After numerous delays, Max Payne 3 is almost here.

During the course of development, Rockstar Vancouver's latest third-person action game saw many hardships, the likes of which would even make their eponymous detective pause. But Max is finally ready to shoot and dodge his way back into the limelight. Rockstar allowed us to get a glimpse of the game behind closed doors at PAX East, and what I saw gave me hope for the return of Max Payne.

We were shown two levels, each from different sections of the game. The first was set in a grimy Manhattan bar under attack by gang members, with Max having to fight his way through shot-up pool halls and walk-in freezers. The second took place in São Paulo, Brazil, and saw Max surviving an ambush at a baseball stadium, aided by an ally behind a sniper rifle.

What separates Max Payne 3 from the myriad other shooters is its stylish use of bullet time. The player can slow the action down by clicking the analogue stick, or by performing slow motion 'shoot dodges', John Woo-esque leaps of fancy that add mobility to firefights. Bullet time uses adrenalin, which Max gains by executing headshots or taking damage. Combined with solid shooting mechanics, Max Payne 3's use of bullet time turns every gun battle into a pageant of blood and bullets.

Max has lost none of his abilities for acrobatic gunplay, and part of Max Payne 3's challenge is to find the best moments to use bullet time.

Rockstar Vancouver has also made several canny additions to the Max Payne formula. New to the series is a cover system, allowing Max to hunker down behind obstacles to avoid enemy fire. Also new is an optional aim-assist, similar to those found in many current shooters, helping players to zero in on enemies for adrenalin-gaining headshots.

One of Max Payne 3's biggest departures from modern shooting conventions, though, is its lack of a health-regeneration system. Instead, players must find and use painkillers to regain Max's lost stamina. Painkillers also lend themselves to another new mechanic: when mortally wounded by an enemy, players can take out the enemy who dealt them the killing blow and gain their life back, in exchange for a painkiller.

Good thing, too, because Max Payne 3 is challenging even at medium difficulty. Max was constantly outnumbered during both levels I played - particularly in the baseball stadium, which takes place later in the game - and playing without regenerating health adds a dangerous rhythm to gameplay different from other contemporary shooters. Every gunfight is tense and deadly, and feels great. As a quick aside, I would recommend playing with the auto-aim turned off; with it on, I found my aiming reticule targeting enemies in ways I didn't necessarily expect. The auto-aim doesn't necessarily drag the game down, but it's far from the optimal way to play Max Payne 3, a game in which the satisfaction of manually lining up headshots, mid-jump, feels incredibly satisfying.

Though much of the game takes place in São Paulo, players also control Max during his earlier life in New York.

Like other current Rockstar games, Max Payne 3 is built upon the Rage engine, used in games like Grand Theft Auto IV and Red Dead Redemption. Max's movements are initially a bit wide and hefty, but I assimilated after a few minutes of play. Rockstar has always trotted out stellar voice acting in its games, and Max Payne 3 continues the trend. During gameplay, Max's internal monologue helps to establish the setting and tone of what's happening, and other characters toss out their lines with natural-sounding aplomb, a welcome change from other poorly-voiced games on the market. The series' signature comic-book cinematics are MIA, but they are given a nod in Max Payne 3's in-game cutscenes, which possess small stylistic changes and use split-screen in a way that suggests comic book panels, though they did remind me of the commercials for Grant Theft Auto: Vice City.

Max has been in deep cover for a long time, but the wait appears to have been worth it. Max Payne 3 looks to join Rockstar's increasingly-long list of epic May releases in just a few short weeks, hitting Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and PC.

Labels: Andrew Testerman, Max Payne 3, PAX East, PlayStation 3, Rockstar, Rockstar Vancouver, Xbox 360

On the morning of November 2, Rockstar gobsmacked the gaming community with the announcement trailer for Grant Theft Auto V, a quick, teasing look at the publisher’s newest tale of guns, cars and criminal activity in the big city.

Twitter and the gaming press were absolutely alight with speculation about the title’s story, how the actual game will play out and what other possible elements might have been hinted in the minute or so of footage released. This sort of behaviour is far from unexpected; Grand Theft Auto is one of the industry’s most popular franchises, and it only makes sense that the announcement would be greeted with such enthusiasm from the gaming community.

So why don't I feel that excited about it?

I suppose I shouldn't be so surprised; the Grand Theft Auto titles aren’t my gaming sweet spot, and never really have been. Granted, I've had my fair share of mayhem-causing sessions in GTA III and Vice City back in the day, and I can definitely appreciate the expert craftsmanship the Rockstar applies to all of its titles, as well as why so many people love the franchise so dearly. That said, the GTA series just doesn't click with me in the way that it does with over 22 million gamers worldwide, and I'll do my best to try to explain why.


