There are 8 screw need to be unscrew to openup vita , 4 on the side , 2 is on the bottom and the other 2 screw is near this connector
to openup vita after unscrew all the screw u need to take out all the memory card, gamecard and simcard holder then pry from top..if pry from bottom its more likely u gonna ruin the touchpad ribbon and battery connector
rear back plate , battery and touchplate ribbon
black smoke trigger,,only white led will be suitable for this kind of trigger sorry this will not be a tutorial because i dont want people screw up their psvita for modding attempt :)
Console-quality gaming arrives on a portable, but at a cost.
Ever since it was first announced, I’ve been dying to get my hands on the PlayStation Vita. In December, I got my chance with a model imported from Japan, but due to a variety of factors, many features and much of the launch lineup was inaccessible. Now, at long last, the system is making its debut in North America, UK and Australia and bringing with it new software features, an expanded array of games and unhindered access to its full suite of online features.
While the system still suffers from the limitations of its proprietary technology, unintuitive software and steep price, my experience with the U.S. version has me hopeful for the future of Sony’s new portable platform.
In terms of the hardware, the U.S. version is identical to the Japanese unit I imported in December, save for a few small changes to the model identification on the rear panel. As noted in my review in January, despite having an all-plastic build, the PS Vita has a premium look and feel with silver, metallic-finish accents and edge work. The focal point of the design is the massive 5-inch OLED display, which delivers the best visuals of any handheld and even rivals the iPhone 4S’ retina display. Even at its lowest brightness setting, the screen is crisp and vibrant, producing millions of colors.
In order to keep the overall footprint of the system low, the d-pad, action buttons and joysticks that flank the display are small and placed closely to each other. Although considerably smaller than a standard DualShock, the controls are just as effective. The buttons are tightly mounted and responsive. The shoulder buttons are springy and loose but detect depressions accurately.
Overall, the touchscreen and rear touch panel are fairly accurate, though performance varies by application and game. For instance, swipes and taps are detected 1:1 on the main user interface, but gesture controls in games like ModNation Racers: Road Trip are slower to respond.
The system also makes use of built-in accelerometers and a gyroscope to detect motions such as tilting for control input. In some cases, the sensors can be a bit too sensitive and need to be adjusted, but otherwise it works well across most applications. Those who prefer traditional controls will be relieved to know that the touch- and motion-based controls are used as optional alternative control schemes that can be disabled.
The only substantial flaw with the design is the high-gloss finish of the front panel, which is so reflective that the unit is hard to use in direct sunlight. What’s more, the display collects smudges and dirt after only moments of use.
The PS Vita comes in two flavors--a Wi-Fi-only model and a 3G model, priced at $249 and $299, respectively. The 3G model’s service is furnished by AT&T in the U.S. and offers constant connectivity to the PSN, turn-based multiplayer, the system’s mobile browser and social functions. Leading up to launch, we outlined the benefits to investing in the 3G model, as well as some more cost-effective solutions, but now that we’ve been able to test it extensively, there are performance factors to consider.
As expected, enabling 3G increases energy consumption, but the impact on battery life is actually far greater than I would have expected. While I was able to get close to 5 hours of juice out of the Wi-Fi only model, 3G connectivity diminishes battery life to roughly 3 hours per charge. Disabling the 3G function and changing other settings, like lowering the brightness, returns optimal battery life to the 5 hour range. Obviously, having 3G enabled all of the time isn’t necessary, but having to turn it off and on in order to preserve the battery is less than ideal.
The speed of the 3G connection also is also inconsistent. Network performance is largely dependent on your location, but during my testing in San Francisco, I achieved speeds as little as 1.3Mbps and up to 1.7Mbps. Basic messaging between friends was speedy, but web browsing and other media-rich activities were slow. Low data speeds and network congestion limits the features accessible via 3G to messaging, downloads from the PSN that are 20MBs or less and asynchronous (turn-based) multiplayer. In the United States, AT&T is charging $14.99 for an entry-level 250MB monthly plan or $29.99 for 3GBs of data, and based on the impact on the battery and the range of apps that use it, it doesn’t seem worth the cost.
As our camera tests illustrated, the PS Vita’s front- and rear-facing cameras leave much to be desired, falling short of the quality offered by the Nintendo 3DS or even the iPhone 3G, which was released in 2008. Still, they are sufficient for augmented reality games like Little Deviants and for apps like Skype and Twitter. In a recent software update, Sony added support for 640x480 video recording at 29 frames-per-second. Images and video produced by the cameras are grainy with washed out colors, so the PS Vita won’t be replacing your smartphone camera anytime soon.
And then there’s the PS Vita’s primary UI, which remains one of the system’s biggest weaknesses. Each menu, application and game is presented as a bubble icon that, when tapped, opens a new window that displays links to DLC on the PSN, recent friend activity and the a button for launching the game or app itself. While the utility of these shortcuts can be handy, having at least two steps between the main menu and every function is anything but quick and intuitive.
10.The Witcher 2: Assassin of Kings The Witcher has been a sleeper franchise for the PC, and stands as one of the top fantasy RPG franchises in a sadly waning genre. The Witcher 2 marks the first time the series appears on consoles, bringing its foulmouthed, hack 'n' slashing, witching protagonist Geralt to the Xbox 360. The original Witcher was a great game that launched the IP with fantastic and engrossing combat mechanics, a great world and a cool story. The Witcher 2 on PC improved on its predecessor in some great ways, and we couldn't be more excited to see what the franchise has in store for its Xbox 360 debut.
9.Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning A title that has seen a long development and some sea changes along the way, Kingdoms of Amalur will finally be released this year. Kingdoms of Amalur has some lofty expectations surrounding it, no doubt due to some of the ginormous names attached to the project (R.A. Salvatore, Todd MacFarlane, Ken Rolston). However, Amalur might be one of the precious few times that a game will stand up to the hype, as what we've seen out of the game definitely has our eye.
