NEWS: Dead Island Gameplay Update!

More word on the Dead Island game that after it's successful trailer released a little while back, got a few tongues wagging...


According to testers, Dead Island is perhaps not going to be the dramatic survival horror the trailer promised, instead it will be "zombie zombie zombie all the time" so say the developers. Instead, it follows Dead Rising where you can basically pick up anything, combine and upgrade it, and make it become a bad-ass weapon. Except as you guys know from my review of Dead Rising, it was somewhat of a chore.

It's also completely ripped off Left 4 Dead by giving you a 4 player co-op option, but worse in that once you pick your character, you stay with it. This leaves out the 'pick-up-and-play' aspect that made Left 4 Dead so popular in the first place. If you're going to rip off a game, why leave the best aspects?

Apparently, part of the story is that you're immune to the zombification, meaning that if you're bit you don't have to worry about turning (or finding Zombrex), but instead can worry about the fact you've got a chunk missing from your arm. The game is a fast-paced, balls out shooter which is more cartoonish than dramatic. For those hoping for a more intelligent, Heavy Rain feel to the zombie genre, I'm afraid you might have to wait a little bit longer because it looks like Dead Island might as well be another Dead Rising in the form of an FPS.

NEWS: Teaser Trailer for Dead Island Released

My friend Simon just showed me this and I have to say it's incredible. It is clearly trying to stay away from the Dead Rising-esque splatterfest usually associated with zombies and give it a bit more heart. The score is haunting and the double narrative here is wonderful, telling a story backwards yet forwards in such a fashion would make the most accomplished of commercial directors blush. Don't dismiss it as a video game trailer because it works on a number of levels and you'll miss out.
It also reminds me a bit of Lost, anyone agree?

NEWS: LA Noire New Trailer - Gameplay

Latest trailer for Rockstar's LA Noire. How amazing does this look? One of the biggest games of 2011 and will be released in May.

Halo Reach

Bungie's last Halo game for Microsoft ends where it began by showing how the war with the Covenant started. But is it worth the wait?

Before I begin, I must admit I'm a casual Halo gamer. I've completed the first 3 (so I haven't done ODST or Halo Wars etc.)but I rarely play it online. I enjoy pissing about with all the vehicles and stuff, but I'm more of a Call of Duty man. I have done my fair share of online play with Halo 3 and some multiplayer fun with the first two but really, I want it to concentrate more on the 'campaigns' aka the story.

The events take place before the plot of the first Halo - this means no Master Chief etc. but instead you are part of a small elite team of Spartans entrusted with some important tasks during the first few moments of the Covenant attack. I have a few issues with this already. I enjoyed the way when I first picked up Halo that you're in the middle of something big already, it's when makers start filling in the gaps in our imaginations (see Star Wars Episodes 1-3 for instance) that I start getting annoyed. I don't want full detailed explanations on everything. However, saying this, they don't dwell too much on what's going on - instead it's a sheer instinct of survival and trying to evacuate as many people off the planet as possible. Baring in mind the events of Halo, you already know you're planet is fucked so it doesn't matter too much what they do. There are no surprises. At all. Which is probably why I don't rate this game too highly.

The problem is, this is just another Halo, it's the same kind of enemies, the same kind of weapons, the same kind of vehicles. Okay, so there are slightly different variations this time round, but essentially it's the same thing. In fact, I'd argue it's got somewhat worse; the interchangeable abilities you can pick up along the way range from jet packs to a shield to sprinting, which means that you won't be able to run if you have a pretty useless shield option. It's a unique touch to the game that wasn't need and feels forced as you make your way through the game. Unless you think haven't a jetpack is completely amazing for an entire game, you're not going to be that bothered.

The only other variations of the gameplay is some outer space shooting and a bit of flying around some skyscrapers. All of which is very nice but again, it all just mixes into the same Halo routine for me. I don't think I could actually tell you what happened in the first three games and this time round, for obvious reasons, there's no swarm; which are really the bits I enjoy the most.