For one, Grand Theft Auto titles have always been too big for my taste. By this, I don't mean that the play areas are too big - one of my favourite parts of The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker was sailing around and exploring the humongous map - but, rather, that there's simply too much of it. The sheer amount of time and willpower I need to commit in order to experience more than a small portion of what a Grand Theft Auto game offers is staggering, and something that I can't quite get around. Certainly too much of a good thing can only be a good thing, but GTA for me has always been too much of a... thing.

This is because I never know whether it's good or not. Any given GTA experience (and I've played III, Vice City, San Andreas, and IV) always leaves me feeling like I've been spinning my wheels, peddling along until maybe, maybe, I'll get to the 'good part' of the game. A similar complaint can be lodged against JRPGs or the Zelda series, two of my very favourite things in gaming. What makes GTA different, though, and worthy of my ire, is how empty the experience feels between bouts of plot; I always feel like I'm performing disposable tasks in order to get through the game, none of which, taken by themselves, are very fun. Again, you can lodge complaints against nearly any JRPG, but while JRPGs are at least understood to be more deliberately-paced, measured affairs, GTA is ostensibly about action and explosive moments, which makes the mostly-passive missions feel even more like a dishonest sleight of hand.


Perhaps this is the difference between a guided experience (Zelda) and an open one (GTA, Elder Scrolls, etc.), and their place in my gaming lexicon. The Zelda series dictates what sort of gameplay experience I have: what choices my character makes, what dungeons I play through in which order, and what items I need to use in order to progress. This simplification of choice allows me to get caught up in the journey, and to invest myself in the story being told to me. In Elder Scrolls, I'm in charge of charting my own course and telling my own story. While many gamers may feel liberated by the breadth of choice they are given to decide their own fate, I get stressed out by the number of decisions I need to make in order to drive the experience, and fail to get caught up in anything.

Furthermore, I’ve never really been satisfied by GTA’s brand of story-telling, either. I've always felt that GTA's story and pacing have suffered, in favour of its open-endedness. Videogame storytelling at its best is often comparable to a novel, with character traits coming naturally over the course of the narrative; titles like Chrono Trigger and Uncharted have a coherent, measured plot full of well-realised characters. Storytelling in the GTA games, by contrast, always feels comparable to a comic strip, with characters broadly and instantly defined from the moment we first meet them, and handled in bite-sized chunks; only over the course of the games do their subtleties peek their heads out, and only if the player is willing to meet the game halfway and watch for the subtle shades. Because the stories are so stop-start, and the story-telling so shallow, the narratives often feel like they lack urgency and pacing, making them less than compelling, and creating a profound disconnect from plot.


For their newest entry, I hope Rockstar looks to the Assassin's Creed series, and to Batman: Arkham City - two titles I enjoy immensely despite my general aversion to open-world games - for inspiration on how to handle Los Santos in the upcoming game. Assassin’s Creed uses an open world similar to the GTA games, where missions are doled out from side characters found on the main map. However, while GTA missions can often feel tangential to advancing any sort of plot (watch a cutscene, drive somewhere, kill someone, drive back), Assassin’s Creed II and Brotherhood work much harder to give each gameplay segment a context within the narrative, even if the objective is as simple as 'follow this dude over there'. Arkham City, on the other hand, gives players entirely different areas for the game’s main missions, in addition to an enormous, dense world for gamers to explore, segmenting off the main play areas to help present more and different gameplay opportunities than if Batman were forced to chase down The Joker on the actual streets of Arkham City.

I get why people love the Grand Theft Auto games. Rockstar is perhaps the best in the business at crafting living, breathing worlds for players to lose themselves in; a friend of mine says he put literally hundreds of hours into faffing about in GTA IV, simply because he enjoyed the world so much. The game is going to be a smash, and I’m glad that so many gamers find enjoyment in GTA, with all of the freedom, chaos and goofiness that the series entails. I just hope that Rockstar can give the series more focus, for those of us who want more than simply the opportunity to wander around.

Labels: 2011, Andrew Testerman, Grand Theft Auto V, Opinion, Rockstar, Trailer

“I think I believe this guy,” says Kieran.

“Eh? I think he looks kinda shaky,” replies Regi, sceptically.

“Yeah, he’s totally avoiding eye contact,” I chime in. “What do you think, Renee?”

“Hmmm. Yeah. He’s probably holding out,” says Renee, with finality.

My friends and I aren’t watching some whodunnit movie on Showtime, or reading the latest John Grisham legal thriller — in fact, we’re all watching me play L.A. Noire. Together.

