I have spent every spare waking hour of the day lately playing Elder Scrolls: Oblivion. Its an awesome game: if you like deep, open ended single player computer role playing games, then Oblivion is definitely worth a look.

Oblivion is set in the Empire of Tamriel in the world of Nirn, a world that may be familiar to people who have been playing computer games for a few years as the setting for the Elder Scrolls. The Elder Scrolls series has been around for a while, starting over a decade ago with Elder Scrolls: Arena. The last release in the series before Oblivion was Morrowind in 2002, a role playing game that was lauded for its open ended style, huge size, and depth of backround materials. It also received some knocks for its initial bugs (most of which were fixed in subsequent patches). I personally played Morrowind- it was a very good game, but I found it hard to get engaged- it was, for me, a bit *too* wide open. I couldn’t really find a plotline to hook on to. I played it for weeks, but never finished it, and have no idea to this day what “finishing it” would have looked like. That’s both good and bad- good, because I had weeks of gaming and came no where near completing the game. Bad, because I never really felt like I was “part” of the game’s main plot.

Oblivion seems to have kept all of the good features from Morrowind (open ended, massive game world, incredible depth) and ditched some of the less than positive features (lack of hooks into the main plotline, game ending bugs). Right from the start, Oblivion’s story line is pretty obvious. But you can still veer off into the open country side, read hundreds of books, go off on your own adventuring paths…and, with the help of the quest journal, find your way back to the main plot easily.

WARNING: some spoilers follow
Read the rest of this entry »

I was really hoping it wasn’t true, but apparently it is: Alienware is being bought by Dell.

Why don’t I want it t be true? Well, Alienware builds hand-made boutique machines for the serious gamer. Dell builds commodity by the tens of millions for the home consumer. Dell is so much bigger than Alienware ($55 billion in revenue, 33 million computers in 2005, versus $200 million in revenue and 60,000 computers for Alienware) that it seems fated that Alienware will “disappear”.

But will they? The current CEO and one of the founders of Alienware reminds us that they will be a “wholly owned subsidiary”, which gives them some lattitude to remain “different” from Dell. I hope he’s right. But all that keeps running through my head is a line from Star Trek’s Borg…

We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.

I rarely actually finish big RPG games. You know, the ones that take 100 hours of play time to complete. Generally, not finishing the game makes me frustrated and a bit disappointed in the whole process…and less likely to buy the next one.

One significant exception to this a few years ago was Elder Scrolls: Morrowind. No, I didn’t finish the game. But I didn’t really mind, either. The game was so open-ended that I just enjoyed wandering around and poking at dungeons. I’m not even sure that I ever really was working on the main quest/story line. But because of the richness of the game, that apparent lack of “progress” didn’t really bother me a lot. I probably got 40 or more hours of play time out of the game and, as I said, never finished.

The next chapter in the Elder Scrolls series will be released soon. Its name is Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. A few years have passed since the last chapter was released. Naturally, this means the graphics and such are improved. But I’m really pleased to see that, at least based on what can be read, the developers have kept their focus on the things that really matter. The world in Oblivion looks as “huge” and opened-ended as the previous chapter.

The main improvements in the richness of the world, aside from graphics and such, come from improvements in NPC AI. The old NPCs in Morrowind were a bit static, but in Oblivion they all have drives/goals/interests that direct their lives independently from interaction with the player. So much so that sometimes the NPCs even surprise the developers. Sneak around and steal from some NPCs and, if they don’t see you, they might start blaming each other. One might run home and grab a sword and start poking around in corners. I look forward to seeing this in action.

The graphics and such are also very impressive. You can download and view a few in-game movies to see what its like. Or watch the trailer, which is all rendered in game. Note that you’ll need the Divx codec installed in Windows Media (available for free download) or some other Divx player to watch that trailer.

And yes, that’s Patrick Stewart’s voice as the Emperor. These games are becoming big production deals now. Also note that Oblivion will be available for both Windows PCs and XBox 360 consoles. I’ll be buying Oblivion when it comes out, theoretically sometime later this quarter (rumours say the end of February).

I’ve heard people say that they prefer the graphics in World of Warcraft over those in EverQuest 2. The discussions I’ve had with people about why they feel this way seem to boil down to a description of the characters in EQ looking “plastic”, “like corpses”, or “not cool”.

I like the graphics in EverQuest 2. But I’ve heard reference in the past to something called the “Uncanny Valley“, and now that I’ve spent all of five minutes reading up on it, I think I see how this applies to this discussion.