I imagine the team would like to think this is their 'war film' piece. A torturous, no holds barred, all out apocalyptic piece and although it does have this feel of almost complete hopelessness, it instead feels completely impersonal and instead invokes a feeling of indifference. The idea of being in a team is short lived as you soon just go and do your own thing anyway (unless playing online), the team don't really interact with each other all that much and as the story progresses, it gets even darker. There might not be any surprises in the plot but I did enjoy where it went. However, there's little fleshing out of the characters and rolling from one battlefield to another just becomes second nature, so you soon don't care what's happening, you just want to start shooting again. The main insult is that the game was way too short and also didn't have much of a climax at all - the after-credits sequence made up for it slightly but really I felt cheated.

So with the same old gameplay then perhaps you have something pretty to look at right? Well, yes. The cut scenes look spectacular but there's not much change from Halo 3's graphics I would say. The sterile cities that you find yourself in also look dated and plain, as if it was for a PC game from the turn of the century. The views of the cities burning in the sky is a lovely touch but really, you're seeing the same thing you always see. There were also a few glitches I found such as getting into a lift and then suddenly dying. For no reason. Lame.

I also had issues with the saving as instead of starting from the exact moment you left it, unless you Save and Exit, you'll end up only able to begin at one of four or so big checkpoints during the level which is annoying - the little checkpoints just don't cut it. The whole set-up for the game has been designed for Halo perfectionists - those who want to be able to change every single possible factor within the game. Which brings me on to the online aspect.

The way so much energy has been pushed into the multiplayer options annoys me a lot. Sure it's great with customisable characters, new types of games ('Invasion' etc.), a voting system to choose what kind of game you might want to play and all these lovely, lovely options to make sure you get whatever multiplayer experience you need. Except, I'm not that bothered about playing Halo online. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy it and will play it, but really I'm getting this game for it's story - and it just felt a bit half-arsed, it's instead concentrated on it's longevity as a multiplayer online paradise and for me, it just leaves the game without any depth and might as well be some kind of add-on rather than a game in it's own right.

I can't complain too much. I did enjoy the dark aspects of the campaign, the cut-scenes were ok, and I can tell I've only just scratched the surface of what it holds in terms of online gameplay, but really it's lost that initial thing that I loved about Halo - unique FPS with a gratifying story. I can't help but think it's turned into something it shouldn't have done, which might be why Bungie are leaving. I doubt I'll go back and play the campaign again, but I will definitely hold it in high regard as catering for the gaming expert but, if you were a newcomer for instance, this would more likely be more overwhelming with it's level of detailed options when really, you just wanna play the fucking game. Geeks rejoice, but those who like to move from game to game might think nothing more from this than an average FPS. When I read 10/10 5 star reviews, I wonder if Microsoft are paying them off or if they are scared they might upset a few people by saying a Halo game might actually be a bit shit. This was a big one for them and I feel short-changed - it just didn't reach out enough.

Rating: 7/10

Mafia 2

After 8 years since the first installment, the eagerly anticipated Mafia 2 hits the shelves. But is it an offer you can't refuse or does it sleep with the fishes?

There's nothing quite like a good old fashioned gangster flick, the moody men, the gratuitous violence, the guns, the women, the money and the dark underbelly of society we're all obsessed with. Well Mafia 2 has this all in spades. The game revolves around your character Vito as he lives the life of crime in a New York style city trying to evade the cops, climb the ladder and make some money on the way.

Let's start with the good stuff. Firstly the graphics are absolutely incredible, I heard the PS3 version had some problems but I was playing this on the 360 and it looked luscious. The city is a real living and breathing city and like Mafia did before it, raises the bar in terms of visuals; every little detail has been considered and it's remarkable what they've done here. The gameplay works well with a standard duck, cover, shoot style that is quite popular these days, a fisty cuffs button mashing and you've got your handy map, your speed limiter button (for the car) and a range of weapons at your disposal. The voice acting, direction and feel is completely authentic, you are always in the world of your favourite mafia films like Goodfellas and The Godfather and all the cliches, good and bad, are neatly ticked off. The music of the era is great to listen to and the plot is exciting, dramatic and full of enough twists and turns to keep you interested. So whassadaproblem?