And we’re all enjoying the hell out of it.

If L.A. Noire goes on to echo the breakout success of Red Dead Redemption, the industry press will be filled with dumbfounded stories of its detractors who, in hindsight, were too blind to see the mass appeal that Noire provides. Before I picked up Noire on Tuesday, I was a member of this group. Even now, I’m still not convinced that Rockstar will find true mainstream success with L.A. Noire. Film noir has fallen out of the public eye, at least in the United States, and is hardly a popular genre in entertainment, though conventional wisdom says I might be wrong. I’m also not sure how many gamers will be ready for the slow, deliberate pace at which L.A. Noire moves; in today’s Call of Duty-dominated marketplace, any game that doesn’t involve some sort of firefight or explosion in any five minute span seems downright boring. Last is the 1940’s detective setting, which, in the U.S., has always held only niche appeal, though I’ve always had affection for it. All told, at face value, L.A. Noire does not provide undeniable proof that it will be another massive, Rockstar-sized hit.

What L.A. Noire does provide, though, is a rarity in gaming: an experience that’s just as much fun to watch as it is to play. Noire’s top-notch story, writing, and acting (both vocal and facial) give it the feel of an interactive movie, making the experience more akin to an episode of Mad Men than a Grand Theft Auto-esque story arc, and appreciable to anyone with a hunger for well-told, mature narratives. Though the game could be described as mechanical and repetitive (you’ll look at a lot of matchbooks before the ending credits roll), L.A. Noire’s pleasures are far more inviting than the mechanical gratification of a perfectly-timed headshot or finishing move.


Because L.A. Noire is so inviting, its gameplay lends itself to group participation gaming in a way I’ve never experienced outside the likes of Rock Band and Smash Bros. The game encourages players to be slow, thorough, taking in every scrap of evidence in the hope of catching a suspect in a lie. This turns any casual observer of the game into a first-rate gumshoe, right alongside the person actually holding the controls. “Check the bathroom,” Renee tells me as I peruse a suspect’s house, and - surely enough - after some snooping around, we’re three clues closer to putting the case together.

The group participation lends itself even further to the game’s interrogation scenes. After scouring a crime scene for evidence, players are asked to lead other characters through a line of questioning, and must decide if the witness is lying or telling the truth. This effectively turns the game into Twelve Angry Men Noire, and my friends and I had a blast trying to determine if a suspect was being truthful, or feeding us a triple-decker bullshit sandwich instead. “Oh, hell no!” shouts Kieran after one particular testimony, and flips through our notebook to find a piece of evidence that flatly contradicts the poor schmuck’s story entirely.

Smashing a case wide open with a few well-placed questions is pretty satisfying alone, but with a few buddies in tow, it becomes downright epic. I had no idea how much I would enjoy the game, and even less of an idea how much more I would enjoy it with a group, turning this faux-multiplayer into one of my most-surprising and favourite gaming moments of 2011. I can clean up the grimy streets of Los Angeles all by myself in any number of other games, but only L.A. Noire gives me and my best mates a chance to work at it together.

And believe me, after we’ve had our say, this town won’t know what hit it.

Labels: 2011, Andrew Testerman, Feature, L.A. Noire, Multiplayer, Rockstar, Social Gaming, Team Bondi

These two weeks see the release of two of this year's supposed 'biggest hits' Brink and L.A. Noire, which both aim to both bring a new set of dynamics into the lives of gamers. Yet, how do the changes offered by the two big budget titles rack up against one another?

Rockstar's L.A. Noire is, straight off the bat, a completely different experience from most mainstream games released today. This, coming from the publisher that brought us Grand Theft Auto and Red Dead Redemption, is to be expected; Rockstar are known - nay, famed - for their top-quality, innovative games, and their recipe certainly seems to work, as all they touch seems to turn to gold.

One of L.A. Noire's features that Rockstar really want to push home is the facial detail that they've managed to achieve using the MotionScan system, a sparkling new feature which manages to express a character's every feeling. From gameplay videos, it is clear that the team have really used the system to their advantage; it is arguably the first time a player has been able to easily distinguish lip movements, allowing for near-perfect lip reading.

However good it may look, though, some may question whether the tech will significantly change gamplay in the way Rockstar hope that it will. Rockstar claim that the features offered are needed for the detective-action title, as one needs to physically note whether the character they're interrogating is telling the truth. If it is true, then perhaps we'll see the MotionScan wizardry adopted for other titles, even despite the time-consuming process needed for significant results.



