Yes, this is a very old game. But with the second Avengers movie out, and a lack of games to accompany it (thankfully this means no shovelware), I thought this would be a good game to review. IT does have a large selection of Avengers to choose from. Some that haven't even been given a movie or TV series yet. There's also the Fantastic Four, Daredevil (Netflix series), and Electra, just to name a few.
Besides having what might be the biggest cast of playable characters in a video game, the cameos using NPCs are astonishing. Balder, Black Bolt, Wyatt Wingfoot. Aunt May and Willie the mailman even mentioned, but not not actually shown. The people at Raven, Activision, and Beenox, among others, did far more research into characters that would bring players into the Marvel Universe, than any other game to date, with the exception of the DCU free-to-play MMO.
Between the Xbox (original), Xbox 360, PS2, PS3, and the PS3, I've beeten the game 13 times, and have a 14th started. Why throw that into the review? Because I was still finding new things in the game the last time I played. And when it comes to hunting for hidden items in a game, I'm usually pretty damned good at it. I don't always get 100% of the items, but I get close, and without using a cheat book.
The character detail is amazing, although I recommend using the older consoles if you want to see better graphics. The 360 and PS3 have this weird texture over the costumes that makes them look like action figures. The older systems actually look more realistic. Other than that, I can't find any major difference between the systems.
If you have a 360, the extra price for the Platinum (comes with extra characters and a behind the scenes DVD) or Gold edition (same characters, but no DVD) is worth it. Activision lost its licensing to use several of the characters in the game. As such, you can't buy the extra characters any longer. This also applies to the sequel. You also get a few more training room missions with either of these versions.
The game play is extremely fluid, and lets you fine tune not just the character's abilities, but his/her bonuses as well. Each suit that you unlock gives you a new look (except for the Surfer), and a set of variables that you can augment. These may include health bonuses, damage bonuses, or extra energy for your powers, to name a few.
The glitching is extremely minor. For instance, if you switch characters, the computer will reassign the powers you mapped out. For instance, your Hulk ground pound may be replaced with his hand clap. I've also discovered a few places that you should never go. While exploring the snow covered mountains of Asgard, do not fly up to the peaks. Not only will your character become stuck there, it will die. There are a few places like this, so just try not to go off road.
There is also a way to break Hell. When in Mephisto's realm, there are a few areas that are supposed to have an endless amount of demons to fight. All you have to do is fight for about five minutes, and they slow their spawning. Go back to the previous area, and they start again, but in smaller numbers. After about half an hour, all of the demons stop spawning, except the one by the save point.
This game truly is the best super hero game there is. Yes, I have played the firdt two Arkham games, and enjoyed them. But that game gives you one character (with some DLC for Catwoman and Robin in the second). This game gives you dozens of characters, and multiple teams to use as well. Remember the New Fantastic Four? Spider-Man thought the FF were gone for good, so he had Joe Fixit (Grey Hulk), Ghost Rider, and Wolverine fill in for two issues. They're in there. The Defenders, X-Men, and even an option to create your own team. All Arkham gives you is a batarang.
If you get a chance to play this, take the opportunity. It's one of those rare games that gets all of the important stuff right.
50 Year Old Gamer
Posts
All Comments
Wednesday, June 24, 2015
Monday, June 22, 2015
Gears of War Ultimate Edition Beta Review
I got to play the beta for the next Gears recently. I have to admit, I was a little disappointed. I don't play Gears for the multiplayer MOBA maps. I play it for the stories. It's not that I don't mind getting into a frag-fest every now and again, it's just that I don't always get to go online when my friends do, nor do I always play the same games that they do. So, when a game that has surprisingly good stories comes out, I want the solo play, no matter how good the arena is supposed to be.
There is also the newness factor that comes into play (no pun intended). When a game like Halo or Shadowrun first comes out, there's usually enough people interested in the game to provide a balanced team, whether you're a new or seasoned player. But as time goes on, less new people join, and more of the older people stop. As a result, the teams can be lopsided, or worse, the server is shut down (R.I.P. Avatar).
