And in this corner, the challenger, Battlefield 3

Shooting things will always be fun

First-person shooters (FPS) sure have come a long way since the days of Wolfenstein and Doom. Heck, they’ve come a long way since Goldeneye and Half-Life, but even with all the advances in technology and on-line play, one thing remains constant – you’re just shooting things. Gamers’ desire to shoot people is sometimes baffling but I admit my guilt to enjoying such fun as well. It doesn’t matter if I’m shooting space aliens, World War II Germans, or modern-day terrorists, I cannot not play these games.

The reigning champion of the FPS for the past several years has been the Call of Duty franchise. It has covered just about every theme there is to have in real world-based war, from WWII to Vietnam to the Middle East. Regardless what you’re interested in shooting, Call of Duty can deliver and they’ve gone somewhat unchallenged for nearly five years, but this year that changes with the release of Battlefield 3 from EA.

Battlefield 3 is looking good so far.

Too much of a good thing

Let me disclose that I am a Call of Duty fan, although I’m not one of the guys that sits on the couch for six hours chatting with a headset. That being said, since the first Modern Warfare game, the gaming experience in the franchise has been fast, fun, challenging and exciting. They are good games, period. Yet after five years of playing what is essentially the same game over and over, you can’t help but start to get a little bored and even wonder if it’s time to give it all up. After the latest Call of Duty game, Black Ops, was released I was decidedly done with the franchise. I go into greater detail about my reasons at Morning Toast, but to sum it all up, the time between new games was too short and it felt like little more than a cash grab. So I started hoping for an alternative.

Battlefield 3 might be that alternative and it is coming out at a good time…when many are getting tired of Call of Duty. However, just because you are a fresh face in the crowd doesn’t guarantee success. Rather, it just means a lot of hype. Can Battlefield 3 live up to its “Call of Duty killer” hype? On one hand I would like to think so, but on the other I’m not sure but only thanks to varying information. Everything you’ll see online talking about Battlefield 3 shows gorgeous visuals, great sound and lots of shooting action. Looking at Battlefield and Call of Duty side-by-side, Battlefield seemingly has the edge…but…if you play the Battlefield 3 beta that is currently out on Xbox 360 then you might be scratching your head. I know I am.

Not enough of a good thing

After watching that video you’re probably thinking this game is going to look awesome, but, you see, the Battlefield 3 beta demo just doesn’t look that good. You’ll find roughly rendered character models, weird clipping problems, and just an overall lack of awe. The game I’m playing certainly doesn’t match up to the trailers and videos seen online. I know it has the “beta” disclaimer but in my head (and my world) beta means this is the last iteration of development before the game gets to stores. So by all rights the beta of any game should be the closest thing to being final as it’s usually going to be, shy of weird bugs and technical glitches. Especially considering the full game is released on October 25, only a couple weeks away, I would like to think that a beta would be the carrot at the end of the stick that gets me to plop down $60 at the end of the month, but right now I’m not sure. Of course, visuals are only a part of the recipe.

The game play of Battlefield 3 is pretty solid and doesn’t stray too far from what you would expect with any FPS game. This button shoots, that one jumps and the other reloads your gun. The game also comes packed with the expected customization of your characters with various guns, grenades, and supplies…again, nothing too extraordinary and at this point in time, not even a lot of different than you’ve seen in other modern-themed games. The beta for Battlefield 3 is limited to a single map and game mode where you’re either on a defending team or an attacking team. The game mode and map are pretty decent but the nature of the mode means it won’t be uncommon to have half hour or longer sessions, and over a single map it gets kind of exhausting and tiresome. I’m sure a normal deathmatch mode would be more exciting in the long run. Once nice thing that is a trait of the Battlefield franchise is respawning where your teammates are located. Unlike Call of Duty that randomly drops you in a location after you die, in Battlefield 3 you can choose a person to respawn next to, saving you the time and trouble of getting into the action.

The Battlefield 3 beta...not quite what I expected.

I’m a loner, Dottie. A rebel.

So those are the normal things I expected to find in Battlefield 3 and they’re all done really well, but the one difference I noticed quickly compared to Call of Duty is the focus on teams to succeed. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing but it’s not really my bag. I was raised on Doom and Quake, and all of those titles were played solo, Rambo-style…just run and shoot. For better or worse, I take that attitude into modern FPS games and that doesn’t always bode well for me. Call of Duty can lend itself to lone wolf gamers like myself but Battlefield 3 doesn’t appear to follow that same formula. Sure, you can go out and do your own thing but don’t expect to last very long. I experienced many a quick death in Battlefield 3 and not just because I’m not very good but because I have no patience to work in a team. Call of Duty is just a little more forgiving and I like need that.

Flip a coin

The new Modern Warfare 3 coming in November promises to be a great game but more of the same. Battlefield 3 boasts something new yet all I saw in the beta was more of the same and nothing too spectacular to set itself apart from Call of Duty. Do you go to something new just for the sake of it being new? Or do you go with a tried-and-true franchise knowing all too well that you’re paying $60 for a game you’ve purchased three times before? I don’t believe the Battlefield 3 beta is truly representative of the final product and that’s a shame because I wanted it to be awesome.

I’m not one of those gamers that shows up at midnight to buy a game. I don’t even pre-order. I always take my time when choosing what new games I purchase. With most games, they don’t get any less fun in six months, but these FPS games are the exact opposite because their fun and success relies entirely with online multiplayer gaming. You have to go where the people are. If you don’t jump on these games sooner than later, you’ll never catch up and you’ll waste your money. Nonetheless, I’m going to have to sit back and watch the battle that begins October 25th and goes through the end of the year. Before too long I’ll have to choose a side, but right now, I don’t know what side that will be.

Sony

Due to recent misfortunate events, CEO Jack Trenton was obliged to do some damage control at the beginning of their conference. After assuring us of the PSN’s resurrection and despite the fiscal damage the company has suffered that the PS3 is still keeping strong, we were given quick reminders of just how awesome things are to come. Uncharted 3, check. Resistance 3, check. Twisted Metal, check. Ico Collecition, check and mate. [Not to mention Infamous 2 literally releasing the same week as the con. More on that game another time.] AWe’ve known about all of these for some time, but probably their biggest surprise for me, game wise, was this:

Don't be so sly, Cooper. I'd recognize your shadow anywhere.

For those of us who played through the Sly Collection, we were treated with a little teaser, but this is the first time it’s been official: Sly 4 Thieves in Time is on the way, and while Sucker Punch no longer has the reigns (given to Sanzaru Games) it looks to be shaping up pretty well. There were, however, a few other surprises. For the online crowd, Warhawk is getting a successor called Starhawk, which has found a unique way to blend Action with RTS elements and make it visceral and fun. Another collection called God of War Origins is an HD/3D remastered version of the two PSP games, Chains of Olympus and Ghost of Sparta, which I guess is nice for guys like me who never bought the PSP.