The problem is the game is full of niggles. For instance, there is a LOT of driving; unlike GTA IV you can't hop in a cab and jump to the next point but instead your left to drive for what can be quite a while and if you bump into a police car and get arrested? Back to the beginning of the drive. But then this was the main problem of the game, not just the annoyingly underused 'checkpoints', but the fact it felt like a tame sandbox game. It had all the elements to be a GTA for the Thirties but it stops short on a lot of aspects. You can't really go anywhere special, you can hold up stores but it's more of a sidenote and you just feel that for something so seemingly open, there's a lack of freedom. The fact that once you complete the game and that's it - no free roam ending - shows that this game might have spent too much on the big picture without taking note of the steps other similar games have taken in the last 8 years.

Sure you can customise your car, get some new clothes, kill some random people, hold up a gun shop, but really that's about it. The game wants you to follow it's linear story which is fair enough but surely you can bust the game wide open at the end for people to do what they want? I also had a problem with the AI, it was OK but at some points was completely infuriating, as soon as you go to shoot them, they will duck which makes gunfights sometimes a lot longer than they need to be. I also ran into a massive glitch when my AI friend Joe didn't accompany me to a final gun fight, which meant the game wouldn't continue and I couldn't restart the mission properly. Somehow, after an hour and a half of just running about trying to trigger something, it went onwards for no reason, but this almost became enough for me to throw the thing out the window. Come on now, games shouldn't be getting these types of glitches anymore. There's also the fact that if you crash your car, even a slight bit, you can die quite easily; this might seem realistic but really it becomes annoying once your nearing the end of a massive drive and a little mistake means you go back to the beginning again. I could tear my hair out at some points.

The game also felt a little short, it didn't quite have the epic impact on me I thought it would in the short space of time I played it in (app. 9-10 hours), but the overall story was what made it majestic. The plot of Vito and the different scenarios and missions they place him in are incredible, you even find out you're the one that kills protagonist Tommy at the end of Mafia and Vito's strange moral compass makes his character more interesting than the cardboard cut-outs of the others. However, the whole thing was let down by a lacklustre ending that will either lead on to Mafia 3 or to the DLC that has been announced. Either way, it didn't help the original experience.

Overall the whole game feels like you're in an interactive mafia film and that's no bad thing. It has some of the best visuals yet, missions and cutscenes GTA can only dream of and a clear love of the genre and the subject matter has gone into this game. However, it just falls short on so many levels that it's just not the complete gaming extravaganza it could have been. I would go as far as to say I enjoyed The Godfather game (where you fight the different families and look after your businesses etc.) more than this - which is a shame because the story is so good. It's slick and swish but without the balls to make it a stand-out release.

As far back as I can remember, I always wanted to be a gangster ... and this helped.

Rating: 7/10

Kane and Lynch 2: Dog Days

Kane & Lynch are back from what was a disappointing first game to try and improve upon its flaws and make killing people just look darn cool. But is it time to put this dog down?

I never played the first game 'Kane & Lynch: Dead Men' because I was one of the people who hated the demo. It was a shame since I enjoyed the premise of these two psychotic killers in for all they can get, but I just found the controls and gameplay not worth the hassle. It seemed like I wasn't the only one.

Everyone was willing to give it a try, but critics found many a flaw and the audience reception wasn't too great either, which made me wonder why they wanted to continue the franchise. A spokesperson said that this would be more character orientated, that the gameplay would be a lot smoother and will be a massive departure from the flawed 'Dead Men'.

In a sense, he's right. The story takes place some years later from the first game, so the characters have aged a fair bit, and Lynch is living in China, slightly overweight and looks like he could be in a retirement home soon. He needs Kane to help him with an arms deal and in a nutshell it all goes tits up. Plot-wise, it's sound, I enjoyed it but I wish there was a bit more depth, the story moves too quickly and it feels too forced. However seeing as that this is an action game, you don't want to be twiddling your thumbs for ages but there's a balance and unfortunately the game hasn't found it. It's close, but it's not quite the 'character piece' we were promised.