8.Far Cry 3 The pedigree of the Far Cry series is huge, and each game in the series has managed to carve out its own unique feel and gameplay mechanics. Be it the original's tropical island setting or the complete 180 pulled by the sequel's African plains setting, the Far Cry series has never been content to stay in the same place, and the third iteration will shake things up even more. The game sees a return to the tropical style setting of the original game while adding in an eclectic and engaging cast of supporting characters not unlike Far Cry 2. If the other Far Cry games are any indication, the third entry looks to blend the best of both its predecessors for a great new experience not to be missed.
7.Transformers: Fall of Cybertron I could simply say "Grimlock" and leave it at that, but there's even more to be excited about in Fall of Cybertron. The team behind was is the best Transformers game to date, War for Cybertron, is looking to build on that experience with a more focused story and even more intense action, awesome gameplay, and new playable transformers. Fall of Cybertron is shaping up to be a huge improvement over its already awesome predecessor. Did I mention Grimlock?
6.Tomb Raider While Lara Croft remains an iconic figure in the world of gaming, she hasn't been on a truly new adventure since 2008 (outside 2010's downloadable foray). That's why the new look, new gameplay, and new world of this fall's Tomb Raider shine with such promise. Everything we've seen so far reveals a new, gritty, action-packed experience set before the original game that made her famous. The new take on the series features a home base, upgrades, horror, and heart. If all the pieces fit together tightly, then Tomb Raider might just be one of the best experiences of 2012.
5.Borderlands 2 Borderlands, 2009's cell-shaded, desert-centric, loot-fest, was both hilarious, entertaining, and expansive; but it wasn't for everyone. With this year's sequel, Gearbox Software aims to ratchet up the story, environments, and polish that weren't the high points of the original game. With snowy mountains, grassy fields, and a range of new character classes, Borderlands 2 looks to make everything the original game did better. And for that, it has the potential to be one of the best games this year.
4.Alan Wake's American Nightmare As a follow up to the beloved 2010 horror game, many gamers initially took issue with the fact that Alan Wake's next game, American Nightmare, would be available as a downloadable title through Xbox LIVE Arcade. However, after learning more about the game, it's pretty safe to say that those fears are unfounded. American Nightmare is as fully-fledged as they come, with a full campaign and even an exciting new arcade mode for those just looking to get their hands dirty against some Taken. American Nightmare is set to change the way gamers think about Xbox LIVE Arcade titles, but more importantly, we can't be more excited to meet up with Alan again.
3.Mass Effect 3 Everything we've worked toward for the past five years is finally coming to a head. The Mass Effect story's been building since 2007, and the reality of our decisions in the first two games is starting to dawn on us. Where do we stand with Illusive Man? What are the repercussions of keeping the Reaper technology? What role does Legion play, will we see the return of the Rachni, and how will the Shadow Broker benefit our goal to save the Earth from invasion? If you haven't played previous games, that probably reads like gibberish, and we can't recommend enough that you rectify this problem. Mass Effect 3 concludes something we've poured hours and emotion into, and much as we're excited to rip the Reaper army a new one, we fear for the fates of our favorite allies. More importantly, we're afraid of where the end will leave us -- we adore this world, and want to interact with its populous and problems for the rest of our lives. We're dying to see where we leave off, and where Mass Effect will take us next -- with or without Shepard.
2.Bioshock Infinite We'd give Ken Levine's team the benefit of the doubt by default -- that BioShock Infinite looks as impressive as it does leaves us vibrating in impatience.The first BioShock was one of this generation's first truly great games. Gears of War and Oblivion certainly rocked our world, but neither had the strong, thoughtful voice saying powerful things BioShock brought to the table. It was equal parts game and social commentary, and each complemented the story and message in meaningful ways. Irrational Games has set the bar remarkably high for itself, but we aren't worried. BioShock Infinite, in the limited demos we've seen, has characters with personality and complex relationships that rival any of its progenitor's characterization. Hero Booker DeWitt swinging on airborne train tracks and accomplice Elizabeth's reality ripping abilities are wonderful complements to Infinite's civil war story setup, political undertones, and distinct aesthetic. Oh, apparently you can shoot stuff too. We often forget about that part.
1.HALO 4 Bungie left Master Chief in capable hands when it retired from Halo. 343 Industries is a collection of some of the industry's elite talent, some of which are Halo veterans, and its Halo: Combat Evolved remake proved the developer's devotion to the franchise. We still only know the basics about Microsoft's second Master Chief trilogy, but its existence is enough to get us excited. Halo 4 has the opportunity to do a lot of interesting things within a familiar framework. The Halo 4 announcement trailer showed us new weaponry and an intriguing setting, and we're hoping to learn more about Master Chief and Cortana as deep characters, to see their relationship develop, and explore vast new worlds. Oh, and to shove sticky grenades down enemy throats. We're likely going to have to wait until E3 2012 for concrete details, which only adds to our anticipation.
No other video game has unleashed my creativity like Minecraft. I've spent countless hours chipping away at blocks, gathering the necessary materials to complete the next masterpiece that would otherwise only occupy my mind's eye. I've also spent just as many hours exploring, spelunking and slashing my way through monsters with bravado. My character – my entire Minecraft world – constantly evolves into whatever I want it to be. I tell my own stories, I write my own destiny and I bring my fantasies to life one brick at a time.
Minecraft stands out not only for the way it inspires me creatively, but also because of its unique aesthetic. Look, I know the visuals look dated and a bit silly, but few games have visuals so endearing and charming. I know I'm not the only one who feels that way either, or else Minecraft's graphics wouldn't be so iconic. Could you take a texture from Gears of War, Halo or Uncharted, put it on a shirt and have players identify it? I doubt it. The looks just work, giving the game a super unique appearance that's memorable, and brings up a bit of nostalgia in me for 8-bit era games.