Into the second third, it felt like Déjà vu as Sony continued to demonstrate the new uses of the PSMove (which I still haven’t bought). To be fair, the games they showcased this year were slightly more effective than last year (though I’m kind of confused what happened to Sorcery, the one use of Move they showed last year that intrigued me.) Medievil Moves, despite the disappointment that it wasn’t a revival of the classic Medievil franchise from the PS1, did demonstrate some impressive use of weapons. NBA 2K12 for the Move was Kobe Bryant approved. Even Bioshock Infinate (which is just awe inspiring in its own right) is getting the optional Move treatment, which is impressive when you consider creator Ken Levine openly opposed the idea of the peripheral when he first learned of it but has now openly admitted to embracing it. But enough of the Move. Let’s get to the main event.

It wins in the name category. PSV. Clean.

The whole final third of Sony’s conference was focused purely on the new peripheral, the Playstation Vita. So far, we got close to all the information on the system I was expecting when they first announced it. It has a decent name that’s easy to pronounce and we also got a price: $250 for the WiFi only version and $300 for the 3G powered by At&t. I was expecting the worse, but the lower price puts it at the same cost as the 3DS. So far the the games they displayed look great, the big one being Uncharted Golden Abyss, which, all kidding aside, looks just as good as its console counterparts. Capcom introduced a brand new crossover fighter, Street Fighter vs. Tekken, in which Infamous’ Cole McGrath makes a guest appearance. Easily the most “shocking” (sorry, I couldn’t resist) development of the game. Another impressive feature comes from a new Action RPG called Ruin, which showed off the ability to transfer games from PSVita to your PS3 and play the games on your big screen in full HD.

Call me cautiously optimistic on this one. If Sony can launch with a decent library, they just may be able to hold their own in the handheld market for once. (It will also help if they get rid of that annoying as hell kid).

Microsoft

Much like Sony (minus the PSN Outage damage control), Microsoft opened right up with showing their biggest hardcore titles first. Now as much as I want to avoid flashing my obvious Sony>Microsoft bias, I can’t help but point out Microsoft chose two 3^rd party games to open their conference (CoD Modern Warfare 3 and the new Tomb Raider reboot) while Sony opened with exclusives (Uncharted and Resistance). The games indeed looked great, but I’m just saying, those will be on the PS3 as well. Perhaps a further look into Gears of War 3 with Cliffy B. and guest appearance Ice T declaring he’s bringing Body Count back together to do a song exclusively for the game should more than make up for that.

And yet again, we revert the focus to motion controls.

Congrats. You have officially replaced Guitar Hero as the "Greatest Party game Eva."

Since the Kinect launch, Dance Central has become its biggest hit, so naturally a sequel is already underway. The Disneyland exploration game and Tim Shaffer’s Once Upon A Monster looked… cute. I’m absolutely certain they will sell great to the casual and family audience. What impressed me was Fable the Journey and its use of improvised spell casting. Mass Effect 3’s use of voice command to lead your squadron I’ll also give kudos too. I wish I could say I was more excited for the Star Wars Kinect but the force is not with me on that one (I honestly think the Move would have been much more fit for a Star Wars game [Pranger's Note: Agreed]).

And that was pretty much it. I guess you could count the Halo Combat Evolved Anniversary, but that’s a remake of a game we’ve played a dozen times. In the wake of their competitor’s new hardware, the 360 needs something that will pop and keep their audience’s attention.

Me and my big mouth.

Just when I thought Microsoft was out of ideas… they prove me right. The way I see it there are four kinds of gamers: 1.) Gamers who’ll love Halo forever. 2.) Gamers who can’t stand Halo anymore. 3.) Gamers who love Bungie and think this game will suck because it’s not made by them. 4.) Gamers who hate Bungie and think this game might be an improvement because it’s not made by them.  [Pranger's Note: 5.) Gamers who couldn't care less.] If this were five-to-seven years from now, than I can see this teaser being epic beyond belief. Yet regardless of where you fall in the above list, announcing a whole new Halo trilogy not a year after Bungie completed their run of the series with Reach just feels like the most safe, cheap, and uninspired thing they could do.

Nintendo

For the third time in a row, we start with some Déjà vu: Nintendo opens with Zelda. But wait, this isn’t about Skyward Sword, a game that was suppose to release last January, oh no. Nintendo announces in the wake of the series 25^th Anniversary that the Zelda orchestra will be performing in concerts across the world. While this is definitely a treat (because as we have discussed on this site before, Zelda music is AWESOME!) I just wish we had a confirmed release date for the game. We’ll just have to settle for “sometime this holiday” for now.

Then it was on to some 3DS news. After the portable’s lackluster launch library, Reggie introduces a whole batch of games that are certain to come by the end of the year, including Star Fox, Mario Kart, the new Super Mario (Tanooki! Yay!), Kid Icarus Uprising (Multiplayer! Yay!), as well as the surprise return of an infamous GameCube launch title that took a whole decade to get a sequel.

“]

I'm curious. How many people asked for this series' return? [Pranger's note: I did!

Besides those, as well as confirming that Skyward Sword will in fact be on the Wii, that’s really the only games Nintendo showed this year. By now, we’ve all heard the rumors of Nintendo’s new upcoming console, and even before this convention started we all knew it would be the biggest news of the whole Expo. With that, Nintendo pulled the curtain on the console that made us all question if it was even a console: The Nintendo Wii U.

Cue the hoards of Kung Pow references.

I almost don’t even know where to begin. Yes, it is an actual console, even though Nintendo focused strictly on the controller, which in-and-of-itself is an impressive piece of hardware. Yes, the console is backwards compatible with the Wii and can allow the Wiimote controller to interact with the screen on the new controller. Yes, it is an HD system running on 1080p. Yes, third party developers are already jumping on, bringing hardcore games like Batman Arkham City, Darksiders 2, and Ninja Gaiden 3 to the system. All this is great news.

BUT, there is still far too much left in the dark. Besides the third party support, there were no actual games confirmed for the system yet, with trailers showing only tech demos. (They did slyly throw out the name “Smash Bros,” but they have to show me first. THEN they can have all my money they want.) With controllers this huge and complex, how expensive will they be? For all we know, this system could still be over a year away from launch, but they hardly showed us any new Wii games to keep us busy until then.

Once again, Nintendo has demonstrated yet another piece of tech that could very well change the gaming industry, yet since we’ve had that exact reaction when the Wii was first unveiled and have since seen how that turned out, forgive us for being a little more cautious this time around.

And That’s Not All…

Link, Kratos, and Master Chief can duke it out all they want. Meanwhile, there are so many amazing third party games that it’s hard not to please anyone this year, thanks to stuff like this absolutely gorgeous side-scroller from Ubisoft:

How have I never played this series? I will definitely change that.