Connections between L.A. Noire and many other titles can be drawn, as it manages to delve into several different genres. It can be difficult to avoid placing it in comparison to Heavy Rain, as both share some common roots, but if you were to look further into the gameplay mechanics of L.A. Noire, you might find it closer to something in the point-and-click genre. Indeed, when searching a crime scene for a set of clues, we are reminded of the lovable Sam & Max duo. In certain scenes, equipped with a gun, elements from third person shooters are seen, although it is apparent that these areas of the game are minimal. The game is trying to 'blend' the genre boundaries, like many titles this generation have attempted to, but perhaps it is worth mentioning that L.A. Noire seems to have picked its colours from a very different palette to those other titles.

The other big hitter of this week is Brink, a title which, similarly, tries to 'blur' the genre boundaries by bringing single player and online play closer together. The system that Brink utilises allows for 'drop in, drop out' gameplay, whereby a player can invite their companion to join them straight from a single player game, without the need to set up lobbies specifically for online campaign game modes.

In my honest opinion, I've been extremely excited for a system such as this, and I really want it to succeed, in the hope that other companies will adopt the idea. Imagine the variety it could bring to other genre; for example, in something like Skyrim, one could wander into a town, find a tavern and seamlessly 'recruit' a friend as a mercenary force. One of the biggest pitfalls for a system like this, though, is that it could be completely ignored by players - if you want to maintain a single player campaign, it's likely you'd entirely leave any sort of seamless offline-online, jump-in-and-jump-out feature alone.

Brink is also a title which offers a grand amount of customisation for gamers, with recent stats having revealed the scale of this mechanic. Bethesda stated that there are over 4,963 different combinations of weapon attachments, and a mind-boggling approximate of 47,325,358,080,000,000 costume combinations (that's over forty-seven quintillion combinations, if you couldn't work it out). It's one crazy amount, and means it'll be extremely difficult (if not impossible) to find two players with exactly the same qualities.



Both games are set to rock some pretty nifty changes from the norms that gamers are used to, and both are extremely unique. For a purely technical advantage,the most impressivle has to be L.A. Noire, as the impressive facial animation is something it is difficult to find in past games. However, with questions surrounding how many games the advanced technology will really change, the award for influence to the way we play can only go to Brink, whose innovative online system will hopefully lead to a fluid mix of online and single player play.

Labels: 2011, Bethesda, Brink, Jacques Hulme, L.A. Noire, Rockstar, Splash Damage, Team Bondi, Trailer, Video

Oh, Grand Theft Auto, I do love you so. I love your dry wit, sharp humour, cutting satire and brilliant societal critiques. I love the fact you're so well realised, with no detail overlooked or flaw jutting out. I love your atmosphere, your dialogue, your gameplay, and - though I hate to be so shallow - your looks. You're damn near perfect.

So you can imagine that I was overjoyed when news broke of Rockstar registering new domains, possibly in connection with the next iteration of the best sandbox around. With such titles as getamexican.com, pregnantandalone.com and justcanoe.com, there was no reason to doubt their legitimacy. They just sound so perfectly in-keeping with the Rockstar style that it seems second nature to walk into an internet café, bash this into the address bar, then log off and start a rampage.

See? Video games haven't affected me one bit!

All seemed to be going swimmingly. I would soon be reunited by my darling, and off we would venture. Where to this time? London would be a favourite of mine, as it's been a while since I mounted the kerb for half a mile in Clapham. Just get me out of America, which has grown stale thanks to endless faceless virtual copycats. Then I'd be happy.

It was with an air of disbelief that I read about GTA V being codenamed Rush, to be set in Los Angeles. There was even a character list to boot, though I just couldn't believe it. How could Rockstar, creators of possible the sharpest, funniest and most playable games out there, create something so... uninspired? While I'm sure 'Rush' has something to do with Take Two, I very much doubt that it is connected with the Grand Theft Auto franchise. And here's why.

Thanks to some very clever sleuthing work by the talented Superannuation, a casting call by Rockstar’s regular agency Telsey & Company was found, which listed various characters for a Take Two project known only as 'Rush'. These resumés seemed to confirm a GTA vibe (one woman listed the part of 'inner city female'). At this point, it's a very believable setup; games are accidentally revealed on a surprisingly common basis thanks to CVs or casting calls, and thanks to Telsey & Co.'s regular acquaintance with Rockstar, everything pointed towards 'Rush' being code for a new Grand Theft Auto. Except for one small issue...

