New Destiny Retail Details

What will we explore in the new Bungie adventure?

Why Am I A Console Game?

[Short Answer] I hate you PC Folk

The Continual Problems with Battlefield 4

Why the DICE multiplayer needs another tweak...

Six Months with Microsoft Next Gen Hardware

Games Console or Entertainment System?

The Best DLC Money Can Buy

Does it have Zombies, Burials or Dragons.....?

Tuesday 25 February 2014

Why I am a Console Gamer.....

With the release of every new console, I always have to ask myself: is this the year I return to PC gaming and stop buying consoles? The answer, every time, is a resounding no.

I suppose it’s best for me to start with some honesty: I'm too lazy these days to be a PC gamer. I realize that things have likely improved since the nineties, but that doesn't mean I want to spend any time whatsoever setting up a game to play it. What I like about console gaming is that you don't need to worry about resolution, colours or graphics card.

Obviously this comes at the sacrifice of customisation but I’ve never been one to move from default much anyway. Except when an FPS has too much sensitivity. I’d prefer my entertainment to be spoon fed into my face straight from the box; playable exactly as the developer intended. I don’t have the time to spend working out the optimised options for each title I purchase and I’m not a fan of tinkering with different pieces of hardware every few months. I’d rather upgrade my system in one fell swoop every  6 or 7 years.

That said, being lazy doesn't make me stupid. I love a challenging, complicated game. I'm sick of the handholding, tutorial-centric crap in games like Assassin's Creed. I hated the "consoleification" of Mass Effect as much as PC gamers did, and my favourite experience with Fallout: New Vegas was playing through on hardcore mode. Just because twitch shooters and cinematic adventure games sell well on consoles doesn't mean we're all looking for simplified games that everyone can master within minutes

It’s probably because I spend 40-50 hours a week in front of a computer for work, and I'm sure most of you do too. The last thing I want to do is spend my leisure hours there as well. Console gaming gets me away from computer, out of my chair (or in the case of mobile gaming, out of my house completely), and away from work. Plus you get to kick back on the couch, which is a great way to take a load off at the end of a long day.

It’s probably about time that I addressed the age old questions here – controllers or a keyboard and mouse. I'm not huge into twitchy first person shooters, so I could care less about precision. I'll play and enjoy the occasional slow shooter like BioShock, Dishonored, or Metro, but you typically won't find me playing Battlefield or Call of Duty unless my friends are involved. So, that whole "mouse and keyboard is the best and most precise control scheme" just doesn't do it for me.

For all the keyboard-centric games on the PC, there are just as many games that are best played on a controller. Dark Souls, while looking exquisite on PC, is suited far better with the Xbox One controller in hand. It’s the same for all the Batman Arkham games, Dead Space and Fable. I have a far stronger preference to the pressure sensitive analog sticks to the heavy skill required with a mouse.

Those of you making a mental note that you can in-fact use controllers on a PC, I completely agree, but this takes time to configure as well. And in my experience they never quite feel like the real deal.

The other thing that always gets me is that most of the AAA titles made for PC instantly, or shortly thereafter, come to consoles anyway. But console exclusives like Halo stay exclusive (excluding the original Halo) and the games are the only real thing that matters.

Some of my favourite titles of the last decade have been console exclusives – you can’t get the Naughty Dog games on PC (The Last of Us and Uncharted are some of the best action-adventure games I’ve ever played). You can’t play Trials, Journey, Super Smash Bros or Metal Gear Solid on your PC.

I love a good strategy game but unless you’re hugely into them  then the PC games don’t come close to the quality of exclusive IPs.

It wouldn’t be fair for me to say it’s all about consoles because PC gaming and console games are two very different things. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. Honestly, I'd argue they're so different that they're almost impossible to compare. Both attract a different kind of person entirely, but that doesn't make one better than the other. Sure, maybe us console gamers are a bit lazy, but that doesn't make us stupid. We crave intelligent, hard, and complicated gaming experiences. You just have to trust us more.

Monday 24 February 2014

Konami is trying to Rip us off with 'Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zero'

Before I begin ranting, I’d like the record to show that I actually completely love the MGS 2 and 3 prequel/demo sections. However, for me, Konami’s approach to Ground Zero as a promotional piece is too much a glorified demo for a full retailer pricing.

Much like most of you reading this, the demos of Metal Gear Solid and the Sons of Liberty packages hold a special place in my heart. I grabbed the MGS2 demo through Zone of the Enders; and the Tanker section, which was the demo of the title, showed off the mechanics, the stealth system and the Easter Eggs that have become a staple in the Metal Gear franchise.

Ok, I was pretty young at the time of the original title, so I didn’t digest the story as well as I might have now, but I do remember loving the game and completing the ‘mission’ was fulfilling and probably contributed to why I’m still a gamer today.