• Elder Scrolls V, Skyrim: An absolute show stealer. Those dragons look outstanding.
• Assasins Creed Revelations: Honestly do not know how those games get better every year.
• Star Wars The Old Republic: Still no launch date. Sad day.
• Batman Arkham City: Get to play as Catwoman? Sweetness!
• Bioshock Infinite: Sometimes, the best sequels are ones that forget they’re a sequel and do their own thing entirely… like going from the Seaworld to Skyworld.
• El Shaddai, Ascension of the Metatron: The demo is available online. I command everyone to download it from Xbox Live or PSN IMMEDIATELY!

With the exception of the last one, none of these were real surprises, though they’re all shaping out to be great. But lets go to something that was actually a new development. Insomniac Games, who worked exclusively for Sony for the past 16 years with the distinction of never, ever, EVER making a bad game, announced last year that they would be working on a whole new property with EA Partners to go multiplatform. Even though they already had both Resistance 3 and Ratchet and Clank All 4 One set to release this fall, they somehow made room to announce a third game: A four player co-op super-spy adventure with a great sense of style, personally, humor, unique weapons, and stellar writing the company is known for.

Thanks Insomniac.

And with that, I am officially exhausted. So tell me, what are you all excited for?

Want to talk about games? We got you covered:

-Five remakes we should have seen at E3

-Ten Games That Changed Everything

-Top 10 Things About E3 I’m Sick Of

I am so ready to let Tyson break my nose again. Bring it!

Fight Night is a series built around an extremely complicated set of controls to master. Each new iteration tries to tweak the controls in such a way to make them more accessible to every new gamer, but they’re still complicated to learn, purely because there isn’t a single other game I can think of that controls like Fight Night games do. You throw punches by flicking the left thumbstick, jabbing by pressing upward, sending hooks by flicking to the side, that sort of thing. I was brought up on Round 3, but the controls have changed drastically since then. This will be an issue for me, but I’ll explain that later.

The big addition here is the story mode, a first for the series but a very welcome first. Besides just playing through a career mode as whomever you want to box as, be they real boxers or someone you made up, the game lets you play through the rise and fall of Andre Bishop. The game begins with you controlling Bishop in a boxing match in prison before tossing you around points of his career to learn how he was framed and tossed in jail and then eventually got out and climbed the ranks of professional fighters once more. This is the selling point for Champion in my book as the story is actually pretty compelling for a boxing story, mostly due to how brutal it actually is with real cursing and corruption, as you’d expect the world of boxing to be.

I was amazed to hear that EA was going to allow one of their sports titles to be rated M, but it really works here. The M rating mostly comes as a result of the language used, but hell, boxers get destroyed in the ring even more devastatingly than they ever have thanks to the graphics getting yet another major kick. Cuts can open in just about any spot on a character’s body and begin bleeding, making the damage appear graphically realistic beyond any previous entry in the Fight Night series. If you’re looking for a game’s graphics to impress you, Fight Night Champion will not disappoint.

Suddenly my desire to get into real boxing has evaporated.

Another place the M rating goes to work is the soundtrack, allowing for mostly unedited versions of the tracks played over the course of the game. The soundtrack is its usual appropriate self with a lot of hip-hop setting the tone very well, but the sound doesn’t just stop at the music. The sound effects for gloves colliding with faces and bodies taking unrelenting punishment sound as glorious and powerful as you’d hope, making every knockout satisfying from a perspective of sound.

Still, the controls have been simplified just a hair since Round 4 and play so much different from Round 3 that if you’re like me and still pop in Round 3 now and again, you’re going to have to relearn the controls all over again, something that may be a pain if all you really want to do is just hop right in and take full advantage of the better graphics and story mode. However, the biggest improvement over all previous titles is the in-between rounds damage recovery. There are no more mini games or points to spend on recovering, instead just recovering your boxer comparable to how well you did in the round, meaning you’ll recover more if you killed in the round and recover less if your face has been turned to ground beef. I couldn’t be happier with that change as it really emphasizes playing well over just learning the healing system better than your opponent.

And that’s the real draw of Fight Night Champion: You get out of it what you put in. If you take the time to learn the controls and practice getting smarter with your strategies, seeking to understand the nuances of the sport, you’re going to get a lot out of the title. Sure, place the difficulty at a lower level and you can flick the thumbstick all over the place and still enjoy yourself, but if you want to see the depth Champion has to offer, give it time and let it grow on you.

You learn the controls, not only do you enjoy the game more but you feel better about yourself, too.

When it comes right down to it, I currently still prefer Round 3 over Champion, but that all has to do with my knowledge of the controls. The addition of the story mode and not having to worry about anything between rounds goes a long way to make me really want Fight Night Champion, but in the end it’s all up to your decision. If you’ve never played a Fight Night game, this is a great one to start with, but if you have Round 3, maybe look me up and we’ll go a few rounds online.

So then, what do you guys think? Who out there is looking to pick up Fight Night Champion? And who feels like passing? Leave a comment and let me know. In the meantime, I have a lot of training to do.

Want more game reviews? Check these out:

-Today’s Forecast: Sunny With a Review of Bulletstorm

-Doing The PS3 Proud:  A Review of Killzone 3

-The Old Is Still New: A Review of Dragon Quest VI

A symphony of destruction. From the creators of Gears of War and Painkiller.

You are Grayson Hunt, the once proud cool-headed leader of Dead Echo; a once proud and proficient black ops team ran by the 26th Century Confederation of Planets. But not any more. Turns out Echo’s boss, General Serrano, (who could only be properly defined with words that are far too inappropriate for Toy-TMA) was using their talents to enforce his own totalitarian brand of peacekeeping on the real good guys; something our guys weren’t too happy to find out. Fast forward ten years later, where Captain Hunt is now a guilt ridden drunk of a space pirate and the most wanted man in the galaxy, and all his Dead Echo buddies are… well… dead mostly, save for one, Ishi Sato. After ramming their ship into the engine of Serrano’s precious flagship Ulysses (the Roman name of the Greek warrior Odysseus) our broken antiheroes (Grey mentally, Ishi physically) find themselves crash landing on the abandon resort planet Stygia. And hilarity ensues.

Contrary to popular belief, this is not a Marvel/DC crossover staring Wolverine and Cyborg.

So no, this story isn’t doing anything groundbreaking for an FPS by any stretch of the imagination, but I do feel that it’s worth mentioning that Bulletstorm feels like it purposely sought to be very tongue and cheek. It is almost the opposite effect of the Killzone 3 story, a game that tries so hard to create this huge epic drama on war while keeping a straight face, even when its performance just isn’t up for the task. Bulletstorm however, had no intentions of taking itself seriously, instead letting the gameplay take the reigns, yet the slightest hints of development in these very familiar gaming troupes that define our protagonists felt surprisingly genuine. Remember how I said the flagship was called Ulysses? Well I myself am sensing just a little symbolism with the Odyssey, with Grey being the broken captain in a decade-long mission that leads all of his allies to death.