Although I did have some fun playing the beta, I had a learning curve to deal with. I am not a huge Gears fan. Maybe if all games used the same controller layout, I could have avoided the memory issue of what button reloads, how do I switch weapons, etc. Instead, I had to deal with all of this while avoiding fire. Something that took a bit of the fun out of it for me, a non-Gears fanatic.
The other issue that I had is the standard, "don't choose your side, the game will decide for you," element of team building. I would have preferred to play as a COG, instead of a Locust, had I been given a choice. Instead, I was just thrown into a team of Locust, just before the match started. I didn't even have time to chose Sniper, or even see what the other options are. I had to wait for the second match to do so.
On the positive side, the graphics were far better than I expected, and I really expected something from them. The sound was what I expected, which really wasn't much. Let's face it, in a MOBA, all you need are gunshots, explosions, and grunting from the wounded.
So, would this beta increase my chances of buying the next Gears on release day? No. I can't say that the experience justifies a $60 price tag. If The Coalition wants me to shell out any money for the game, they'll have to wait until the price drops to the "Greatest Hits" value price, or at least give me a demo that lets me check out the game play for solo. Otherwise, I may even wait for it's eventual "free with Gold" offering.
MOBAs are a dime a dozen. A good solo or side-by-side co-op is always worth the extra money to me, because I can play when I want, how I want, without worrying about a server being down or closed. I can enjoy the game without waiting for another player that owns the game to plug it in. At $350 for a console, and however much per game, I think I deserve that much control.
There is also the newness factor that comes into play (no pun intended). When a game like Halo or Shadowrun first comes out, there's usually enough people interested in the game to provide a balanced team, whether you're a new or seasoned player. But as time goes on, less new people join, and more of the older people stop. As a result, the teams can be lopsided, or worse, the server is shut down (R.I.P. Avatar).
Although I did have some fun playing the beta, I had a learning curve to deal with. I am not a huge Gears fan. Maybe if all games used the same controller layout, I could have avoided the memory issue of what button reloads, how do I switch weapons, etc. Instead, I had to deal with all of this while avoiding fire. Something that took a bit of the fun out of it for me, a non-Gears fanatic.
The other issue that I had is the standard, "don't choose your side, the game will decide for you," element of team building. I would have preferred to play as a COG, instead of a Locust, had I been given a choice. Instead, I was just thrown into a team of Locust, just before the match started. I didn't even have time to chose Sniper, or even see what the other options are. I had to wait for the second match to do so.
On the positive side, the graphics were far better than I expected, and I really expected something from them. The sound was what I expected, which really wasn't much. Let's face it, in a MOBA, all you need are gunshots, explosions, and grunting from the wounded.
So, would this beta increase my chances of buying the next Gears on release day? No. I can't say that the experience justifies a $60 price tag. If The Coalition wants me to shell out any money for the game, they'll have to wait until the price drops to the "Greatest Hits" value price, or at least give me a demo that lets me check out the game play for solo. Otherwise, I may even wait for it's eventual "free with Gold" offering.
MOBAs are a dime a dozen. A good solo or side-by-side co-op is always worth the extra money to me, because I can play when I want, how I want, without worrying about a server being down or closed. I can enjoy the game without waiting for another player that owns the game to plug it in. At $350 for a console, and however much per game, I think I deserve that much control.
Wednesday, June 10, 2015
My Xbox 360 Bucket List Part 2
Since I will be working six days this week, I am taking advantage of a "slow" period to write this week's blog, using my lazy topic.
Family Guy: I know this is supposed to be a really bad game, but I was a big fan of the series when it first came out. Although I quit watching it a couple of years ago, I'm interested in just how bad the game really is.
Castle of Illusion Starring Mickey Mouse: This was one of the Genesis games that I just never got a chance to play. When I still had the system, it was always a bit pricey around here, even used. Now that I don't have a Genesis, I see the cartridge every so often for $2 - $3 at thrift stores.