I love creating in Minecraft, but my gratification is due, at least partially, to the fact that I have to earn everything. Survival Mode generates a random world with nothing to your name, forced to gather resources in order to construct food, shelter and tools. By the time I crafted and installed a wooden door in my first mud hut I felt a sense of ownership . Other games let you buy a home with the money you earn, but none of them really challenge you to forage for the materials and build it yourself. When I look at my home and see every piece of furniture and wall is exactly where I wanted it, I love it all the more or change it at my whim. From the moment my home was built, my mission was clear: tunnel into the earth in order to get whatever I needed to carve out a fortress in my little part of the world.
Creating items in Minecraft is one of the most important actions you do. The problem, though, is the necessary information isn't found in Minecraft. The first time I beat my way through some trees and gathered wood, I had no clue what to do with it. Thankfully, like many Minecraft players, I had a mentor who pointed me to the various online forums, communities and wikis. I have pages that I return to all the time, often tabbing out of the game itself when I can't remember exactly how to craft an item. For many this is just a rite of passage, but mostly it's an obtuse way to handle crafting. I'd love for the recipes to be integrated into the game somehow, even if I had to find them throughout the world. There's not much of a sense of accomplishment in reading a wiki and just following instructions verbatim.
Even after you find a good resource, it still takes a lot of effort to learn everything. The sheer amount of recipes and items you work with in the game is intimidating and time consuming to learn. Many games have poor documentation, but Minecraft has none at all, and what's available isn't easily digestible.
But Minecraft is still more than fun enough to warrant the learning curve. The addiction, though, really begins as you craft items and gain mastery over your surroundings. Suddenly night time, when monsters spawn and take over the unlit portions of the world, isn't as scary. I mean, it's always a bit scary, but having a sword in hand – even a simple, wood one – instills a sense of power. Like a caveman whittling their first spear or stoking their first fire, building simple tools and torches in Minecraft makes me feel safer, like I am the master of my fate because I have the power to create the items that can save me.
Beyond safety, crafting creates a whole new set of goals in Minecraft. I crafted items as needed (tools and torches), but eventually I expanded my repertoire to include superfluous pieces. To finish my first stone keep I had to craft stairs and ladders; simply jumping up a simple series of platforms was unbecoming of the king of the land, after all. Crafting slowly became something I did less to survive, and more to complete the next big project I set out for myself. Creating panes of glass didn't really give me an edge in my world, for instance, but it did make the viewport of my scale Star Wars AT-AT look a lot more badass. Crafting even gets more complex if you want it to. You can create tools and buildings or elaborate self-powered rail systems, taking you from the stone age to the 20th century,, and making you feel like the fate of my world lies squarely in my hands. It's exhilarating, and instills a sense of power that I rarely feel in games.
After I secured a plot of land in my world, my intentions during a session with Minecraft changed. Each session became an adventure, wherein I challenged myself to go exploring for the next crucial component parts needed for the next recipe. These self-imposed quests are why I sometimes venture into the Nether, a hellish other world where monsters – who just so happen to drop precious materials – live. Other times I venture into dark caves, donning crafted armor and enchanted weapons so that I can tackle whatever enemies I come across. I don't know what exactly I'll find, or what terrors I'll face, but I do it all in the name of finding precious blocks – and the thrill of the experiencing the unknown.
That thrill, that experience of unplanned and unpredictable adventure, makes every session with Minecraft exhilarating. Sometimes I might end up spending the evening doing mundane activities like farming or hunting for food, but other nights I might end up stumbling upon a gigantic, randomly generated mine that's full of monsters and treasure. Because each world is procedurally created, I never know just what I'll stumble upon next. One day my character may be a simple builder, the next he's a dungeon conquering hero who slays horrors in the dark.
Of course, adventuring is always better with friends, and Minecraft's multiplayer is great fun if you can get it working. It isn't broken or a completely buggy mess, but requires a lot steps to get started compared to most games. If you want to start a game you'll need to download additional software, and go through all kinds of online tutorials to get it working. Players who just want to join a game have to know the server's I.P. address, since there is no server browser built into the game. Still, annoyances and tedium aside, if you have the option to play with others you definitely should; exploring, adventuring and building up epic structures is a lot more fun with friends. Besides, if you're going to spend hours of your life building gigantic monuments, you might as well have someone else to show them to. You can post them in online videos, but it just isn't the same as having your friend right next to you sharing in your accomplishment. Or, even better, having them log on after a period of inactivity to be stunned at the marvels you've built in their absence.
If you're not the type to play with others, and you don't want to earn all your materials, you can always jump into Creative Mode. In this world you're invincible, and have access to every item in the game. It's great if you want to, say, create a gigantic Wampa from Star Wars, but it doesn't give me the same sense of reward or accomplishment I get when playing Survival since I don't have to earn the blocks or fend for my life while doing so. Many blocks take considerable effort to acquire (some even make you journey into monster filled labyrinths), so when I build them in my Survival Mode it's a lot more impressive. Still, it's a fun distraction.
The original Portal had the element of surprise. Its style of first-person physics-based puzzle gameplay was unique. GLaDOS, the murderous robotic villain, was new and vibrant and evil in the most charming way. Cake jokes and songs about surviving dismemberment were still hilarious. It was short, succinct and essential. Creating a sequel without playing all the same notes and making it feel like Portal: The Longer Version is a tough task. For Valve, it's apparently no problem.
From the first moments of waking up in the rusting Aperture Science facility to right before the credits roll, Portal 2 rarely falters. The world is bigger, the story thicker, and the character development more surprising. The mania of GLaDOS, the facility's operator, is molded into unexpected forms alongside a host of brutally funny personalities. The history of the Aperture Science facility is filled in, character origins discussed, and though its pacing suffers as it occasionally strikes a more serious tone, an abundance of cruel jokes and cheerfully sincere death threats prevent it from losing its sarcastic charm. When you're not staring at your screen with wrinkled, pained expression on your face trying to figure out a puzzle, expect to be laughing.