The basic premise behind the Uncanny Vally goes like this: at one end of a scale lies something which is somewhat human like but obviously artificial (E.G.: the characters in World of Warcraft). Such characters tend to inspire empathy in people: we feel “sorry” for them, or overcome their limitations by filling in the blanks between their obviously artifical nature and something “human”. At the other end of the scale are things that look and act truly human: we feel empathy for these things as well, since, well, they are “us”. Somewhere in between are things that look very human, but are subtly wrong: corpses or the seriously ill fall into this category. They move wrong, or don’t sweat, or have skin tone that is a bit “off”…such characters make us uncomfortable.

I think its possible that the characters in EQ2, somewhat like the characters in the movie Final Fantasy: the Spirits Within, are somewhere in that “valley” of empathy. They look just a bit too realistic for some people, and the things that are “wrong” (skin tone, motion, lack of sweat…) are disturbing. Although this makes sense to me, it does raise a question: why didn’t Final Fantasy: the Spirits Within bother me? And why do I like EverQuest 2? I know the characters aren’t “real” people, yet I appreciate their proximity to reality. I don’t find the flaws jarring: I think I would find it more jarring if they were so perfect that I couldn’t distinguish the real from the machine generated.

And that difference between the way I perceive things in regards to this so-called “uncanny valley” and the way some others do intrigues me. My threshold is at a different point, I guess. The day I watch a movie with a computer generated character that is so human that I can’t believe it isn’t human is the day I’ll feel a bit spooked out. I wonder why other folks feel that discomfort at an earlier point than I do?

Technorati Tags: Computer games, Graphics, Uncanny Valley

I downloaded the demo for F.E.A.R. today. Talk about totally smashing any hope of getting into the Christmas spirit! The demo is impressive: if the rest of the game is as good as this preview, the game as a whole must be as good as Halflife 2. Assuming you liked Halflife 2, and if you didn’t then what the heck is wrong with you?

Basically, its another in a long line of oppressive, scary first person shooters. Things leap out at you from the dark. You carry large guns with which to make said Things bleed. Blood flows everywhere, and death comes quickly. You have your flashlight (with limited duration, naturally)- thankfully, you can have it turned on and shoot at the same time, unlike other games *cough*Doom3*cough* where the duct tape required for this high tech feat hasn’t been developed yet. And you have a sort of “bullet time” ability that reflects your characters amazing reflexes. The graphics are great, and the physics of the world seem realistic.

With these types of games, the technology features are not the selling point for me. The technology has reached the point where reflecting water, realistic shadows and lighting, and plausible physics are no longer surprising: they are expected. What makes action FPS games work for me is a combination of story line and “atmosphere”. Does the game make me jump in surprise? Do I care about uncovering the story behind all those bloody deaths? And does all that fancy technology work together well to bring the atmosphere and story together seamlessly for me?

F.E.A.R., at least based on the demo, seems to do these things for me. So much so that I’m trying to get the “direct to disk” download of the full game to work. Unfortunately, I keep getting an “Internal Server Error” on the game purchase website each time I click on the “Download Now!” button. Buggerit!

Technorati Tags: Games, First Person Shooter, F.E.A.R.

I’m not really a big “halloween” person. Our house is the one on the block with the shades pulled down and the lights out on halloween night. But I do appreciate good game design effort.

The folks at Sony have added some “halloween” cheer to the world of Norrath in EverQuest II. There is a haunted house in each of the two major in game cities, pumpkins in the streets, and a trick-or-treating contest of sorts. I like what they’ve done.

The haunted house demonstrates some innovative story telling and is a fun little quest. And the idea of over-sized in game “masks” that you can win and wear based on various creatures and monsters is a fun little diversion. Irene and I had fun running around for an hour or two “trick or treating” and going through the haunted house.

I understand that World of Warcraft has done something similar for Halloween. Kudos to both of the big MMOG developers for putting some effort and thought into a holiday that normally doesn’t appeal much to me.

I’ve had my XBox for a little over a week now. In that time, I’ve played maybe 10 hours on the box, and spent another 5 hours putzing with setup and hardware. I now feel qualified to offer a bit of an opinion.

I’d say that Microsoft’s XBox is a pretty cool piece of technology. I thought this when they first released it back in, I guess, 2000. A console based on PC technology- it has an Intel processor, uses an NVidia video processor, and has a hard drive- basically, a purpose built PC compatible. But why would I have one of these when I already have a much more powerful PC on my desk?
Read the rest of this entry »

I’m playing Doom3 at the moment. Its the most claustrophobic, frightening, heart-rate-increasing game I’ve ever played. I’m far from finished (barely even started), so I’m not yet ready to write a review or form a final opinion. Consider this an “early review”.

As everyone will tell you, the graphics are stunning. But since it varies from “dark” to “totally fricking pitch black” throughout the game, you don’t really get much of an opportunity to admire the graphics.

Similarly, I think the physics are pretty good as well. But you can’t pick anything up and toss it around, and the vast majority of bodies “disintegrate” when you kill them, not even leaving any gibs to kick around, so whatever physics there are in the game are pretty hard to see.

