody who's been a long time fan. In case you missed it, they tried this twice before with 4 player Zelda and 4 player PacMan during the GameCube era. SquareEnix made a 4 player Final Fantasy for the GC as well... doesn't anybody remember Nintendo's big "connectivity" campaign? It sure seems like Nintendo forgot.

So what did they really show as at E3? Gimmick, after gimmick, going so far as to promote gimmick-improving gimmicks. I am tired of peripherals damn it. I want a real controller and real games. Its hard to get excited about Metroid when I know im going to hate playing it on a Wii-mote. I don't want a Wii-mote, I don't want to have to buy some accessory to make the Wii-mote more accurate. I don't want to use a damn steering wheel, or a balance board. I don't want to read interactive novels. I don't want to be a fashion designer. I don't want to work out. (with a game console anyway).

Then they spoke of 3rd party games, and how those developers have room to be creative with the Wii and DS. If that's the case, why are half the games being developed rail shooters? Because that's creative, right?.. Pointing my controller at the screen and shooting things with it. Didn't Nintendo pretty much get this right in the 1980's with Duck Hunt? This is innovation?

I get it Nintendo. You don't want people to be intimidated by the interface. You want Grandma, and Suzy and Joe Casual to be able to pick up and play your games. That's fine. Just remember, when those guys are long tired of their new toy, you'll have nothing but disappointed GAMERS left.

On the plus side Microsoft and Sony both had lots of awesome stuff coming. Again, no loyalties here, I just expected more from Nintendo. Ill be where the games are.

Replay value has always been a big deal, but perhaps now more then ever is it important to modern gaming. When a new game costs you 60 or more dollars after tax, getting your moneys worth is a big deciding factor. The first things people think about are usually...

1) How long is it? (How many hours to complete?)
2) How big is it? (Is it expansive, open ended, can I explore?)
3) How's the multiplayer? (Does it even have it and will I care to play it?)

More and more though, players are looking towards Achievements as well. (AKA Trophies for PS3 owners) Achievements are an artificial way to extend a games life without having to actually create and develop more content. Some game companies have incorporated them into their games with great success, while others have failed badly to make them worthwhile. An example of a simple achievement might be: Kill 500 of these bad guys. Then once you do, you get some points as a reward.

The value of achievements of course, is ultimately up to the gamers themselves. Most gaming companies actually keep track of an individuals total achievement points spread across all games, and give you a total point score. It's a way to show your experienced not only at certain games, but as a gamer in general. Depending on how difficult certain tasks are, you might get more or less points for completing them. For example, most games will reward you points for completing it. Most games will also reward you more points for completing it on a harder difficulty.

Some game companies though, go above and beyond with their achievements. Its very easy for some companies to just tack on rewards for doing basic things like finishing the game. However, few and far between you will eventually come across a game that you love to play and has fun achievements. Left 4 Dead is a prime example.

In Left 4 Dead, the achievement points are mostly rewarded for learning to do things that are actually important to be successful at the game. So you really WANT to complete the achievements. They will challenge you to do something very specific and once you've done so you're a better player for the experience. (Lets not forget, that they are actually fun which is important) You will be challenged to play the game again and again to get certain things done and because of how good the game is itself and how well the achievements are designed you'll want to. (Especially with friends)

On the opposite end of the spectrum completely are the achievements in the most recent Prince of Persia. They seem to "reward" you achievement points just for turning the game on. You will get the vast majority of the available points in a single play through, without trying. Once it's all over, you'll never care about bothering again. This game offers very little replay value comparatively speaking.

So what does all this matter? Well it's all about bang for the buck. Would amazingly fun and robust achievements have made Prince of Persia a better game? No, that's absurd. However, they would have added a lot more life to the game for those who did enjoy it and you simply cannot discount that. Achievements are now a major part of modern gaming. Game companies need to make sure they are crafted with as much care as the their games themselves. Because when they aren't, it shows.