You still play as Chell, dragged back into Aperture after the events of the first game. You soon meet Wheatley, a spherical robot, voiced by Stephen Merchant (The Ricky Gervais Show, Extras) who helps you through the early stages. It's difficult to overstate how Merchant's obvious enthusiasm for the role benefits the game. No word Wheatley speaks is without witty inflection, and the consistently clever writing perfectly complements the onscreen action. It's easy to be be just as concerned about missing lines of dialogue as about progressing through the puzzles, especially during Wheatley and GLaDOS' verbal sparring matches.
The attention to detail throughout is nothing short of stunning. The facility is in a state of disrepair at the beginning. Once GLaDOS whirs into action, so does the facility, becoming an extension of her body and personality. When you enter a room mechanized crane arms and wall plates spin and shift with an urgency like you walked in on them with their pants down. As Portal 2 progresses, the environments expand from claustrophobic test chambers to yawning underground chasms. Metal girders and structural supports break and crash into each another, snapping apart in chaotic and natural ways, consistently serving not only to entertain the eye but to expand our understanding of the game's characters. The core appeal of something like Portal will never be the visuals, but it's still impressive how much mileage Valve is getting out of its Source technology first used for Half-Life 2 in 2004.
Though there's a much bigger emphasis on story and character development in Portal 2, you'll spend a lot of time tangling with spatial reasoning puzzles in test chambers. Valve brings back the same portal gun while greatly expanding the number of gameplay toys. The gun shoots two linked portals through which you and objects can pass and momentum is maintained. To get from one test chamber to the next and through the guts of Aperture's vastness, you'll use your portals to redirect energy beams, coat surfaces with globular gel that makes you bounce or run at high speeds, pass over gaping pits with bridges of light and manipulate cylindrical tractor beams. Arriving at a solution will require quick reactions just as often as clear thinking, as portals sometimes need to be repositioned while soaring through the air or before timers run out. This isn't a first person-shooter in the traditional sense, but at times it can feel like one as you zoom in with your portal gun to spy distant targets and frantically adjust your aim and fire with precision.
No matter how complicated the puzzles get, the solutions are always sensible. Sometimes you'll "get it" right away and adjust lasers with lens blocks to activate platforms to reach switches. Other times you'll have no idea what to do, exhausting seemingly all possible options until, eventually, a solution so plainly obvious sparks in your brain and you curse yourself for being such a dolt. Valve does an excellent job of presenting you with all the necessary clues without slapping a set of instructions onscreen to explain the way forward. Even when multiple mechanics are mixed into puzzles like jump pads, tractor beams, light bridges and gels, I never felt getting stuck was due to unreasonable or poor design, only my ability to decipher it.
As good as the single-player story is, the co-operative is the real highlight of Portal 2. The beginning of the co-op picks up right after the end of the single-player game, giving you and your partner control of two robots, and serves as a continuation of the story of Aperture Science. It features fewer characters than the single-player mode but is still filled with enough sharp writing, deadpan jokes and absurd humor to keep you entertained between puzzle sections and provide motivation toward an end goal. Better yet, instead of simply recycling puzzle designs from the single-player portion, the inclusion of another player significantly alters the way you need to think.
That's because each of the robotic co-operative characters carries a portal gun, which means two guns and four portals. Valve takes full advantage of the increased capacity for dimensional holes by raising the level of challenge and coordination required. As is obvious if you've ever played Left 4 Dead, Valve knows how a good co-operative mode requires a game design that doesn't simply encourage but requires you to work together. In Portal 2, communication is vital to success.
Getting through can be frustrating, especially if you're playing with someone you don't know, because there's no diffusion of responsibility here. You can't hide in a corner and wait for someone else to do all the work. The contributions of each person involved are plain to see, and Valve's developed numerous tools to help make communication as smooth as possible.
You can set context-sensitive markers on parts of the environment to wordlessly indicate where a portal should be placed, where a partner should move, and even trigger a countdown clock to synchronize when switches should be hit or buttons pressed. The indicators may feel superfluous at first, but once you're setting up four portal chains of light bridges to block turret fire or redirecting edgeless safety cubes as they fly through open air over bottomless pits, it's obvious how useful they can be. Barely a moment will go by in silence while playing Portal 2 with another, except when you're listening to GLaDOS belittle your intelligence with endearing sarcasm.
Really the only place Portal 2 falters is in the second act of its single-player mode, where the pacing sags and the story becomes more concerned with the past than anything else. Even so, as compared to many other linear first-person games where the stories are little more than shrink wrap and glorify a blood-is-progress philosophy, Portal 2's mid-game doldrums are relatively far more creative and confidently original. Valve's sequel serves as the anti-Call of Duty. Portal 2 is a first-person thrill ride from beginning to end that challenges you to think without failing to entertain.
Spider-Man: Edge of Time revolves around the timelines of both The Amazing Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2099 as they must work together to prevent the death of Peter Parker.
That's why I find myself drawn to Spider-Man: Edge of Time. The haunting image of Spider-Man 2099 carrying the broken body of the Amazing Spider-Man was how Beenox Studios introduced Spider-Man: Edge of Time to the world in April, and it has stuck with me ever since. Yes, I gave the game some good natured ribbing by making sure to point out that while this game is not Spider-Man: Shattered Dimensions 2 it sure seems like it is (same voices, art style, Spidey-switching idea), but the thing I took away from that initial taste was a desire to dive deeper into this story that hinges on the wallcrawler's death, and that's exactly what the E3 demo gave me.
Maybe I'm jumping ahead of myself, though. Spider-Man: Edge of Time follows up on Beenox's success with Spider-Man: Shattered Dimensions. Here, a scientist from the future travels back in time and kills the Amazing Spider-Man (that's the red and blue hero we all know and love). This sends a shockwave through the universe that instantly changes the timestream. The time-traveling scientist sets up an evil company that shouldn't exist for dozens of year and molds the future in his image.