At the very least, its plot and writing is a heck of a lot more enjoyable than the Gears of War games.

"#%^&, this thing is pissed! What did you do, kill its babies?” “No… wait… maybe?”

You know what IS unique about this game? The setting. Planet Stygia is literally an entire resort planet. Think of it as a rundown Las Vegas: plenty of sunny skies, beautiful waterfalls, miles of countryside, hotels on every corner, exotic plant life, VERY exotic plant life, rampaging thousand-foot-tall monsters, oh yeah, and every single human resident on the planet has mutated into savage gangsters, or worse, cannibals. Have fun.

And fun is exactly what this game delivers. The shooting element of this game runs on a Skill Point system where you score points on all the unique and interesting ways you kill your enemies. Grayson is armed with an electron leash that reels enemies in, as well as both a kick and slide technique, that can all be used to line your target up in slow motion for certain skill shots. If you just try to play this game conservatively like other competitive shooters (or rushing in guns blazing for that matter), you’re going to have some problems. See, your progression relies on your will to experiment, as these skill points are needed for you to pay for new weapons, upgrades, and ammo. Sure there are the typical points for head shot, crotch shot, burn, electrocute, impale, but there’s also points for kicking people off cliffs, throwing them into cacti, feeding them to man-eating-plants, poisoning them with anger toxin so they attack themselves, and let;s not forget the X-Ray.

How many games let you de-fleshitize noobs and NPCs alike? That’s right, one.

For those of you into the online multiplayer crowd, this may seem like a refreshing change of pace. Now, you are not scored by your body count, but more on your style. Yeah, that’s a swell massage to teach gamers: “It’s not about how many people you kill, it’s how you kill them.”

Its already obvious, but I’ll say it anyway. This game is definitely not for kids. It is violent to the third power and the language is unabashedly profane. If you are someone who is even the slightest bit uncomfortable with harsh language, then might I consider spending your time and money elsewhere.

So the game showcases some excellent ideas and amazing action set pieces. A whole lot of them, like the chase from the Ferris wheel in the desert, and the boss fight with the giant plant, are spaced out pretty well in the beginning and middle of the campaign. Too bad the final act doesn’t have anything that really matches those moments. Instead, it jacks up the difficulty by increasing the enemy count, adds some Quick-Time-Events, and calls it a climax. The story’s conclusion, I was pretty much fine with, yet the post-credit scene kind of weirded me out.

Despite all that, I still had a blast with Bulletstorm, and that’s coming from someone who isn’t the biggest FPS fan. I liked the protagonists. I hated the antagonist (in the way you are suppose to). The dialogue, if you can handle it, is colorful and hilarious in its own way. Plus, how can you not have fun with a game that gives you a remote-controlled-robot-T-Rex with laser beams attached to its head?

Want more game reviews? Check these out:

-Doing The PS3 Proud: A Review of Killzone 3

-The Old Is Still New: A Review of Dragon Quest VI

-For The Win: A Review of Marvel vs Capcom 3

Well, horrors beyond horror have appeared again. What's an unlikely hero to do?

Visceral Games has thus far given us two games worth noting, the first Dead Space, a completely unexpected hit, and Dante’s Inferno, a game best not talked about any more now that I just remembered it. Taking everything from the first game and fine-tuning it for the sequel, Visceral Games has managed to craft a second game in a series worth existing and certainly worth the typical asking price for a Triple A title.

Back is Isaac Clarke, the unlikely hero from the first game, except now he’s a little off his gourd with some mild insanity and hallucinations and whatnot that you’d expect from someone whom saw all manner of unspeakable horrors previously. He’s on a space station called the Sprawl, and as you’d expect, Bad Things Happen. Specifically, Necromorphs return in spades and seek to throw him into a tailspin of nightmares.

So does Visceral Games succeed in nightmare-worthy throwing? Yes. Dead Space 2 is packed to the rafters with Monster Closets (events you trigger purposefully for a monster to jump out and go “BOO!”), but it doesn’t feel like the usual schlock here, mostly because encounters with enemies aren’t just simple, “Oh, I shot you and now you’re dead” battles. The controls are tight, which you’ll need since each extended encounter with enemies can leave you physically winded in the real world after you realize you’ve been panicking as a result of tough fights in-game. Basically, the Monster Closets only add to the stress and “horror” of being ill prepared for a fight against the looming threat of more and more Necromorphs.

Really though, if these things began jumping out at me in real life, I'd be pretty terrified.

Much like the early Resident Evil titles, ammo drops are a bit less frequent than you’d probably feel safe having, meaning you’ll have to be more careful with your shots and with what weapons you use. If you use just the first weapon, the Plasma Cutter (making its glorious return from the first Dead Space), for the extent of the game, you’ll pretty much only get ammo drops for that weapon, but if you decide to mix things up and try all the weapons out, ammo drops will start coming in a wider variety, meaning you’ll have ammo for everything but only a little bit for each. Take your pick which is better between sticking to one gun or having a chronic lack of ammo.

The presentation is what sells Dead Space 2 more than anything. Graphically (I don’t care about these whatsoever on average but people want to know), the game looks excellent. No one should be throwing any sort of hissy fits about textures or shadows or other random unimportant features as everything here is flawless. The sound, too, is in a league of its own, though at times it can be difficult to hear characters talking over the loudness of the rest of the sound mix, so be aware that you may need to adjust some settings to get things just right.

Oh, and I forgot to mention, but Dead Space 2 is surprisingly not for children. Blood flies everywhere, body parts litter the screen like clouds in the sky, and incredibly graphic fatalities occur to both the warped enemies and Isaac himself. No kids allowed on Sprawl! Go home and keep playing Call of Duty or whatever it is you kids play these days.

Little kids, you wouldn't get the level of character development that's going on here anyway.

To cap things off, there is a multiplayer mode to the game that just sort of exists for no other reason than to be the standard multiplayer experience now required in games. The single-player campaign will last you between eight to 12 hours, but the multiplayer modes will probably wear thin after one or two. They just aren’t very good, pitting human characters against other players controlling Necromorphs. Both sides can level up with a progression system, but it’s really not worth the effort to continue playing this portion of the game. Stick to the single-player and you’ll be fine, though if you enjoy the multiplayer, more power to you.

And that’s it. Dead Space 2 is worth a rent, a buy, or a- well I guess those are the only two options, aren’t there? You can pick this up for the PS3, Xbox 360, or PC, and each version works perfectly fine, so get out there and start fighting Necromorphs. Your sanity depends on it.