John Marston is a stunning character. Not just for video games, which often substitute story for gameplay, but in terms of any piece of fiction, he's a beautifully rounded character. Niko Bellic may have been a bit whingy, but he showed layers of complex emotion that one wouldn't find out of place in a novel, albeit one with a lot of carjacking. Rockstar is known for creating incredibly detailed, intricate characters who can evoke sympathy, loathing, pity, or any number of alternative responses.

With that in mind, have you seen the characters for 'Rush'?!

Mitch Hayes:
38 – Annoying, wise cracking, highly successful FBI agent. In great shape. Does triathlons, drinks low cal beer, but still has a sense of humor.

Eddie:
47 – Weed evangelist, guy who started smoking at 30, and is now a leading proponent of marijuana’s fantastic properties. White, awkward.

Kevin De Silva:
18 – Albert’s fat, FPS-playing gamer son. Smokes a lot of weed, has anxiety issues and a card for a bad back, very soft, very opinionated. Into making racist comments while playing online.

'Annoying, wise-cracking'. That's probably the most basic stereotype for anyone inhabiting a Grand Theft Auto world. Does 'Weed evangelist' or 'annoying wise-cracker' sound familiar? Again, this is an incredibly boring, uninspired and underwhelming description of 'Default 18+ Video Game Characer #1'. And the self-referential 'Kevin De Silva'; would Rockstar really stoop as low as to parody their very players in such a simple, overtly cliché manner?

Oh, and he smokes a lot of weed, too.

I find it hard to believe, with the writing talent on Rockstar and the smorgasbord of superb figures standing proudly in Grand Theft Auto IV, that they would revert to such petty, childish stereotyping. If you asked a random man on the street to come up a list of with character traits they think the archetypal GTA oddball exhibits, these are the kind of quirks you would expect. But not from Houser & Co.

And then things take a turn for the ridiculous with Gilbert Gottfried reportedly tweeting that he had been cast to play the main character in GTA V.

“just found out I’m voicing the lead in grand theft auto 5! also I hate japan lol.”
- Gilbert Gottfried (@RealGilbert)

I want you to listen to this. And I want you to imagine that blasting out of your speakers for 25 hours of a video game. Rockstar's leading men have always been incredibly likable, from John's strong family values and dry humour, to Niko's sly remarks and desire for a better life. Could you really ever like the parrot from Aladdin? He's comic relief, a one-trick pony, just background noise. The voice is unique, but in a fingers-on-chalkboard way, not a warm, involving lead character way.

Which brings us back to the kicker; apparently, the game is set in Los Angeles. Now, I'm not sure about this, but according to some industry insiders, Rockstar are publishing a game already set in Los Angeles. Something called 'L.A. Noire'? Despite more than half a century between the two timeframes, could you imagine Rockstar visiting the City of Angels twice, in such a short space of time? It seems nearly impossible.

I'm sure Grand Theft Auto V is coming. I'm sure, very soon, the internet will be broken all over again thanks to everyone trying to see a debut trailer. But will that debut trailer focus on 'Eddie', the drug abuser? Will the Griffith Observatory stand proud in the opening shot? Will Gilbert Gottfried provide the voiceover?

I very much doubt it.

Labels: 2011, Chris Hawke, Grand Theft Auto, GT5, GTA4, Red Dead Redemption, Rockstar, Take Two

Dearest Rockstar...

How's life in California? The wife and kids thriving? Glad to hear it. Colorado is doing well. Unemployment is down, the Rockies have been blanketed with a foot of fresh powder, and the seventy-foot-tall series of statues portraying John Elway fighting off a horde of ninjas whilst riding a flaming bronco Pegasus and swinging Excalibur in front of the capital building are coming along steadily.

I'm writing about a matter of great importance: your upcoming blockbuster title, L.A. Noire (which looks all kinds of fancy, by the way. Good, pipe-smoking, rustic gentleman fancy. Not 80s glampop music video fancy). I couldn't help but notice that it shares a release date with last year's mega-hit Rockstar title, Red Dead Redemption. Does this represent a shared development timeline between the two games? If so, then I'd like to discuss L.A. Noire's inevitable Hallowe'en downloadable content.

I'd like 50s style aliens to invade Los Angeles.

The famous 'Battle of Los Angeles' photo, taken during a supposed alien encounter over the city in 1942. Somehow, your conspiracy theorist neighbour will link this to 9/11.

Space music.

You may already have a plan in the works for new Hallowe'en DLC. With the rich history of corny B-movies being shot by-the-minute in 1950s Los Angeles, there are a cornucopia of zipper-suited monsters you can pull from. That said, tin-foil suited, antennaed, green-skinned visitors are the best choice. The fear of malevolent, subvertive life forms from outer space, abducting cows^[1] and plotting the destruction of humanity, beats at the heart of America's cultural identity during the awkward pubescent years of an age heralded by changing lifestyles, frightening new technologies, and a neverending showdown with a quiet, leering enemy - the Cold War.