Spider-Man 2099 is the only one who knows how things used to be -- how things are supposed to be -- because he went through the time portal with the evil scientist. Now, Spider-Man 2099 has to work through time and a telekinetic link with Amazing Spider-Man to keep the hero from getting killed and unspooling everything.
Players take on the role of Amazing Spider-Man and use his web hammers and such to quell enemies from a distance. Spider-Man 2099 is much more melee based and meant to get up close and personal with the bad guys. As I've said before, though, that's not all that shocking as that's how both of those characters played in Spider-Man: Shattered Dimensions, but the E3 demo introduced "Hyper Sense." This ability allows Spidey to slow down time and dodge enemy attacks while getting in some shots of his own.
Hyper Sense is critical because it's needed to take on Anti-Venom. Of course, Anti-Venom is Eddie Brock. In the comics, Brock used to be Venom and be a bad guy, but as Anti-Venom he's a force for good and can cure people of aliments. That doesn't matter here as the evil scientist has taken control of Anti-Venom and is going to use him to fight the Amazing Spider-Man. That fight might sound like every other fight in a video game, but Anti-Venom can "cure" Spider-Man by removing the radioactivity from his blood. Basically, if he gets his hands on Spidey, he can make him a normal dude.
This is what kills Spider-Man. Activision confirmed that Anti-Venom is the foe that takes Spider-Man's life and kicks off the entire game. I'm not sure if what I saw in the demo was the second time Spider-Man faces off against Anti-Venom or if this truly was the fight that ends his life, but when I found out this is the man that would finally kill Spider-Man, the fight meant so much more. Anti-Venom kind of hulks up and lunges at Spider-Man. The hero tries to talk him down, but eventually Anti-Venom pins him down and -- the demo ends in desperation.
It sucked for me, but it was a good place for Beenox to stop it. Back in April, I saw Spider-Man: Edge of Time for the first time and didn't think too much of it other than that image of a dead Spidey. Now, I want to see that Anti-Venom fight end. Were those the final moments of Parker's life? Do you play through them? I assumed the game started with a cutscene of Spidey dying and then players took over the task of Spider-Man 2099 trying to stop that from occurring. Now, I'm thinking we start on a fool's errand to beat an unbeatable foe.
I know Spider-Man's going to fail, and this time I don't just want to watch, I want to play.
Jigsaw wants you to play another game, but should you run in terror?
I didn't enjoy the first Saw game. It had bad, repetitious level and puzzle design, and some truly awful combat. Sadly, Saw II: Flesh and Blood, the sequel pumped out in just a year, does essentially nothing to change this, somehow even making the combat worse.
Prepare yourselves; Jigsaw wants to play another crappy game.
Saw II follows the story from the films, placing you in control of a young Michael Tapp (the son of Danny Glover's character from the movies), who is trapped in an elaborate maze set up by the serial killer Jigsaw. Beyond that the story is hopelessly lost on anyone not familiar with the movies, as character after character is introduced throughout the game in a manner that assumes player has memorized the cast of every chapter in the series. However, Saw II has lots of additional reading material that you can collect to try which sheds some light on what's going on, but unless you're ready to do some reading on Wikipedia you'll find yourself as lost as I was.
OK, so storytelling isn't Saw II's strong point, but you'd at least hope they could at least get the horror aspect right. Sadly, no. The game is full of traps that will kill you outright, such as shotguns trigged by opening doors, or tripwires on the ground, but these are repeated so much that you eventually anticipate them. Jigsaw goes from diabolically clever serial killer to tired and predictable after just the first two hours of the story.
Even the puzzles that won't kill you outright end up being little more than repetitious speed bumps to finishing the game. Countless doors require you to move some segmented wires around so that the power travels from the source to a switch, while other times you'll have some other item that is only obtainable through doing a simple game of pressing lights on and off (pressing the switch makes the adjacent lights turn on or off, depending on the state they were before). Saw II has a few of these simple puzzles and it beats them right into the ground. Occasional twists on the mechanic also fall flat (making players manipulate two wires is not clever), making these "puzzles" feel more like nuisances put in the game to turn it into a multiple hour experience.
The major set-piece puzzles of Saw II are also uninspired. The last Saw videogame had a few unique puzzles wherein the player was tasked with saving a major character from an elaborate trap. Saw II also has these, but they're either minor twists on what was seen in the last game, or simple tasks that are introduced so that they can be repeated ad nauseum in other parts of the story. Even when these puzzles manage to introduce a cool element, such as one that makes you do simple match-two-similar-pictures while also keeping a victim out of cycling jets of fire, they become frustrating affairs thanks to the fact that slipping up almost always causes instant failure. Learning by failing is ok if actually teaches you (see: Limbo), but in Saw II it just feels punitive.
The environments are imposing at first, until you realize that nothing is going to jump out and scare you without prompting you first. The only reason you'll find not to run headlong into darkness is the occasional bit of glass or acid on the ground (you're barefoot). Otherwise you are always prompted when you run into an enemy, or even given a chance to mash a button to dodge a hidden trip wire. And don't worry about getting lost in the dark, either, because despite there being a map the game is so linear that you'll never need it.
Combat was almost universally panned in the last Saw game, and Saw II somehow manages to make it worse. Instead of the clunky combat of yester-year, players are now forced to suffer through a quick-time event. You can argue all you want that the previous game didn't require all that much skill when it came to fighting, but simply inputting a few buttons to take out foes not only isn't fun, it takes all the suspense out of wondering when and where they're going to attack you from.
Running screaming through an evil forest with familiar scenery in the third chapter of Shadows of the Damned.