Bureau: Xcom Declassified: I hated the original game on the PSOne. Just like Civilization, there were those annoying little built in cheats that the game could use against you, like letting the aliens take shots out of turn, or not letting your character even get a chance to move at times. In Civ II on the PSOne (and computer), the computer could move net to your territory or character, and not be penalized. If you run out of moves next to an A.I. character, you risk starting a war. This version of Xcom, however, gets rid of that nonsense, and gives you an FPS instead. I REALLY want to play this.
Batman Origins: I honestly thought it was going to come out on the One at some point. The last Tomb Raider did, so why not this one? Better yet, do an XB1 upgrade for the trilogy. But please, no Blackgate. I'm serious when I say I hate platformers, even Mario Brothers. No, ESPECIALLY Mario Brothers.
Aliens: Colonial Marines: Technically, this one shouldn't be on the list anymore, since I found it really cheap on Amazon recently. So cheap that technically, it was free. I was a couple of dollars short of free shipping, and this only put me about ten cents past the $35 minimum. It was still cheaper than paying for shipping without the game, too. So even if it's as bad, or worse, than I hear, I can sell it, and come out pretty close to even.
From Dust: I played the demo, and it reminded me of an old SNES and PC favorite, Populous. So much so, that I haven't bought it, simply because it's so much like Populous that I feel as if I already played it. Now, if I ever get it as a Gold freebie...
To Be Continued....
Family Guy: I know this is supposed to be a really bad game, but I was a big fan of the series when it first came out. Although I quit watching it a couple of years ago, I'm interested in just how bad the game really is.
Castle of Illusion Starring Mickey Mouse: This was one of the Genesis games that I just never got a chance to play. When I still had the system, it was always a bit pricey around here, even used. Now that I don't have a Genesis, I see the cartridge every so often for $2 - $3 at thrift stores.
Bureau: Xcom Declassified: I hated the original game on the PSOne. Just like Civilization, there were those annoying little built in cheats that the game could use against you, like letting the aliens take shots out of turn, or not letting your character even get a chance to move at times. In Civ II on the PSOne (and computer), the computer could move net to your territory or character, and not be penalized. If you run out of moves next to an A.I. character, you risk starting a war. This version of Xcom, however, gets rid of that nonsense, and gives you an FPS instead. I REALLY want to play this.
Batman Origins: I honestly thought it was going to come out on the One at some point. The last Tomb Raider did, so why not this one? Better yet, do an XB1 upgrade for the trilogy. But please, no Blackgate. I'm serious when I say I hate platformers, even Mario Brothers. No, ESPECIALLY Mario Brothers.
Aliens: Colonial Marines: Technically, this one shouldn't be on the list anymore, since I found it really cheap on Amazon recently. So cheap that technically, it was free. I was a couple of dollars short of free shipping, and this only put me about ten cents past the $35 minimum. It was still cheaper than paying for shipping without the game, too. So even if it's as bad, or worse, than I hear, I can sell it, and come out pretty close to even.
From Dust: I played the demo, and it reminded me of an old SNES and PC favorite, Populous. So much so, that I haven't bought it, simply because it's so much like Populous that I feel as if I already played it. Now, if I ever get it as a Gold freebie...
To Be Continued....
Wednesday, June 3, 2015
Chris Matthew's Slip Of The Tongue
I like Chris Matthews. I genuinely do. I don't always agree with him, but he seems to be a sincere, honest journalist. A journalist that i can respect. However, he made a very bad slip of the tongue on his 6/1 Hardball show that I just can't ignore. "It's a she... It's a she."
As so many other shows, Mr Matthew's did a segment on Caitlyn Jenner, formally Bruce. As you must know by now, the Olympian has been undergoing a physical gender transformation. Surprisingly, Ms. Jenner has been getting support from almost everyone in the media. Even at FOX News. And although Chris Matthews had many supportive things to say, he let loose a very verboten slut. "It."