Saying that, the gameplay works well and from what I remember, it's a massive improvement from the first game. You press a button to cover and pop out with the aiming and then shoot. The problem is, this is pretty much the whole game. Run, cover, shoot, move on. It works the same way as say, Army of Two, but at least you got to drive things, customise things and you had loads of weapons. Instead, with Dog Days, you pretty much pick up whatever you can and just keep running forward. I don't really mind this per se, as for the realism it works (you're not going to be able to carry an arsenal with you) and you can't drive a tank through Shanghai but there wasn't really much variety to keep me entertained. Every time I went into a new room, I'd take a deep breath and move on knowing that I had to kill a bunch more people and then move into the next bit. Once a game begins to feel like a chore, you know there's a problem, no matter how cool it looks.

Also, the cover system isn't great. There were times where I'm covered and somehow, someone from a slight angle is still able to hit me so I'd have to 'uncover', crouch and move out of the way a bit, which becomes frustrating. Also the aiming can be annoying, unless you have a sniper rifle, you're going to have to move quite close to make sure you hit an enemy, which does add an element of realism again, but I felt like I had to shoot these guys a lot before they would die. The AI is also quite exemplary but could do with some tweaking, they will take cover and slowly try to flank you and will hide while you're shooting but sometimes it makes them a pain to come out to kill. At the same time it works well if you're badly injured; just keep shooting in the general direction while you find cover and you should be safe - something I imagine would work in real life!

When you do get hit, blood starts to fill the screen and the picture goes fuzzy and at times you will get completely smacked off your feet meaning you can shoot people on the ground or press a button to get up to cover (or if no cover is around just to get up). This works well because I imagine even with protection on, getting hit by a shotgun might knock you back a bit. There's enough guns to make the average gamer happy but in essence it's quite repetitive. However, when it does mix it up a bit, it works well. Flying over the skyline of Shanghai shooting a glass building from a helicopter was a real treat for instance and running around the tiny back alleys of the city felt like a real crime thriller. A lot of the shoot-outs would feel like they came straight out of Heat and it just felt fucking cool. You can even grab someone and use them as a human shield as you move forward.

The real plus here though is the style, something that IO have kicked up a real fuss about - and so they should! The whole game looks like it's being recorded through a shaky camcorder, so the whole things compressed, when it's dark it goes grainy, lights smear the lens and it moves all over the place. This looks absolutely wicked. When you sprint, the screen is everywhere and it feels like you're in a real movie with the camera keeping up with the pace of the action. I'm hoping this innovative style will influence a lot of other game production companies to take notice and think of things slightly differently, Dog Days proves that it can work. It's sometimes just the little details - a naked woman is blurred out, or an exploded head is blurred out, all while you are still playing. It's great. The cut scenes which are presented in the same style are exciting, the sets are exquisite, and bits such as where you're being tortured (which looks like something from Martyrs) really do make you feel like you're in a Tarantino movie. I mean, you're spending most of the game killing cops - you can't get more bad-ass.

So what's the real problem? Firstly, apart from the repetitive gameplay, I found the dialogue levels weren't quite right. Maybe it's my TV, but I couldn't hear what some people were saying which was infuriating when you're trying to move with the quick pace of the plot. But the real issue here is the length. It must have taken me about four or five hours, if that, to complete it - that's with dying occasionally and all that. The whole thing just feels short. You wonder if it's because the gameplay is perhaps too tiresome that it doesn't want to make players angry by stretching it out too long - but at least make it an 8 hour game - that's standard these days. It's a massive problem and hearing that there's the arcade mode (for the people who want to complete the levels with a score system), the co-op system (which I haven't tried and is supposed to work well) and a somewhat flawed yet interesting heist multiplayer mode, there isn't really that much here to justify it as a full game. It's like an EP rather than an album.

I have to say, I really did enjoy playing the game and it took me no time to complete it, you could easily buy it, complete it, and refund it within a day. I'm not joking. Keep in mind I completed it in three hour and a half sittings. I would recommend people play it just to see what they've done with the game but I don't think £40 (or £33 in Sainsbury's tomorrow) can justify it. I just feel there should have been so much more, which is a shame because for some reason I like these characters, I liked the game but once again it is ruined by some massive flaws. Maybe they should just come back to Kane & Lynch when they can do it justice. Rent it, borrow it, or wait until it comes down to £20 or something because it's well worth a play, but I just can't rate it highly against other, more 'full', games. I really wish I could.