Grasshopper Manufacture's resident impresario, Suda 51, has made mention of Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez's Grindhouse again and again in marketing and interviews for his upcoming HD debut, Shadows of the Damned. But after making my way through the first half of the game, it's clear there are other 80's horror icons that belong in that list of influences. Five or so hours in, and it also seems like your ability to appreciate the multi-dimensional references to eight and sixteen-bit era gaming conventions and VHS horror mainstays might determine your ability to appreciate Shadows of the Damned as a game.
Publisher EA and Grasshopper Manufacture have already shown the first two chapters of Shadows of the Damned a couple of times before, but chapter three is unlike anything they've exposed us to previously. It also kicks Shadows of the Damned's horror homage into overdrive. Where earlier levels of Shadows of the Damned reference the style of the Tarantinos and Tobe Hoopers (Texas Chainsaw Massacre), the third chapter features an extended tribute to Evil Dead and Evil Dead 2 and their director, Sam Raimi.
While he's better known now for his directing work on the Spider-man films, Raimi made his bones (no pun intended) writing, directing and producing the Evil Dead films. In the middle of Shadows of the Damned's third chapter, the Evil Dead worship isn't just evident, it assaults you. Running screaming through the woods, our hero Garcia (F*cking) Hotspur is fleeing the deranged corpse (possibly? Shadows wallows in nebulous explanations of weird sh*t) of his suicide girlfriend Paula, taking refuge in wooden cabins, screaming to the world "How do you stop them?" I had to stop and take a moment to process the familiarity, the audacious, wholesale lifting of visual cues, right down to the roaring intangible spirit trying to break down the cabin door.
Then an undead monster banged its head up into the cellar door and cackled maniacally, staring at Garcia through the crack left by the rope securing the portal, and I'm pretty sure it said something about swallowing my soul.
As a fan of Raimi's work, it's hard not to feel an overwhelming sense of kinship with Suda 51 for his clear love of Evil Dead ad infinitum. It's that building psuedo-relationship, that kinship of appreciation, that's pulling me through Shadows of the Damned where otherwise I don't know that I'd be so inclined to continue. The wacky, over the top gore, the fantastic and diverse score by Silent Hill composer and fiction-caretaker Akira Yamaoka, the Ghouls and Ghosts inspired progress map between chapters, these are all attaching themselves to the threads of nostalgia in my brain. The gameplay? Not so much.
So far, my earlier issues with Shadows of the Damned from a mechanical point of view are borne out in this review build of the game. Shooting is a little clunky, and a little slow in the way that third party Unreal Engine 3 third person shooters often are. The camera doesn't always play nice despite the relatively simple demands placed on it. The character animation is often laughably bad, and Shadows of the Damned so far desperately panders and stoops to every possible dick joke and phallic reference it can stretch to - it's like the video game equivalent of that douche at the party who never stops with the "that's what she said" refrain.
It isn't fair to crucify Shadows of the Damned yet though. There's still half of a game to go, and mechanically, Shadows of the Damned is functional, if nothing else. But I can't shake this feeling that if not for my own predilections toward campy horror and gore, the five hours I've spent playing Shadows would probably have felt at least twice as long. The new tricks it keeps pulling out to show me are mostly removed from how it plays, which is usually considered a not so good thing. The question is whether Shadows of the Damned will find something besides red meat to throw at me in the second half.
Cole's adventure in New Marais warrants your attention.
I'm a sucker for sandbox games and solid third-person action titles, but Infamous didn't intrigue me leading up to its 2009 release. Superheroes and comic books aren't my thing, and I figured I would be just fine ignoring it while waiting for something more alluring to come through. But I was wrong. Having been tasked with writing the IGN Guide for Infamous, I jumped into an experience I thought wouldn't interest me and ended up loving every second of it. I beat Infamous four times. No matter how many times I played, Infamous never got old, and it quickly became one of my favorite games of the entire generation.
I'm happy to report that, in many ways, Infamous 2 is even stronger than its predecessor.
Tangible allusions to Infamous are scarce in Infamous 2, and there's an expectation that you're already familiar with the events of the first game. So you should definitely play the former before you play its sequel. Having survived his time in the quarantined metropolis of Empire City, Cole MacGrath -- with powers imbued to him from a mysterious device known as the Ray Sphere -- finally faces off against the prophesized Beast. He gets his butt kicked and retreats to the American south to lick his wounds and follow-up on the very real possibility of becoming more powerful in the town of New Marais.
Infamous 2's story is a deep, character-driven affair -- Cole's best friend Zeke is back and joined by a new foil named Bertrand and his anti-Cole Militia -- but what good would it be without great gameplay to accompany it? Infamous 2 plays nearly identically to how the original played, and that's a good thing. You'll once again control the electric superhero (or supervillain as you get to choose your moral alignment) in third-person. You'll once again have the ability to use his superpowers as well as take advantage of his increased melee capabilities thanks to a weapon called the Amp. And experience points can be used to unlock new, more powerful attacks, allowing Cole to inch closer and closer to the strength necessary to take on The Beast.
All of this boils down to gameplay that is superb. Cole handles smoothly, and better yet, he feels powerful. Cole in Infamous 2 is a continuation of Cole from the original, so he should feel like a powerhouse, and he does. Certain skills you had to learn in the original Infamous, such as the abilities to float and grind, are already learned as Infamous 2 gets underway. The goal here is simply to make Cole even more outrageously powerful than he already is, as opposed to starting again from scratch. This is definitely a nice touch. And while melee combat isn't as strong as it could be (and in fact causes Infamous 2's most serious problems in terms of a wonky camera), fighting is still incredibly satisfying.
Aesthetically, Infamous 2 pleases both the ears and eyes. Sucker Punch has created a telltale art style that fits perfectly in this series, and the game's overall look, including animations, is improved from the original. The sounds of New Marais are also great, from the basic sound effects of a bustling city to the voice acting. I certainly miss Cole's original voice, but the voice acting in Infamous 2 is still top-notch.