Want more game reviews? Check these articles out:

-Little Changes, Big Smiles: A Review of Little Big Planet 2

-Not Quite An Epic Win: An Epic Mickey Review

-The Missing Link: A Review of Donkey Kong Country Returns

Is it just me or does this guy keep reminding you of Kane and Lynch?

There is nothing new or original from Medal of Honor. There isn’t anything inherently wrong with it, but everything it brings to the table has already been brought to the table by someone else, mainly Modern Warfare. The controls are even 1-to-1 between the two games. It does everything just as competently as previous entries in the quickly crowding “wars that are currently happening or could happen very soon” market, but there’s nothing new to speak of. I could just copy/paste paragraphs from reviews of Modern Warfare 2 and Battlefield: Bad Company 2 and you’d have a review of Medal of Honor, though that’s not surprising since the two teams that make up the developers for Medal of Honor previously worked on Modern Warfare and Battlefield: Bad Company.

So if there isn’t anything worth talking about, what should I really say? The game looks good, sounds good, plays good, and is, for lack of a more original word, good. I just don’t care. The multiplayer mode, the aspect that anyone will really care about (and you’ll have to since the single player campaign is under six hours long and amazingly easy), is also exactly like a bunch of other multiplayer modes, meaning you might as well stick with the game you currently have and still play all the time.

I feel like I've seen this somewhere before...

I’m only half way through this review and I’m out of things to say, so let’s talk about the whole Taliban controversy nonsense thing, huh? While the Taliban are still in the game as obviously evil bad guys (stupid bad guys that will do everything short of painting a target on their heads to allow you the simplest kills possible), they are no longer playable in the multiplayer mode. They WERE initially in the multiplayer as one of the two playable sides, but because so many people spoke up about it, they’ve been removed. Or rather, they’ve been renamed “The Opposing Forces,” which is about as half-assed of a fix as you can get. They might as well have just replaced the Taliban with Spartans for how little they seemed to care on the basic level. EA should have stuck to its guns and just kept the Taliban named “The Taliban” in multiplayer. Who cares? We all know who they’re supposed to be at this point, so it doesn’t make a difference. It’s like if EA had programmed a character who runs around in overalls and a red hat shouting “Let’s a-go” but decided that calling him “Overalls Man” was enough of a change and anyone who called him Mario was wrong. That’s what this feels like.

Gee, I wonder who could live in that house? I bet it's Russians.

Anyway, Medal of Honor isn’t going to offend you any more than all the other games where the entire point can be boiled down to “Justifiable Genocide.” It’s not even going to be a title you’ll remember a few years down the road. It’s just there. It’s a really well-made sandwich that you’ll eat, enjoy, and then pass before moving on to another sandwich that tastes roughly the same and performs the same function of giving you a hunger fix. Even I love sandwiches, but I get tired of eating the same sandwich for every meal. That’s what Medal of Honor is. It is a delicious sandwich made by employees from Subway and Quiznos but not actually sold at either Subway or Quiznos. And now I want a sandwich, so please excuse me.

Want more reviews? Check these out:

-A Miserable Pile  Secrets: A Review of Castlevania: Lords of Shadow

-Just Stay Dead: A Review of Dead Rising 2

-How To Reach The Masses: A Review of Halo: Reach

No seriously, you've seen this game before.

I called it. I’d only played the demo for Dante’s Inferno but that was all I needed to figure this one out entirely. Now that it’s been out for a week or so, let’s take a look at Dante’s Inferno as it plays as a game, though I could probably just tell you to go play God of War and get the desired effect. Whoops. Let’s start.

Creating New Games Must Be Hard

As I’ve already pointed out, Dante’s Inferno is absolutely a God of War rip-off. There’s no denying it, even if you want to. The games both have main characters seemingly tricked by dark forces and require you to battle your way through hordes of enemies with hack-and-slash controls and Quick Time Events, ultimately leading to a resolution that entails fighting a god or Satan or whatever.

So for this game, Dante, based off the classic Italian poet of the same name but not of the same anything else, must storm all nine circles of Hell to reclaim his love Beatrice, taken from him by Lucifer for some reason or another. It’s all supposed to be based off of Dante’s Inferno from The Divine Comedy, but we know better, don’t we?

You deserve every ounce of punishment you receive, Dante.

The game does play smoothly enough to be played, and it has a heck of a lot to look at much of the time. The first third of the game throws some truly messed up enemies at you that relate to their respective levels, such as Gluttony or Lust. Problem is, after that these enemies begin showing up again and again in circles other than the ones they make sense in. Right there is where Visceral Games loses its credibility when they say, “We used the poem exactly for inspiration.” No, you got lazy.

What makes this all worse is that the final third of the game consistently throws you into battle after battle on a platform without any real innovation or anything new. You just fight enemy after enemy for the finale stages of the game. That’s not good game design; that’s once again a sign of laziness. And of course the ending leaves itself open for a sequel. Looks like this is going to be a whole franchise if it sells well enough. So let’s try not to let it sell well, okay?

I just can’t get past the game’s two defining characteristics: It’s resemblance to God of War, and it’s use of a classical poem as a backdrop. I realize making games can be tough, and thinking up an original concept is even tougher, but just taking two already successful things with nearly no relation and deciding, “Yes, this is what our next game shall be,” well that just doesn’t work for me.

Maybe you’ll really like Dante’s Inferno, though. It’s not a terrible game. It’s just a game that’s two elements have been done before and done a lot better. Either go play God of War or read The Divine Comedy. Rent this one if you absolutely can’t resist.

If I had any amount of stamina, I'd totally want to play soccer.

Something about football games don’t exactly appeal to me. Maybe it’s the fact that year after year they tend not to focus so much on progressing the series in favor of just updating the roster. Little did I know that such is not the case with real football, by which I mean soccer, the world’s favorite sport. Turns out FIFA Soccer ’10 is awesome, assuming you like soccer that is. Want to know more? Let’s talk about it some more.

The FIFA brand is still similar to the Madden brand in so much as there are new FIFA games roughly once a year. Beyond that, FIFA sits apart as a franchise that goes way out of its way to do everything possible to increase the overall experience of the game. This year gets the addition of new controls that allow you to juggle the ball more in depth than before. You’re able to make your character dance around with the ball with such control that you become amazing, though this isn’t without some drawbacks. The main one is, it’s bloody difficult to juggle the ball correctly. I don’t know much about soccer, so controls like this just make for more homework for me.

The same goes for the maneuvers you can program into your team to execute whenever you see fit. I don’t know the finer points of soccer well enough to make these features work for me. But this game wasn’t built for me; it was built for the hardcore soccer fan, and if you happen to be one of those, FIFA Soccer ’10 has made sure to be as intuitive to your needs as it ever has been.