Rating: 6/10

God Of War 3

One of the most popular and critically acclaimed series comes to a climatic end as Kratos continues on his path to kill Zeus ...

Each God Of War has always been a benchmark of gaming since it's first release in 2005 and with it's unique hack'n'slash gameplay mixed with button-press timing, it has paved the way for other titles to try and copy the format but alas they have never been able to fully capture God Of War's sheer ingenuity and originality.

For those who don't know, you play Kratos,a Spartan, who after offering his soul to Aries for victory was tricked into killing his own family and became a servant to the Gods of Olympus. But since then, he has rebelled and taken it upon himself to get revenge by killing Zeus and anyone who stands in his way.

This game was created by Sony and therefore is a PS3 only title. It also means that they have been able to push the console to it's limit and it looks stunning. Graphics are lush, the gameplay is smooth and it looks and plays like a dream. As always, God Of War remains epic - the huge backdrops, the incredible enemies, the amazing score and a story that doesn't let up.

As you travel your way up to Zeus through all kinds of scenarios, you benefit from a great array of weapons. If you've played a God Of War before, you'll be used to many of these already but you do get some cool little extras like wings to fly (or rather glide), the Head of Helios - literally a head ripped off someone that exudes light, and more. The fighting doesn't ever grate, even though it's essentially the same thing, and the puzzles are original and satisfying. The voice acting is inspiring and the entire experience makes for an outstanding game.

But then, I wouldn't say it was perfect. For one, even though it does summarise it's history as it goes along in quite a cool animation style, you do seem to have to have a knowledge of sorts of the first two games, but then this would be expected at the end of any trilogy. Also, there is some rather annoying aspects of the game that I found infuriating. Firstly, the 'flying' scenarios that occur are enough to make me throw the controller at the screen. Why they added this is a mystery, it goes back to 80's gaming where up, down, left, right and memorising the sequence as you die each time doesn't make for a satisfying experience. It wouldn't be so bad if you could potentially do it after a couple of go's, but by the end of the game, they get so ridiculous that you feel like relying on chance would be a better idea. There was also a sequence inside a cube where you had to hang onto a flying thing otherwise you get impaled on a spike. However, it all got a bit hectic and you had to wait to the last minute to do it successfully three times in a row, or you'd have to go back to the beginning which made for a lot of retries.

Apart from these few problems it makes for a terrific game and one that ends the series well. However, I couldn't help but feel I'd done all this before and it wasn't quite as varied as I would have liked. You cannot fault it for it's looks, style, story and gameplay but I just felt that as epic as it was, it would be the same thing but in a different backdrop and as varied as the weapons and enemies are, it is ultimately a hack'n'slash that compared to the more contemporary games coming out these days, feels slightly outdated. This might be a controversial statement, but it is by far the best of it's kind and perhaps the best-looking games on the PS3, but I can't get blinded by it's beauty as, at it's core, it's the same game as it was back in 2005.

Rating: 8/10

Shadow Of The Colossus

Taking a step back into a pre-gen console classic, The Wild Bore takes on the much-applauded Japanese game that is still being bid on like crazy on eBay and still sends tremors through the gaming world.

To some this is a vintage classic like no other. Never before, or since, has a game been so original, innovative and pain-achingly beautiful and yet remained so epic, simple to play and just fucking amazing. All this on a Playstation 2 and, even though playing it on a PS3 might pull up the graphics somewhat, it still looks incredible. But for those not already aware of this cult classic, what's it about?

You play a young lad who's missus is dead, and so to bring her back you take her to a forbidden land and make a deal with some sort of dark creature. The deal is you are to kill every single Colossi (or Colossus) and in return, she will be brought back to life. Simple enough. So with just your ancient sword guiding you, your bow and arrow and your faithful horse Agro for company, you are to travel the land and defeat the Colossi one by one.