The key defining factor with Doom 3 is the sense of fear. The designers have truly mastered this, and the sense of foreboding is masterfully managed at every step. I respect the fact that the dim light in the game is part of this atmosphere.

But one thing really bugged me right from the outset. This game is set over a century in the future on a colony on Mars. Yet apparently no one has remembered how to attach a flashlight to a gun. I have to put down my weapon to use a flashlight…which means that when I have to fight something, I’m literally in the dark. The monsters move around a lot, and trying to shoot what you can’t see goes beyond atmosphere and into frustration.

I jokingly mentioned this to a co-worker of mine, and commented that, in the future, mankind must have become more stupid and apparently forgotten innovations like duct tape, which could easily be used to fasten a flashlight to a weapon. This, of course, assumes that the military spec flashlight-equipped weapons that exist today somehow were outlawed or something. Well, it seems that someone else had the same thought I did, and so is born the Doom 3 duct tape mod.

I haven’t installed it yet, but I’m sorely tempted.

First off, I should point out that I’ve never played any of the other Thief games. But I have read about them. The “thief” in the game is one Garrett, a mysterious fellow adept with a lock pick, bow, or blackjack. Garrett’s place is in the shadows: the Thief games are first person sneakers, which basically means that you are better off skulking past trouble rather than running into it head on.

So, with the stage set, how was the game? Graphically, Thief III is top notch. Lighting and shadow are, not surprisingly, very important in this game, and are rendered well. The moonlight shining through a window produces diffuse beams of light with motes of dust…its actually quite pretty. Sound is also very important: much of the time, Garrett is hiding in a corner and risking a peek at the nearby guards could be deadly. But hearing the footsteps as the guards complete their rounds is nearly as good as seeing the guard.

The hard part with a sneaking game like Thief is the AI…

… and I am happy to say that Thief III does an excellent job in the “smarts” department. The guards have nice, regular “beats”, but if you (or someone else) makes an unusual noise, they are off to investigate. When searching, they are more sensitive to new noises…this leads to tension and makes the whole “sneaking” process seem real. And guards aren’t the only citizens of the city Garrett plys his trade in. The shop keepers, bar maids, and others wander the streets, react to unconscious bodies and blood, and fight (or run away screaming) from the baddies unleashed as the game progresses.

And this variety of “background players” is something that really sets Thief apart. Unlike a lot of games in the “action” metagroup, Thief III places you in a environment that has more to it than just the next linear objective. The guards, shopkeepers, citizens, and two main factions in the city aren’t really part of the “core” story at all, yet they can help or hinder you at every stage. Need some spare cash to buy equipment for the next mission? Maybe that wealthy noble walking by with the heavy looking purse can help out. Or perhaps you’ll overhear a conversation about something worth stealing.

And those factions I mentioned? Well, the citizens themselves have their own enemies and agendas…regardless of what Garrett is doing, fights and battles will break out, attracting the attention of less politically inclined citizens. And as the plot progresses, even some of the “monsters” start mixing it up with the the townsfolk- there were a couple of running battles that kept me pinned in the darkness for long periods of time. The deathtoll was astounding, ordinary citizens were running around screaming and trying to hide…not big crowds, mind you, but enough action to make the situation complicated and interesting.

Despite his preference to keep to the shadows, Garrett isn’t completely unable to “mix it up”. In a pinch, in perfect health, he’s a toe-to-toe match for an ordinary armoured guard. And if killing is your style, Garrett can snipe from a distance with his bow, or sneak up behind someone and use his dagger very effectively: the only “downside” is the blood left behind, which can attract unwanted attention. Other weapons you’ll discover include landmines, knockout gas, and several “utility” arrows to put out lights or silence footsteps over otherwise noisy floors.

I won’t reveal anything to speak of regarding the main plot. It has plenty of twists and turns and, for me at least, was quite engaging. On normal difficulty, the game took me about 30 to 35 hours of play time to complete. That’s using plenty of save games and quick saves, both of which Thief supports in unlimited quantities. Levels load somewhat slowly, as do save games, but performance is overall quite good. Bear in mind that my normal gaming station is fairly powerful.

All in all, I was very pleased with Thief: Deadly Shadows. I’d give it a 93 out of 100 on the Kelly rating scale.

Computer games…I’m a big computer gamer, and so I spend probably far too much time thinking about and playing computer games. I recently bought FarCry, a fancy first person shooter. I hadn’t really been planning on buying it, but I wanted a diversion one day, and I had read a lot of very positive things about this game.