Lots To Enjoy For Soccer Fans

Even more for the fans is the staggering amount of teams to choose from. There are hundreds of teams to pick and play as or against in dozens of venues. You’ll have your work cut out for you if you intend to master the nuances of every team, but at least you’ll have something to do for a while.

If you hadn't noticed, the game also looks pretty darn good overall.

So what could make this better? Excellent online support, that’s what. Beyond just simply being able to upload your face onto a player, the online feature allows for great matchmaking against all sorts of players all over the world. You’d just better know what you’re doing as there is a sharp difference between players that have put in the time and effort to rawk this game and those that just rented it this weekend. You’ll want to have spent some serious time training your players before you attack the other powerhouses on the online circuit. At least you’ll always have something to do.

And that’s about it. FIFA Soccer ’10 is perfect for soccer fans, but anyone unimpressed with the sport probably won’t enjoy this one for obvious reasons. If you’ve never tried a soccer game and find yourself curious, FIFA Soccer ’10 is a good place to start. You might just find yourself hopelessly addicted like the rest of the world.

Sequels are just getting better and better these days.

Mass Effect 2 is now out. Do I have much to say about it? Not really. It’s too big of a game, and worse, there’s nothing interesting to talk about. Why? Because the game is top-notch excellent, and reviews about great games all tend to be on the dull side. I have few gripes, but I can at least tell you the main selling points. Should I do that? Probably. Let’s continue.

The game’s biggest selling point is also the biggest drawback for me when it comes to the scope that Mass Effect is attempting to create. Mass Effect 2 is a game that branches off in different directions based on choices you make in the game, but there’s more to it. Did you play the first Mass Effect? If so, your save file will be read by Mass Effect 2 and change the game accordingly, meaning that if you want a true Mass Effect experience you should be expected to play not only the first game but the second game in the series all the way through, creating two alternate play-throughs. What makes this even bigger is the fact that the third game in the series will have this feature as well. Choose carefully unless you have a lot of time to kill.

Man, isn't the future gonna be sweet?

And that’s my only hesitation for the franchise. Mass Effect 2 is well-made and enjoyable what with the combat being improved over the first game and the characters remaining engaging and likeable, but it will take upwards of 40 hours of gameplay to get near some semblance of completion for just the second game alone. If I want to replay the game I have to set aside enough time to play for 40 hours total, plus however long it takes for me to get through the first game. That’s a hefty request, though at least the experience is a good one.

Adult situations Are For Adults Only, Obviously

Parents, you may remember the first Mass Effect getting flack for containing an adult scene with nudity. Yes, there was the option to engage in “certain acts” with some of the female characters, but the acts were neither gratuitous, nor were they tastelessly done. However, they did exist and they exist again in Mass Effect 2. Just be warned that if kids are playing Mass Effect 2 they will be exposed to adult situations, though not before going through a lot of heavy gun-inclusive violence. Take your pick which is worse and parent accordingly.

Overall, as I’ve said, I don’t have very much to say about Mass Effect 2. The consensus between reviewers is that it’s a great game and I’ve been hearing the usual buzz about “Game of the Year” that’s inevitable when a game is universally reviewed positively. Certainly pick up Mass Effect 2 if it sounds like it interests you, though don’t worry about needing the first game in the series as the sequel does allow you to choose what choices you’d prefer were made before you begin. So choose wisely.

Is Dante's Inferno offensive? Let's Think Deep. Also yes.

Usually I tend to be very silly and less serious than the typical individual when I write my articles. That’s just my style and also because I have the mental capacity of a seven-year-old. However, I’m about to go into a Let’s Think Deep that is going to tread on some extremely serious, touchy, and possibly inflammatory grounds. I’m going to be talking about Christianity, or more specifically, how Christianity appears in Dante’s Inferno. Not the classic Italian poem. No, the new video game based on said epic, and I use the phrase “based on” extremely loosely. So if you’re ready to Think Deep, let’s begin.

A Book You Should Have Read

If you don’t already know the background for the things I’ll be discussing, don’t worry, I’ll fill you in as best I can. Firstly, you need to know that Dante’s Inferno is the first part of three of The Divine Comedy, an epic poem written by a one Dante Alighieri, in which the author goes on a journey through Hell guided by the Roman poet Virgil, a real historical figure Dante looked up to. This is all very serious business here. Most people don’t realize that Dante’s Inferno is only part one of three since the other two parts, taking place in Purgatory and Heaven, respectively, aren’t as interesting since it is really hard to top the imagery that Hell can conjure up.

Dante’s journey takes him through nine circles of Hell, each having specific punishments and tortures for the various individuals trapped there for all eternity, usually involving ironic punishments for their sins, such as corrupt politicians being boiled in a lake of pitch, representing their sticky fingers and dark secrets. There are a ton of things like that (I chose a less-violent punishment for demonstration, but rest assured, it can get gruesome), and as Dante traverses these circles he speaks with various residents, learning what they did to end up here. What makes this even better is the inclusion of people Dante actually knew in the circles as a way of him gaining poetic justice (yes, pun totally intended). If he hated you and thought you made his life miserable in some way, you better believe he placed you in Hell somewhere along his trip.

Dante is a voyeur throughout the poem as all he does is just watch. He doesn’t get to save anyone or change anything, nor is he ever in any real danger since the whole point of this journey is to help him understand how NOT to wind up there. In the third part of The Divine Comedy a woman named Beatrice, also based on a real person whom Dante had never met in real life but always loved, escorts him through Heaven. And that’s the story of Dante’s Inferno and beyond as it was actually written.

So how the heck did EA take that and come up with this:

Oops, I don't think Visceral Games really "got" Dante's poem.

Because “God of War” Was already Taken

I played through the demo last night to fully understand what was happening in the game, and so far I have learned that, mainly, EA wanted to get in on some of God of War’s popularity but couldn’t use Greek and Roman mythology since it would look too much like God of War. So their likely conclusion was to absolutely bastardize a brilliant piece of literature and in doing so totally tick me off.

Dante’s Inferno, the EA version developed by Visceral Games, stars Dante, a knight of some sort from the Third Crusade that apparently has a sordid past. He is killed by some random, worthless enemy in the very beginning of the game but refuses to die and fights Death, somehow beating him and stealing his scythe (made from bones of course). Dante travels home to find his loving fiancé Beatrice dead, just because, and Lucifer is stealing her soul, prompting Dante to chase after him into Hell to find her, getting advice from Virgil as he goes. Do you see the connection to the original poem? Yes, I do too, and it doesn’t really hold up. If I made a soup and said it was based on a ham sandwich you’d probably look at me like I was stupid, even after I told you I put some ham in the soup just so I could call my soup a ham sandwich.