Firstly, the graphics make you look like you are travelling through a painting. The colours and light can look rich at times, bleak in others, reflecting whether you're in a lush green field, a desert or atop a mountain. The sound is incredible and feels like you're in a fantasy film and even picks up the pace when you're duelling with a Colossi. The controls are fairly easy consisting of stabbing and shooting but you'll mostly be playing a balancing act between jumping, gripping and resting to get your strength back. Your horse Agro allows you to travel the plains and comes in use when dealing with certain enemies, he is in fact your most reliable and trustworthy, dare I say it, friend. You go up against so much together that if anything ever happens to him, you suddenly get really worried, it's only supposed to be a bloody game for God's sake!

So what actually happens? You basically have to kill 16 of these huge creatures and the set-up is the same in each scenario. You follow your sword to the fighting ground, a cut-scene introduces the Colossi, then you have to figure out a way to get on top of it and then climb your way to it's soft spots to kill it. Each one acts differently and it becomes a tactical game on a monumental scale, whether you have to jump on top of a huge bird-like creature, gallop alongside a sandworm one and jump off your horse or simply hold on to a water dragon one as it flows through the lakes. Each one is exciting and you have your heart in your throat each time, if you fall or fail, you will have to climb atop once again and it's all one big flowing world - you aren't cornered off at all, if you fall off a flying beast, you could land anywhere and have to find a way back. Some of these creatures you cannot even fathom how you are going to get on it, let alone kill it and it's the whole one small boy taking on a huge giant that reveals the passion behind the game. It's the idea of having all the odds stacked against you, having to tackle an issue a billion times bigger than yourself and all for the sake of love. Even as you defeat them one by one, you might be getting somewhat stronger but you soon realise you are growing paler as you absorb the dead souls and you understand that you are in fact, slowly dying.

There's nothing that can prepare you for dealing with the Colossi on such a monumental scale but rest assured you will be able to fathom out how to kill each one by using your smarts and gaming skills. There's nothing quite as satisfying as dealing that final killer blow, but as you wake up again with another black soul of the Colossi staring down at you, you cannot help but feel sorry for them as they are tend to be just going about their business until you turn up. Some of these monsters took quite a while to kill while others took no time at all but the main annoying point of the game was finding the buggers. I found myself often running around on my horse with no idea where to go and even, shock horror, used a walkthrough to figure out where the next one bloody was. This, to be fair, is enough to put people off but a minor irritant to a somewhat perfect game and, seeing as the environment is so bloody gorgeous, it's worth running around in it just to have a look.

So are there other flaws? Unfortunately yes, but teeny tiny ones. Mainly, I found controlling the horse somewhat annoying. Tapping 'x' to get him to go faster was just a nuisance and sometimes I found myself jumping around him when I'm trying to get on him which, in some urgent cases, left me screaming at the screen telling him to get on. Also the jumping/gripping combo feels like it needed a shine that something like Uncharted has, but seeing as this game was made in 2005 - you can't blame it!

This game makes me want to go back and complete Ico, which I never got round to doing and also conjures up exciting images of the next Team Ico project due out on PS3 later this year in Japan. It is also a reminder that, like movies, some games will always be perfect and this is another example of how video games should be winning awards for sheer originality if not for anything else, it's a work of art and should be treated as such. Never before had a game like this been created and never will it again. I can't imagine many game developers in America walking into the office going 'OK, one kid on a horse, 16 bosses - nothing else, and there's next to no dialogue' and everyone giving it the green light, but this comes from a time where the Japanese were taking chances and changing the course of gaming, which says a lot nowadays seeing as the country's gaming produce is somewhat of a cliche (new Yakuza game anyone? Jesus!).

There's a reason why this game is still doing well over five years on and if I was you, I'd even try buying a PS2 again just to play it. It might seem a bit much giving this a perfect score, but as soon as I completed it after a good 9 hours of gameplay, I started it again almost immediately. I don't think I've ever done that with a game before and so that's really saying something. If you like the classic David Vs. Goliath story, you might as well take it to the extreme because the Goliath's don't get much bigger than this. See that huge creature in the distance? The one that's about as tall as the Empire State building? Give it fifteen minutes and you'll soon be on top of it's head trying to stab it to death. A colossal score to a colossal game - if only there were more about like this.

Rating: 10/10