New Marais is a totally unique location that is a more living, breathing locale than Empire City ever was. There's real diversity in New Marais from the neon-lit red light district to the Katrina-like devastation of Floodtown, and it is all there for you to explore with the game's trademark parkour and climbing moves. Plus, there are plenty of enemies to fight, with a more robust cast of foes in both type and size. There are normal pedestrians who will rebel if you go the evil route to massive ice creatures looking to pulverize anything and everything.
Rockstar Games takes the side of the good guys in its risky new police procedural.
IGN SCORE : 8.5(GREAT)
L.A. Noire is different. It's not like most video games developed by Rockstar. You don't play the outlaw running wild, free to kill, steal, and cause destruction. You're a cop. A good cop at that, determined to restore order to the violent streets of 1940s Los Angeles.
L.A. Noire's not like most games. Sure, there are car chases, gunfights, and a point-tally to judge the quality of your police justice, but it's a slow-paced, meditative experience. The focus isn't on how good you are at scoring headshots with a pistol but instead your ability to read a suspect's face and determine if he or she is telling the truth, holding something back, or flat out lying.
Using a brand new technology called MotionScan, L.A. Noire delivers pure performances from a talented group of actors. Every wrinkle, twitch, downward glance, grimace, and hard swallow is from an actor playing a part, not an animator manipulating things from behind the scenes. It's a striking, sometimes unnerving effect certain to help push video games closer to true cinematic experiences. It's easy to fall into old video game habits like checking your phone while listening to a line of dialogue, but you're setting yourself up for failure. The actors' tells are in their faces, their posture, their eyes – rarely is it revealed in what they say.
This is where L.A. Noire shines. The interrogations are like lengthy dialogue scenes you'd see in an RPG -- but they're captivating. This is the core of L.A. Noire and that core is very good.
You're a detective, so you're going to scour crime scenes searching for clues. And when you question witnesses, you have to think less like a gamer and more like a sleuth. It's not easy. In fact, it's often a real challenge to judge the trustworthiness of a witness' statement. The line between "doubt" and "lie" is very narrow. Though L.A. Noire's hero, Cole Phelps, is regarded as one of the best case men ever, I still managed to falsely accuse dozens of suspects, doubt witnesses who were actually forthcoming, and use the wrong clues to try and catch killers in lies.
After every question, selected from Phelps' trusty notebook, you get a response from the suspect. Then you must choose to believe, doubt, or accuse them of lying. Get it right and you can open them up and get more clues. Get it wrong, and they offer less. The better you do over the course of a case, the more you'll understand the suspect's motivations. The worse you do, the tougher it is to get at the truth, but there's no possibility of failure in any conversation. L.A. Noire won't abruptly end if you fail to catch a killer's lie or miss an important clue. The bad guy only gets away if it's pre-determined in the story. The only game over screen comes from dying or allowing a fleeing suspect to escape. This makes you less of a real detective and more of a page turner, destined to always reach the next chapter so long as you make a choice -- any choice.
L.A. Noire isn't all about badgering people, though. This is still an open-world game. You're free to deviate from a case, explore faithfully recreated 1947 Los Angeles, and tackle more action-oriented missions. No, you can't run wild like in Grand Theft Auto (you're a cop, accept it), but there are some other things to do. Forty "unassigned cases" come in as calls on the radio. These aren't random; they're single-scene missions where you'll stop a bank robbery, chase down a bat-wielding lunatic, or shadow a crook to his hideout.
A few other distractions can be had -- finding all of the famous L.A. locations and discovering more than a dozen hidden cars -- which earn you points towards leveling up your rank. New ranks mean new clothes, hidden car locations, and intuition points (which can be spent to reveal clues and narrow choices when interrogating a suspect). This is the "game" portion of L.A. Noire, the part built for those who aren't ready to release their old needs as gamers. And maybe Rockstar is struggling to release that same hold. I like going about town, but L.A. Noire would have been stronger with greater focus on the experience and less concern for including traditional game elements.
Each time I start getting immersed in the world, I'm reminded "you're playing a game" with unnecessary text popping up on the screen or a score tallying my lie-detecting ability.
There are moments when L.A. Noire comes together brilliantly, when the threads from multiple cases lead to a darker ringleader. But more often, things are perhaps too true to real police work – repetitive, redundant, and unsurprising. Despite having 21 cases, some of which can take more than an hour to complete, L.A. Noire drags at times because it recycles the same drama.
We go hands on with Transformers: Dark of the Moon multiplayer and see how Optimus really stacks up against Megatron.
With licensed titles, we're all understandably skeptical of the idea of a cool multiplayer component. With the upcoming Transformers: Dark of the Moon game, players should be paying attention. Last year, Transformers: War for Cybertron offered one of the most interesting multiplayer experiences around. It was fast, violent, dynamic... and no one played it.
Of course, the same could be said for War for Cybertron -- while it was received reasonably well critically, it didn't sell so great. This kind of thing is the kiss of death for a multiplayer community, and the player base for War for Cybertron dried up rather quickly. Developer High Moon's hope with Transformers: Dark of the Moon is that its immediate tie-in to the fast-approaching third Transformers film will get it more attention than its spiritual predecessor. After spending about half an hour with Transformers: Dark of the Moon's multiplayer, which borrows heavily from War for Cybertron's, I'm hoping for the same thing.
Put simply, Transformers: Dark of the Moon's multiplayer is everything that War for Cybertron's was. On the surface, it's a familiar combination of the class-based play of a game like Battlefield Bad Company 2 or Team Fortress 2 with the killstreak and perk emphasis of Call of Duty. One immediately apparent change from War for Cybertron to Dark of the Moon is a sort of de-prioritization of the support classes. The specialized role of Scientist from War for Cybertron is gone. In its place High Moon have reclassified flying characters as Hunters.