So, here I am playing FarCry. Its got very pretty graphics. A tropical paradise, rendered in bump mapped 3D, complete with real time shadows, reflective/translucent water, skeletal animation, and sophisticated physics. In this tropical paradise are a lot of people with guns, and your character is supposed to be trying to figure out why they sunk his little cruise boat and kidnapped his passenger. So far, so good…

This game is renowned for its sophisticated artificial intelligence in addition to its graphics. I’ll say one thing for sure: the guys wandering around the island with guns are no slouches…

They “talk” to each other, and when you shoot one of them, there is a good chance that several others will hear about it. And if one of them gets to a radio, well, you can count on even more of them showing up. All sort of realistic, I suppose. Also realistic is the way that, even with heavy body armour, you can only take so many hits before you die.

I started to find that FarCry was not just realistic. It was punishingly realistic, and in all the worst ways. You play one character, up against dozens. Your foes all have good weapons, armour, helicopters even. You don’t have save games: you have to make it to a checkpoint, which invariably comes somewhere right after you really needed it. The enemy is all together too alert: shoot one, and six or ten come to find out why their buddy dropped dead. They take the high ground, and man heavy machine guns. They can hear you sneaking prone 30 feet away. And somehow if you throw a grenade into a 10×10 room with three of them, all three of them will survive. All of this leads to playing the same thirty second scenario in the game over and over and over again, as you die and fall back to the same checkpoint.

I can’t say I’ve seen any particularly amazing examples of artificial intelligence in the enemy: sure, they all become alert when one of them dies, but they also will walk right over a dead body and not turn and go somewhere else- seems kinda stupid to me. I don’t feel I have to play “smart”…being smart and sneaky doesn’t seem to work. If I could play “smart”, I would be able to kill a guy quietly with my knife and hide his body. But the way the guys are set up, that never works: there are always four more looking at the guy I off, and even if there aren’t they somehow seem to just “know” that their buddy has been killed. Instead of being smart, I just have to die enough times to figure out exactly which corners each bad guy is going to pop out around from, and then kill each based on my past life experience…

I’ve been playing FarCry on its easiest setting for two weeks, maybe 12 hours total, and made it through 1.5 levels. Looking at it another way, I’ve probably made it through 1.5 levels 20 times. To put this in perspective, I finished Max Payne in 10 hours, Max Payne 2 in 9 hours, Call of Duty in about 23 hours…I’m not a bad player. In FarCry, I’m getting to know the deck of a certain rusty old ship extremely well. And I’m starting to really, really hate a certain helicopter.

I don’t mind realism in a game. In fact, its something I like to see. But I also play games for fun. And I guess that’s what I have to wonder about with FarCry…is it really fun? Do I really want a game that is so realistic that its frustrating? Does the absence of a save as you go feature really make the game more challenging? Or is it just a cop-out by the developers to make it seem like they have delivered more content than they really did by forcing you to play it over and over again?

I’m not really slamming FarCry. Its a good game. I’m just not sure I’d call it a “great” game. And I’m wondering whether all the guys who are calling it awesome are seeing something I’m not, or if they are just afraid to admit that its frustrating as hell to play.

Update: I continued playing FarCry to completion…I’m a glutton for punishment, I guess. But here’s the thing: I overcame some sort of mental block, and the game became easier. I figured out how to move better: earlier, I was spending most of my time prone, but I discovered that crouching or even running was often wiser. I figured out how to get the drop on the “bad guy” more reliably. And I figured out how to shoot down helicopters, and how to lure them back to the big machine guns to make this easier.

Once I started making progress, FarCry became a lot more fun. After four or five more levels, I decided to resort to “cheating” to keep it fun. There is a mode you can enable (run the game with the -developer flag) that lets you save the game whenever you want. Now FarCry is pretty darn good.

I wouldn’t go so far as to say that FarCry is the best game in years like some gaming magazines have. There were plenty of flaws in the AI, for one thing. Numerous times I would find mercenaries trying desperately to climb up cliffs or getting stuck in corners and allowing me to blow them to smithereens without retribution. In one memorable instance, the Cowboy-hatted leader of the mercenaries stood in the middle of a pond and did nothing to defend himself once I had killed off all of his sidekicks: I expected a better fight from him. And a truly “smart” AI would have the enemy falling back, picking up healing packs, arming with better weapons and grenades as they find them: instead, I set myself up to the side of a doorway and kill six or seven “elite mercenaries” in a row as they queue up to die. The most “intelligent” thing the FarCry mercenaries do is call for help and detect me early: often before any reasonable human being ever could.

I also am strongly and firmly against the whole “checkpoint” mechanism of save games. Take this message, developers: treat us like adults and give us a “save anytime” save game mechanism. If someone wants a challenge they can choose to not save the game- how hard is that? If they want to spend more time playing and less time repeating the same content over and over, they can save lots and lots like I normally do. Everyone is happy…

In the final analysis, FarCry is an “Excellent” game- I would rate it as a 90 on the 1 to 100 “Kelly” scale.