In my youth, "It" was was the transgendered equivalent of the "N" word. A word that was used by bigots to refer to anyone that was a cross dresser, female impersonator, effeminate male (straight or gay), inter sexed person, or transsexual. If you fell into any of these categories, especially if you fell into one of these categories in the eyes of a trans-phobic person, you weren't a full human being. You were an "It."
I have heard many people referred this way, both in public and on TV. Early talk shows such as Phil Donahue would occasionally have someone transgendered on, and some caller or audience member would have to use the word "it" to refer to the person. Even as people started to grow more accepting of cross dressers, inter sexed, and transgendered, the word never fully went away. IT faded quite a bit, but it always managed to linger.
Of all the people at MSNBC to refer to anyone in the gender spectrum as "It," I never would have guessed that Mr. Matthews would be the one. I could imagine that a guest panelist on a show would use it, and then be corrected by the host. But Chris Matthews? I had to replay the segment a few times, hoping that I had misunderstood him. But unfortunately, I didn't.
Of all the segments that I've seen on local or cable media, of all the radio clips that I've heard, Chris Matthews was the only person that I head use "It" to describe Caitlyn Jenner. I watched his show again yesterday, hoping that someone had pointed out his slip of the tongue to him. I fully hoped that he would have apologized to Ms. Jenner, as well as his LGBT audience members. Either he is still unaware of his slip, or he thinks it's too minor for a quick, ten second apology.
Chris Matthews, I am very disappointed in you. Not just as a member of the Gender community, but as Ca person that has trusted MSNBC, as well as your show, to provide people with respect as you covered a story. You have shown respect to people of all other groups these past few years, no matter how much you disagreed with them publicly or privately. So please, show the same respect to the Gender Community. Just take a few seconds to say "I'm sorry for revering to Caitlyn Jenner as 'It,' instead of he or she."
As so many other shows, Mr Matthew's did a segment on Caitlyn Jenner, formally Bruce. As you must know by now, the Olympian has been undergoing a physical gender transformation. Surprisingly, Ms. Jenner has been getting support from almost everyone in the media. Even at FOX News. And although Chris Matthews had many supportive things to say, he let loose a very verboten slut. "It."
In my youth, "It" was was the transgendered equivalent of the "N" word. A word that was used by bigots to refer to anyone that was a cross dresser, female impersonator, effeminate male (straight or gay), inter sexed person, or transsexual. If you fell into any of these categories, especially if you fell into one of these categories in the eyes of a trans-phobic person, you weren't a full human being. You were an "It."
I have heard many people referred this way, both in public and on TV. Early talk shows such as Phil Donahue would occasionally have someone transgendered on, and some caller or audience member would have to use the word "it" to refer to the person. Even as people started to grow more accepting of cross dressers, inter sexed, and transgendered, the word never fully went away. IT faded quite a bit, but it always managed to linger.
Of all the people at MSNBC to refer to anyone in the gender spectrum as "It," I never would have guessed that Mr. Matthews would be the one. I could imagine that a guest panelist on a show would use it, and then be corrected by the host. But Chris Matthews? I had to replay the segment a few times, hoping that I had misunderstood him. But unfortunately, I didn't.
Of all the segments that I've seen on local or cable media, of all the radio clips that I've heard, Chris Matthews was the only person that I head use "It" to describe Caitlyn Jenner. I watched his show again yesterday, hoping that someone had pointed out his slip of the tongue to him. I fully hoped that he would have apologized to Ms. Jenner, as well as his LGBT audience members. Either he is still unaware of his slip, or he thinks it's too minor for a quick, ten second apology.
Chris Matthews, I am very disappointed in you. Not just as a member of the Gender community, but as Ca person that has trusted MSNBC, as well as your show, to provide people with respect as you covered a story. You have shown respect to people of all other groups these past few years, no matter how much you disagreed with them publicly or privately. So please, show the same respect to the Gender Community. Just take a few seconds to say "I'm sorry for revering to Caitlyn Jenner as 'It,' instead of he or she."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)