A Thesis Statement At Last

But now comes the tricky part: Why would EA and Visceral Games choose Dante’s Inferno as a suitable background for a video game? I can come up with multiple reasons. First, they want to get street-cred as the developer/producer that used a piece of classical literature for source material in a game, a point I’ll refute in time. Secondly, they want to be able to gather shock value for being able to say, “Yeah, we went there,” since Dante’s Hell, the one from the actual poem, is incredibly graphic and for mature audiences only. More on that later. And lastly, and probably most importantly, they saw how popular God of War was, as I already said, and needed a way to recreate that “epic storyline” without resorting to Greek and Roman mythology. That is where I’ll draw a lot of my arguments here. So let’s get ready to Think Deeper.

You remember in The Divine Comedy where Dante fought with Death? Apparently I wasn't reading closely enough.

Credibility Only Goes So Far

As my first main point states, transforming Dante’s Inferno from an epic poem to an epic video game does garner some semblance of credibility since it’s something you rarely see in video games. It’s supposed to be a big step towards making video games more respectable, but they entirely fumble the concept when they attempt to think past, “Okay, so let’s ride on the respected poem’s popularity.” I’m an English major and a writer, so yeah, there are a few things I actually respect beyond Ninja Turtles and Super Mario Bros. I have a high love of Shakespeare for one because I’m big into writing dialogue and Shakespeare was the master of dialogue. I’m also big on Milton’s Paradise Lost as it deals with The Fall From Grace, a subject I constantly deal with in my own stories. You could probably see the connection to The Divine Comedy since it deals so well with Heaven, Hell, and what sends you to either according to one man’s opinion. So messing with this is going to immediately prick up my warning signals that something is amiss.

The thing is, they won’t be pulling in the people they want to pull in by saying the game is connected to classic literature. People that have already read Dante’s Inferno and loved it will absolutely hate the video game version, partly because it takes something they loved and took out all the parts they enjoyed. It will, however, strengthen the crowd of gamers that believe whatever they’re told about their games, so when they find out this game with breasts and decapitation and everything is “based” on a classic poem, they’ll get the impression that shallowness all around is not only awesome, but it’s defended by classical literature.

Also, basing something off of anything doesn’t instantly make it good. When was the last time a movie-game turned out to be even half as respected as the critically acclaimed movie it was based on? Were The Godfather games something stellar? Not exactly. Sure, they weren’t bad, but they definitely didn’t share the credibility that the movies do. But in this case, Dante’s Inferno isn’t just taking a basic concept and running with it, it’s completely forgetting the parts that the original was based on. Dante’s Inferno the poem was an allegory about the human soul’s journey to redemption and repentance. Dante’s Inferno the video game is about shock value through and through. Not getting the outrage here? Try taking The Chronicles of Narnia and deciding to make a video game where Aslan goes around killing everything in order to save some kids that accidentally stumbled into Narnia. See how the original fanbase reacts to the changes you make. I’m still undecided as to whether the new book-deal is a good thing or a bad thing since Dante’s Inferno the poem is now being reprinted with the same cover as Dante’s Inferno the video game, bone-scythe-wielding crusader and all. Sure, it’ll tick off a lot of people expecting the book to be anything like the video game, but at least it gets people to read the source material.

It's surprisingly hard to find "Family Friendly" images of this game. No kids, don't go looking.

A Shocking Truth

Now about my second point, the whole “shock value” thing, you lose any credibility you may have had using a classic poem when you decide to use as much shock value as possible afterward. You can’t rightfully say you were inspired by the poem when you then go on to sexualize violence to the basest degree. The God of War series romanticizes, sexualizes, and fetishizes violence in every way possible, but so does the source material of Greek and Roman mythology. Dante’s Inferno was, and I know I’m repeating myself, a poem about NOT romanticizing ANYTHING sinful. It was meant to be an extremely heavy-handed warning about any and all sins, even going so far as creating a “Boogieman” effect where the reader is so terrified to experience these horrors themselves that they are prompted to remember these details whenever they sin or come close to sinning. Dante in the story has no chance to fix anything he sees and neither does the reader. The shock value sticks. I’ll always remember the scene where Dante witnesses a line of souls eternally being sliced in half by a demon with a massive sword, only to be healed as they walk around and wait their turn to be hacked in half once more. That’s poetically shocking.

Dante’s Inferno the video game doesn’t have shock value that means anything since you play as Dante yourself. You see something shocking in Hell, no problem, you get to kill it. The actual shock and horror of the events don’t stick in your mind, but rather how cool you look when you kill the demon in some spectacular display of “Hoorah!” and Quicktime Events. Just because it has an entire level devoted to the sin of “Lust” where everything is a phallic symbol or a breast or a piece of anatomy and then makes sure none of that looks sexy doesn’t make it poetic or clever or any of that. You want shocking with a point? Play Silent Hill 2. The enemies are all representations of sexual depravity in one way or another but you’re never told this straight-out. When you figure it out, it takes you to a new level of “Whoa,” but in Dante’s Inferno, no, it just isn’t happening. It just gets too difficult to make much of a statement when the main character is going around goring everything he sees with a scythe made from a human spine. Nuh-uh, not gonna fly.

Why is that? There has to be a point to all the shocking things you throw at someone and then beyond that there needs to be a real grounding point for people to relate to. In Silent Hill 2, the main character has lost his wife but harbors guilt since he was the one that killed her, though he has a subconscious discomfort with sexual images due possibly to the extended period his wife was sick before her death. There is character depth from seeing enemies inspired by subconscious fears or phobias. Dante’s Inferno just throws shock after shock at you but none that relate specifically to Dante since all he has to do is slash his way to rescue his lost love. Yes, there is a sub-plot about him repenting for his own sins, but those sins all relate to murdering people since he was a crusader and that’s all they did (no offense to practicing crusaders of course).

With using Hell as the jumping ground for the game, Visceral Games get to throw in everything they possibly want in terms of shocking. All I’ve done is play the demo and see the trailer for the game and I can already tell the sort of things they think are shocking and I can safely say, oops, God of War sort of did it first. There’s just a problem of having Dante being capable of fighting off any threat since he’s already killed Death. Why should these shocking things actually be shocking to him? Or to us for that matter? I’m at a loss there, so I’ll just move on to my most inflammatory point.

Turning a Religion into a Joke For Profit

So why Dante’s Inferno? As I said, the God of War franchise already had Greek and Roman mythology secured as its domain. No other big titles were allowed to touch it, especially when emulating the style of God of War, i.e. a hack n’ slash with Quicktime Events, a fascination with over-the-top fatalities, and above all an otherworldly atmosphere. Greek and Roman mythology is off limits, so where does Visceral Games turn? Christian mythology. And there is my main problem: They’ve reduced fundamental Christian beliefs and concepts to a level that matches Greek and Roman mythology. You. Just. Can’t. Do. That.

This is pushing it right here for tasteful.