Otherwise, the classes from War for Cybertron are mostly untouched. There are the speedy Recon characters, now Scouts, that can skirmish quickly but can't take much punishment; the Leader class is now the Commander, who have friendly buff special abilities and a good mix between mobility, armor, and power; and finally, the Warrior class (formerly Soldiers), who bring the heaviest firepower to bear but suffer from the worst comparative mobility.
That's the other major thing about Transformers: Dark of the Moon, the thing that sets its multiplayer apart from virtually everything else out there. Every player can freely shift between robot and vehicle forms, lending a mobility and combat versatility to every combatant that steps over and above every other shooter out there. There's a constant calculation required, forcing you to decide what form and what strategy is best suited to the situation at hand.
In practice, Transformers: Dark of the Moon's multiplayer plays out like a combination of Unreal and Tribes. Levels are asymmetric and have major altitude differences that force you to keep your eyes moving up and down as well as left to right, and the perks, which include abilities that might keep opposing players from using their abilities or transforming, add unpredictability to the mix. Like War for Cybertron, it's fast, fun, and violent.
Unfortunately, some of the balancing issues of War for Cybertron have carried over, as well. It seems clear playing Dark of the Moon that the class-based dynamics at play lend themselves particularly well to Conquest mode, multiplayer's point-capture mode. In Conquest, the different roles unique to each Transformer type complement one another. Scout players are the first on-site point men, Hunters are the rapid response firefighters, Commanders provide fire support and buff their teammates to take or hold points, and Warriors go in to clean up messy situations - or to cause them. In these matches, it's easy to feel useful and have fun playing the way you want to play.
However, in Team Deathmatch, the importance of the Scout and Hunter classes is minimized by their poor damage dealing capabilities. In a way, it's easy to understand why High Moon would pull back and make sure that these classes have severe limitations. The Hunter in particular has such an enormous mobility advantage taking to the skies that for them to wield a more destructive payload could make other classes pointless. But as it stands now, it's just not as fun to play as those classes outside of Conquest. It's not a new issue -- in this respect, Transformers: Dark of the Moon picks up right where War for Cybertron left off. Still, it rankles.
Perhaps players will be assuaged by the major addition to Transformers: Dark of the Moon's multiplayer. Rather than picking an odd palate-swapped Transformer that kind of, sort of looks like your favorite, players can now choose named, major characters in multiplayer. Sure, this can look kind of weird when there are something like three Starscreams rolling by a pair of Megatrons, but the ability to smash Starscream out of the sky online as Optimus Prime? That's priceless.
Ghost Recon started on PC, which you might not guess given how console-focused the series has been the past few years. Well, PC gamers are finally getting some much deserved attention with a promising new free-to-player title, Ghost Recon Online. The bad news for purists: This is a third-person cover shooter. That aside, if the early demo is an indication, this is a free-to-play game worth looking forward to.
Teamwork is the focus in both of the objective-based modes to be included in the late 2011 launch. Ghost Recon Online is an 8v8 battle that's as much about on-the-fly strategy as it is sharp reflexes.
Domination mode, for example, is designed to create blockade points where one team has control of an area and is able to set up a daunting perimeter. Sure, a skilled (or lucky) soloist can get in and maybe take them out. But that won't work against a good team, who have the same reconnaissance tools and can guard against a single infiltration. You're going to have to work together to distract and flank well-guarded positions. And there are rewards both in-game and post-game for playing as a team.
There are three classes to choose from at launch -- Assault (tank), Recon (stealth), and Specialist (engineer). When teammates are within 15 meters or so of one another, they automatically buff each other. When buffing, a blue line connects players, like an invisible tether, helping to establish their locations in a firefight. Those buffs are specific to a player's class. The Assault class boosts armor for nearby teammates, Recon extends the range of intel (highlighting enemy locations), and Specialist replenishes ammo.
It's not just good to stick together, but to work strategically with your teammates. The Assault class has a special move where he whips out a shield and rushes forward in a berserker charge. It's fun to do alone, but far more effective if a buddy trails behind. It's a good option for storming an enemy defense, as both are well protected. Once you break enemy lines, you have two soldiers able to quickly take down an opponent's nest from the inside.
Post-game point tallies favor those who work as a team to capture objectives. Unlike Call of Duty's online reward system, where killing is more lucrative than objective-nabbing, Ghost Recon Online gives considerably more points for capturing and defending locations than for capping people in isolation. There are also some added bonuses for party play (sticking with your friends from game to game).
The strategy is what adds complexity to Ghost Recon Online. The controls are fairly stripped down and simple. The only deviations from the standard move keys and mouse-click aim/shoot functions are using space bar to take cover (and this works well even in the early build) and the F-key to engage a class's special ability. Along with the Assault class's shield rush, Recon can scan the area to highlight enemies in the vicinity and the Specialist can deploy an Aegis Shield to add a protective dome over a small area.
Ghost Recon Online has a persistent character system with a level 50 experience cap. Earning levels unlocks new items (armor, clothes, weapons, weapon mods, grenade types) which you then buy with in-game cash earned from playing well. Every match also ends with a loot drop. This randomized drop can net you cool things (I scored a nice ACOG scope). The better you do in a match, the luckier you are. Meaning, the more points you earn, the higher the chance of good loot.
Ubisoft promises there are no tricks or hooks to "force" you into putting money down on microtransactions. While it's not clear of all the things money can buy you in Ghost Recon Online, one thing it won't earn you is an advantage on the battleground. Real-world cash can only buy items you've unlocked. If you don't want to wait to earn in-game cash for a new scope, you can drop some real bills down instead. Or you can buy some cooler-looking versions of items. But none of it gives you any real advantage that you can't earn by playing the game.
Ghost Recon Online offers something different in the free-to-play market. And it offers something a little different for an online PC shooter. It's a free game and one worth checking out when the public beta rolls around later this year.