L.A. Noire is set during this 'Cold War'. I'm just sayin'.

Imagine Cole Phelps, detective on-the-beat, discovering through a series of clues that the City of Angels is being secretly invaded by little green men. Without any help from the city government, he follows a trail of oddities across his urban jungle. Characters Phelps knows (from L.A. Noire's campaign) walk and talk awkwardly, as if puppeteered by invisible strings. Quiet, black-suited federal agents tail Phelps, then disappear without a trace. Blurry photographs of levitating saucers hovering above the city skyline somehow find their way into his padlocked desk drawer.

It would work perfectly.

Alien invasion film noir has been done well before. Where, you ask? How about a forgotten short story in a tattered old anthology found on the top shelf in a dank, labyrinthine library in a quiet little hamlet known to its shadowy denizens as... The Twilight Zone.

Here's a taste of Martian invaders, complete with Rod Serling's famous pun-infested conclusion. As you watch, imagine a hardened human detective listening in the back of the diner, face hidden by a fedora, but for the cigarette he sits tending. As his offhand rests on his revolver, his heart threatens to hammer out of his chest at the exchange he hears.




Now conceive a different invasion scenario, in which the supposed conquerors are not conspiratorial at all, but friendly and outgoing. As the rest of Los Angeles embraces their Samaritan extraterrestrial benefactors, one doubting Thomas-in-a-trenchcoat suspects that the city's would-be messiahs are too good to be true.




L.A. Noire's aliens could be boldfaced warmongers, assailing Los Angeles with saucers and death rays with a head-on attack, à la War of the Worlds...




...or honestly come in peace, for the good of all living things, like those of The Day the Earth Stood Still.



Hell, it could be completely zany, like Destroy all Humans! or Invader Zim. The point is, any alien-themed Hallowe'en expansion would be the greatest DLC since... well, since Undead Nightmare.

It's in your hands, Rockstar. If you can mate this with this, then you'll have created something beautiful^[2].

You see, Jimmy? This is why you never get in the car with strangers - they'll fatten you up and turn you into pie. Now finish your broccoli.

You don't have to respond right away. I know that when it comes to far-off development plans you're a little shy, Rockstar. That's okay, you're human. I only suggest that you do this: go outside on a clear, moonless night, when the stars are so clear and vibrant they fill the sky and the Hubble telescope seems unnecessary, listen to some jazz, and think on the possibility of extraterrestrial life. Then put on your thinking cap, light a fresh cigarette, and ask yourself whether or it's possible that human beings are, in fact, alone in this universe (or in the saxophone-echoing streets of Los Angeles, circa-1955). Who knows? Maybe there'll be a life-form somewhere out in that vast expanse looking back at you.

Thanks for reading, Rockstar. You're a real pal. We've been through a lot together, which is why I swear to you, with Thor as my witness... if you make this alien invasion DLC, I'll forever erase my memories of the drunken mistakes of your past.

Good luck with the L.A. Noire release, buddy. See you at the review party.

Footnotes

[1] But they're covered in nipples!^
[2] Inversely, not doing so will make the baby Jesus cry.^

Labels: 2011, DLC, Feature, film noir, Greg Mengel, L.A. Noire, Open Letter, Rockstar

Let's imagine for a minute that Red Dead Redemption is a delicious German Chocolate cake, baked long, long ago in a quaint small town bakery, Uncle Hans' Loafin' Buns.

When it was released, Uncle Hans' German Chocolate recipe became an instant sensation. It was tremendous! Cake critics from the far side of town raved about it, exclaiming between bites that it was, quite possibly, the most delicious cake in the history of baking. Cake connoisseurs demanded that Hans don his apron again and improve on his masterpiece.

Ecstatic at the positive reception to his recipe, Hans turned back to the drawing board, twirling his moustache in deep, sugary thought for months. Finally he rose from his thinking chair, snatched his finest chef's hat and marched to his bakery. After a few months he emerged from his dessert lair, hair standing on end and face covered with a film of powdered sugar, to announce that he would indeed be re-releasing his German Chocolate recipe, this time with a Hallowe'en twist - pistachio ice-cream filling!

It would be dubbed 'Zombie Chocolate'.

The response was mixed. Some cake critics were enraged, decrying the inclusion of pistachio ice-cream as an abominable insult to the pure, historical goodness of Hans' original German Chocolate. Others lauded Hans. His baking skills were so great, they declared, that he would make German Chocolate and pistachio ice-cream seem as naturally compatible as cookies and milk. Still others remained neutral, stating quietly that nobody could predict the future, and the town would all have to just wait and taste for themselves whether or not Uncle Hans had gone mad.