Why is that? Because they’re also doing it wrong insomuch as the subject matter needs to be handled with far more care than they’re allotting it. This is all speculation off of the demo, mind you, but I’d assume I have a fairly good grasp of where things are going. If EA would like to send me a copy to review, sure, I’d be all for being a bit more fair in my assessment. As of now I have to go off of the demo and everything I’ve heard about the game, such as the marketing campaign of “Looking like jackasses.” So far EA has tried to do a marketing campaign that hits as many of the seven deadly sins at it can, with it’s E3 promotion going hilariously bad when it went for Lust, telling gamers to go snap a picture with the most attractive Booth Babe to win glittering prizes. Later, they sent game journalists a $200 check and said that if they cash it they’re guilty of Greed but if they don’t cash it they’re guilty of Waste. Finally, a box was once more sent to game journalists that when opened Rickrolled them and wouldn’t stop until they smashed the box, demonstrating Wrath. These sins cannot and should not be used as marketing campaigns since the executives at EA are attempting to be oh-so clever with things that aren’t exactly black and white according to individuals that believe and study the Bible. Even worse, EA hired people to protest their own game as a means of inciting some sort of promotion or news coverage. This means they effectively protested their own game in such a way that they made Christian protesters look bad, so now everyone will think you’re ridiculous if you ACTUALLY protest the game. That’s just shameful EA.

But why am I bothered by the game itself? Because of one simple function the game allows Dante to do: either condemn or absolve souls. Let me stop for a moment of poetic silence and let you think about the meanings behind this before I continue. So once more, Dante, the main character of the game, is able to choose between condemning souls by gutting them, or absolving their sins by forcing a glowing Crucifix into their face.

Contemplate this now.

I'm serious.

If you haven’t seen a problem, and I’m seriously not trying to be silly, you need to think REALLY hard about what’s happening here. Yes, it falls under MY deadly sin of a video game giving me a stupid morality choice based on two extremely polar opposites. Beyond that the real question is two-fold: Who is Dante to be given this power over people’s souls and why does he have this power? The Crucifix Dante uses is one that Beatrice gave him to symbolize their eternal love. He then blesses it himself and it gains what appears to be magical powers, such as being able to shoot white Crucifixes as a ranged attack and, as aforementioned, to absolve souls.

The Crucifix seems to be everywhere in the demo by the way. Dante begins the game by stitching a red cross to his chest, to his CHEST, so that he remembers all the sins he’s done in his past. He has the Crucifix weapon as well which glows white whenever it’s used. Late in the demo a large wooden cross falls across your path and naturally, said cross is on fire. Fire demons spawn from the burning cross and once killed, parts of the cross break away until you can continue past. You have got to be EXTREMELY careful when using cross-imagery in things you do, but all I’m seeing is the cross thrown around haphazardly because it can be and in some cases as shock value once more.

And Then God Takes a Nap

So I still have to ask: What makes Dante so special? It’s one thing to say that someone is “The Chosen One” and that’s why he’s able to do all the things he does. Sure, fine, I’m all for “The Chosen One.” I have nothing wrong with that. No, it’s what Dante as this particular Chosen One can do that has some problems: absolve sins. I can’t phrase that any more accurately since the choice pops up saying “Punish” or “Absolve” when you have enemies at the end of your scythe. I don’t want to get down and dirty about this, but if my memory serves me correct, and I’m pretty sure it does, the only guy according to Christianity, the source material the game is so heinously taking from, that is able to truly absolve souls is Jesus. Please, someone correct me if I’m way off here.

Remember this guy? You can't use Christianity as a background without also putting Jesus above everything else. It's just how it works, otherwise the fundamentals of the material breaks down.

So if Dante can absolve souls, mostly just used as a finishing attack, what makes it favored over condemning souls? One way gives you experience points used for upgrading attacks while the other fills up a Redemption meter used for larger, more devastating attacks. So while you can choose to save certain souls, what choice does it come down to? Is your Redemption meter depleted? Well, looks like it’s time to save souls and all that. Is it already full? Awesome, time for more experience points. They’ve reduced something that’s already charged with controversy into little more than a means to fill your attack meter, otherwise known as: made it completely inconsequential whether this guy is saving souls because he wants to or because he needs to. Beyond being insensitive on a stupid level, that’s just bad character motivation.

Let’s say God has given Dante the power to choose the fate of any and every soul he encounters. What would that mean for the game? Dante is encouraged to destroy everything that gets between him and Beatrice and only really stops to save souls when he needs to charge his ultimate attacks. Why would a just God allow this to happen? We’re playing with SOULS here. The game is somehow going out of its way to point out to you that souls are entirely meaningless beyond your own selfish gratification, both to you and to whatever God allowed Dante to be in the position of power he’s currently in.

So this is how EA sees the Christian mythology? Yes, Dante wrote about Hell in a very extreme way, and he placed real people wherever he saw fit, but it was him doing it, not the reader. In the video game we get to make these moral choices as the actual gamer and suddenly that starts to feel a little weird to me. I’d be totally okay with the game if it just had some guy running through Hell wasting everything in his path as long as he wasn’t also granted powers over any and all souls he meets.

Wrapping Things Up

You know what? Given the facts of everything, given the obvious resemblance to God of War and the religiously charged imagery and the shock value, I’d still probably play the game if it wasn’t called “Dante’s Inferno.” Why? Because currently it gets to hide behind the title. Everyone that gets in a stink about the game can’t focus blame on EA or Visceral Games because it can all get deflected to the original Dante’s Inferno since, “Dude, that poem was eff’d up!” I’d have far more respect for the game if it were called “Land of Dis” or “The Nine Circles” or some other “epic” title like that because then at least the developers would have to stand tall and say, “Yes, we made these decisions because we felt they were important to the game.” But instead we get the epic Italian poem turned hack and slash shock-fest and I, for one, couldn’t be more frustrated.

To sum everything up, I’m worried that EA’s Dante’s Inferno is offensive without needing to be since it clearly uses Christian mythology to replace Greek and Roman mythology in a game, allowing it to rip off God of War without being sued. In the process, they’ve granted the title character the power to judge the fate of souls but not made said character Jesus, the only one in actual Christian mythology capable of doing such a task and thus making it potentially offensive. In the end we either have a means to get people to read the original poem The Divine Comedy or we have a lot of people that actually read The Divine Comedy feeling completely cheated since something they love is being reduced to the lowest-common denominator. Does that about sum things up? I think so.

And now we come to the end of this beast of an article and the final important detail: What do YOU think? Does all of this sound like something that’s gone too far? Have you played the demo and feel that I’m way off on my conclusions? Do I just seem combative for no reason? Or am I right on one or more of my points? I both want and need to know what you think and the only way short of writing me a letter is posting a comment here. Let’s really get some discussion going this time. This is one of those debates that could really mean something.