I must have played that section of the game nearly 20 times before ever picking up the full game and therefore I’ve spent more time with those tasters than with half of the game I’ve ever played. I loved working out different routes through the rooms, hiding in lockers and picking up all the items I could before the demo finished.

Yes, the time spent in these demos justified my investment in Zone of the Enders – as I hated the game itself but I cannot see how Hideo Kojima and the team can justify paying £40 for any demo, no matter how length or great the content may be.

The difference for me is that demos cannot exist on their own. The Halo 3 and Sons of Liberty’s samples in Crackdown and Zone of the Enders were incentives for gamers to invest in new franchises. These key demos had their own reasons to be included, they gave a new game the chance to impact consumers and if you didn’t enjoy the titles, but wanted the demos, then you had something else to spend time with. You categorically shouldn’t remove the new franchise and just sling the demo our to consumers at the full price – because it still just boils down to a demo.

It’s almost one of the well-known “Unwritten Rules” – you shouldn’t sleep with your buddy’s girlfriend and you should sell something that’s a taster for the full price. A baker doesn’t charge you full price to sample the crackers and chutneys it has on the top of its counter so why should Konami get away with, what some are saying is, daylight robbery.

Ground Zeroes would not look out of place as a free listing on the PSN or Xbox Marketplace. It is the opening chapter for Metal Gear Solid V, for all intents and purposes, the equivalent of taking the MGS2 demo and labelling it “Metal Gear Solid 2: Chapter One”.

The worst thing I can think of is that I know, and I doubt many people could argue with me here, that some consumers will pay the full price because they think it is a whole new game – especially if they don’t troll through the Internet like you and I.

Recently the designer for Ground Zeroes argued that the length of the title is irrelevant, with indie titles such as Dear Esther and Journey offering similarly short experiences. However, and he seemed to miss these points completely, neither of those titles demanded a full retail cost and they also offered the full game in its complete form. Had Ground Zeroes asked for maybe half of what its recommended retail price then I wouldn’t be so pissed, but the nerve to ask gamers to double dip is morally ambiguous at best.

The worst thing is that Konami knows this, and the exploitation of their fanbase to their attachment with this franchise is what annoys me most. They know gamers will pay full-price for a new Metal Gear Solid, but many will feel ripped off if they knew what they were getting.

The title isn’t being advertised as a small sample of MGSV, at least not to the average consumer, and we are not the average consumer. You are informed, and passionate amount games, which is how you stumbled upon this site anyway and so you know the truth of what is on offer. The majority of people who will purchase this title will no doubt see if as the ‘next-gen’ Metal Gear and buy it with the incorrect understanding.

The inclusion of 'Metal Gear Solid V' on the box art of Ground Zeroes only adds to the notion that Konami is misleading fans. Many people won’t acknowledge that Ground Zeroes is a stop-gap cash-in, but instead think it a full release, in the same way vain that Guns of the Patriots, Sons of Liberty and Peace Walker were.

I hope gamers vote with their wallets on this one, because this could set a dangerous precedent going forward. If this sells well, which at the moment it looks like it will, then we could see other titles do the same which would mean we’re all in trouble.

The Theories and Lore of BioShock Infinitie and the Story of Burial at Sea

**Spoiler Alert - In this article I will be talking about the full BioShock Sage so far and specific story point. Anyone who has not completed this series of games should not read on any further**


A few weeks ago marked the return of the Burial at Sea DLC, for BioShock Infinite, in the form of a trailer specifically set created for Episode 2. Episode one featured the relationship of Booker DeWitt and Elizabeth again but - in a contrasting environment to the sky city of Columbia – the underwater dystopia of Rapture.

The trailer shows what most imagine will be the opening three minutes of the game and brings back characters of old. In true Irrational style the trailer adds more questions than answers as a ‘downed’ Elizabeth interacts with the scheming Atlas. Or, to be more specific, I’m assuming its Frank Fontaine posing as Atlas.

The gameplay will take a different turn to the ‘shoot-everything’ style of the main game (and Episode 1) in the fact that you will take over the role of the weaker Elizabeth. Her story will be driven by stealth; although we still haven’t seen this in action.
When watching the trailer, the questions arise almost immediately when a ‘ghost’ of Booker – similar to that of Caprica Six only seen by Gaius Baltar in the more recent rendition of Battlestar Galactica – guides Elizabeth through a series of hairy verbal exchanges. Almost certainly saving her from death.

The story appears as though it will, at least, begin with Elizabeth helping Frank Fontaine (“ATLAS”) return to Rapture. Atlas, posing as Fontaine, was banished from the city by Andrew Ryan, some time before the beginning of Episode 1, in exchange for the safety of Sally (the Little Sister that provided the focal point for the last instalment).