The verdict?


Uncle Hans' Zombie Chocolate, otherwise known as Rockstar Games' Undead Nightmare, may be the most delicious downloadable expansion ever baked.

Music.

The game starts in symbolic grindhouse fashion, with a cutscene of a dark and quiet night in the Old West. An eerie, disembodied voice (that you wouldn't be surprised to hear reciting the complete works of Edgar Allen Poe) narrates, as a relieved John Marston returns home after a day of chores, the trials presented to him in the last few months practically forgotten. He's tired, and happy enough just to share in his wife's lacklustre supper or listen as his son describes the plot of the latest book he's reading.

Unfortunately, the rabid, cannibalistic corpse of Uncle spoils the familial tranquility, infecting John's wife and son with the plague of undeath. Unwilling to let his loved ones wander the world as mindless cadavers, John grabs his revolver (and shotgun, and rifle, and repeater...), mounts his horse, and rides to nearby Blackwater to find a cure.

John's journey across the original map of Red Dead Redemption is a strange exercise in nostalgia. When you find yourself saving the McFarlane Ranch from cadavers under a green-tinted moon, or hunting down and escorting survivors to their family members in a government-run Fort Mercer, you may sense a strange mixture of déjà vu and surrealism. Things are the same... except that they're different. Rockstar picked a perfect name for this expansion, as this zombified, mystical West could easily be one of its residents' nightmares.

Don't get lost in the woods.

To match its nightmarish environment, Rockstar once again produced an incredible musical score - subtle, poignant, and perfectly timed. Here is one of the user comments found on the YouTube page for Blackwater, U.S.A.:


"Desolate, yet you know something happened there. Fires and damage surround you, yet strangely... where are the corpses? There are definite signs of fighting: Overturned carts, bullet holes in the wall, painting on the walls "The end is nigh!" "The dead have risen!" Risen? That can't be right, you know that's impossible. An old legend to keep people inside at night... But... where are the bodies? Where is everyone.....  what was that? Something's coming. You are not alone here. Run... RUN!"
- wkunzelman1


I couldn't have put it better myself. Or how about Dead Sled, by The Kreeps? As you play this song, imagine yourself on an American Army cargo train headed full-speed for Mexico, pinning your hat against the wind as you pick off a horde of ambling zombies under the moonlight. The image will stick.

What Undead Nightmare does, it does well. My only complaint regarding the game would be that I wasn't ready for its story to end when it did. I wanted more than a mere seven hours of nightmare. I'm not sure I would have been content with seventy-seven. Good zombie westerns make me greedy.

Zombies, this is Death, Felhorse of the Apocalypse. Death, zombies. What do you mean you've met?

Now that I've tasted the forbidden fruit, and inevitably find myself periodically succumbing to the siren's call of zombies in the Old West, I sate that appetite by either:

a) Replaying the story. One of the benefits of a storyline under ten hours is that you can churn through it in a weekend.

b) Wandering the endgame, finishing challenges, and unlocking the Undead Hunter (a much-deserved Army of Darkness reference) and Legend of the Apocalypse outfits. Also, there be mythical creatures to find ...and slay.

C) Multiplayer modes: Undead Overrun (basic but fun survive-as-long-as-your-ammo-holds-out-then-pray game) and Land Grab (a free roam game in which any player on the map claims a piece of land, then defends it from the neighbours). Both add enough spin on traditional Red Dead Redemption multiplayer to keep you entertained. Undead multiplayer skins are a nice touch.

With its terrific grindhouse style, nostalgic twist on Red Dead Redemption's characters and world, and new challenges, outfits, and multiplayer game modes to explore, Undead Nightmare is a must-buy for anyone who enjoyed the original game. Taken as a whole, Undead Nightmare is more complete - more feasible as a standalone product - than any other DLC I've played. Simply put, it's as much a masterpiece as its predecessor.

I, for one, am glad that when there's no more room in hell, the dead will walk the Old West.



Next Hallowe'en, Rockstar? I expect an L.A. Noire expansion in which flying saucers land in Los Angeles.

10/10 [?]

Labels: 2011, DLC, Greg Mengel, Red Dead Redemption, Review, Rockstar, Undead Nightmare

Grand Theft Auto.