Although details of the upcoming episode are minor, (however we now know the release date should be 25th March) we can expect to get some explanations into what’s going on while also seeing the whole content play into the strength, and lore, of the BioShock franchise.

I fully expect the story to tie into the original BioShock and in particular to the fall of Rapture itself. If Elizabeth succeeds in helping Fontaine return to the main part of the city then this could lead us into an interesting circle – especially as the fall of Rapture begins on 31st December 1958 and this is the date shown on Bookers calendar within his office at the start of Part 1.

At the end of the first episode Booker discovers Sally, the missing child, and as he attempts to extricate her from one of the Little Sister vents he has a flashback. It quickly becomes apparent that Booker is actually an alternate universe version of Comstock, but his attempts to kidnap baby Anna ended in a very different fashion. Instead of a finger the dimensional window closed around her neck – decapitating her – killing her instantly.

As Booker starts to understand what has happened the Lutece twins and Elizabeth explain that he asked them, Robert and Rosalind, to help him escape into Rapture so he could forget these terrible actions at which point he is killed.

This obviously leaves several strange questions for us to ponder:

  • How did this version of Comstock survive the culling that occurred at the end of BioShock: Infinite?
  • Why was Elizabeth present at the kidnapping of Anna that we see at the end of Part 1?
  • Are we confident that the Elizabeth, the key companion in Part 1, is the same one from Infinite?
  • If so, why has she suddenly gotten so vengeful and gone so ‘dark’?
  • How long has Comstock been in Rapture and where did he come from?

The second part of this content is obviously due to answer some of these questions but it’s starting to become a confusing mess again….



The biggest question we have to deal with is how Comstock “escaped” from the culling at the baptism. The end of Infinite ‘Prime’ confirmed that Booker’s self-sacrifice at the baptism was designed to cut off the timelines for any further Bookers who managed to reach the same point in their own timelines. Meaning all of the subsequent ‘Bookers’ would drown at this constant point in time…..

Therefore… never becoming Comstock, so, as Booker doesn’t live this also means Anna is never born.

At the end of BioShock Infinites main story we see the different Elizabeth’s fade from existence, Back to the Future style, while Booker dies. Except we then see the troublesome scene after the credits where we are back in Booker’s office and he goes to get Anna from the other room. How could this happen if Anna has been erased from all timelines?

So my ‘theory’ is that the “Burial” Elizabeth, and potentially this Booker/Comstock, has followed a completely “exceptional” path. Potentially at the kidnapping this version of Anna did not suffer any physical harm during her encounter with the ‘tear’. Perhaps she really does become the Seed of the Prophet that attacks New York. Perhaps during this fight she realises the error of her ways (or never really wanted to go through with it anyway) and tries to stop the events – only to find that it is too late anyway. Obviously this is all speculation.

It would then stand to reason (if you could go that far) to say that the Lutece twins had always been attempting to find an “Exceptional” Booker to finish the mission set during Infinite Prime. In fact they may have failed to find one of these Bookers during the first 122 attempts. It’s not until they manage to get back to the original dimension Anna came from (potentially by complete change) that they find the “Exceptional” Booker they require. This would be the Booker, we control during Infinite, whose innate connection to “Prime” Elizabeth allows him to succeed in the mission. And in the process of doing so, he drowns his “Exceptional” Comstock, and then sacrifices himself, closing the loop and leaving nothing left over.

But now we know that it wasn’t true. There are other sets of “Exceptional” Bookers and Comstocks, one of which we find has absconded to Rapture in Burial at Sea. In fact the links are there when you look over them…. when Comstock moves over to Rapture through the tear, his memories are wiped in the same fashion that the “Exceptional” Booker’s are when he moves into the Infinite Prime timeline (as we see this happen during the final sequence of the main game). Hence he has no sense of who he really is until the very end, where his attempts to pull Sally out of the heating vent and his memories flood back to him.


Elizabeth needs to make sure he dies to finally close the loop. And therefore she needs to make sure she is there to see it and make sure that nothing stops him from dying.

ROBERT: You turned to us to solve your problem
ROSALIND: To provide a place to go where you might forget
ROBERT: Where there never was an Anna in the first place
ROSALIND: Comstock was never one to own up to his errors, was he brother?
ROBERT: Never comfortable with the choices he made
ROSALIND: Always seeking someone else’s life to claim as his own

We shall see. There’s still the second half of Burial at Sea to be played (where we’ll be taking control of Prime Elizabeth herself, which should be a rare treat),

Sadly, any I’m sure we’ll find out soon, if I am right there could be many “Exceptional” versions of Booker and it may even suggest the ‘Jack’ from the original game is actually a ‘Booker’ too…. Oh god by head hurts.

Have you got any theories on the BioShock universe, specifically those on Burial at Sea? If so please let us know in the comments below.