It sends a small shiver down your spine, no? You can forget your Modern Warfare and your FIFA; if you want a game that encapsulates all that's great about gaming, you look straight to arguably the most popular, loved and revered series ever made. From the breathtaking and ground-breaking GTA III, to the hedonistic overkill of San Andreas, and Grand Theft Auto IV, the highest rated game ever made - Grand Theft Auto was all that gaming needed to be.

But was it worth it? Now that the hype has all but disintegrated into ashes, and days spent roaming the vicious streets of Liberty City are all but a distant memory to most, we can clad Niko Bellic in his trademark tracksuits and set out once more, beneath overcast skies, to cause some havoc. It's all so 'noughties'.

Nearly every detail is perfect. That's the first thing to hit you. You survey the typical Mohawk street, from the bin bags left out in the rain to the businessmen sprinting home, and absolutely nothing looks out of place. The cars queue, fumes rising from their dirty exhausts; the outdoor vendor expertly squirts condiments onto hotdogs; people run from the downpour, holding up newspapers to protect their receding hair or charging to the nearest awning with shopping bags in tow. The graphics might be a little blurry, but Rockstar have studied every detail of the city that never sleeps, and somehow crammed all the trappings and activities that happen into a single disc. The whole place just feels alive.

And let's not forget how important that is. Mafia II was criticised for feeling sterile and lifeless, and reviewers pointed to Liberty City, more than two years Mafia's predecessor, as an example of a city that feels teeming with life and energy. When you steal a car, people react. When you pull a gun, people run. Bags get dropped, screams ring out, the world explodes into panic. This gets taken for granted, but it's so vital for an enjoyable experience; remember how depressing it is when you shoot an enemy in a videogame, only for them to just stand there and soak it up like a slightly 'slow' superhero? Aiming a shotgun at a passer-by, only for them to glance up, look back down and keep walking? Doing something extraordinary only for the world around you to look on with indifference? It snatches that atmosphere, that feeling of realism and believability (yeah, it's a word), and crushes it with a sharp stamp of the lacklustre. In GTA IV, every action has a reaction, just like Newton's third law.

Which brings us neatly and smoothly onto GTA IV's best feature: its physics. The Euphoria physics engine, familiar to any gamer, allows for the most realistic movement and horrific ragdolls. Forget scripted animations when a cop gets shot; instead, he stumbles, clinging onto anything he can find, before collapsing in a crumpled heap on the cold pavement. Just as the AI has the intelligence to react to what the player is doing, the physics engine allows characters to react to bullets and objects. The effect is exactly the same: no two shots are ever the same, allowing for infinite replay value and endless fun. Watching a hapless bystander tumble and fall, or seeing - I hate to say - static civilians suddenly thrown into the air, cartwheeling several times before face-planing on the damp road as your stolen Infernus careers into the U.N. is unbelievably boisterous activity, despite the questionable morality.

For a minute, focus solely on the sound design. Forget about the glorious physics or the vibrant graphics, and just keep your ears open. The hustle and bustle is all there; car horns in the distance, constant chatter down cellphones, a police siren storming past as birds sing and water laps against the concrete barrier. It's goddamn perfect. The slightest details, even the most gruesome, are meticulously recreated: the sound of some poor soul's head smashing into the windscreen, or a gut-churning scream from a terrified passenger of the vehicle you've just jacked. The care and attention that Rockstar have put into something as small as sound design oozes out, clear for all to see (or hear). Each facet, each tiny detail; each seemingly unnecessary area of the game has been perfected and mastered.

Of course, you can focus on the tiny details until your face goes blue, but it's medically inadvisable and, frankly, a little creepy. Ask any player what the main - possibly only - fault was, and they'll simply say "it wasn't fun enough". Now, 'fun' is an incredibly odd and subjective word; it can mean a plethora of different things to different people. Prod a bit further, and eventually you'll get something like: "Well, couldn't that have put harrier jets in there too?".

Ah. There it is. After San Andreas spoiled gamers with harriers, jetpacks, tanks and all manner of improbable luxuries, it was a shock to some that Rockstar then created a game which was so... grounded. Literally. Helicopters were your only set of wings, and you didn't even go higher than the tallest building in the game. People will put this down to the game being 'too realistic', but without realism, we wouldn't have that beautiful physics engine or that perfection of detail. No: Grand Theft Auto IV suffered one crippling flaw. After the dark and engrossing plot had tied itself up, there was bugger all to do.

Roman wanted to go bowling. Brucie wanted to hit a strip club. Some random woman wants to do god-knows-what. You can scrape together half an hour's worth of enjoyment from slow-mo driving along vast stretches of sidewalk, clipping poor souls and watching them fly through the air; or even doing a good deed and finding some crimes to swiftly and gruesomely stop with your Police Cruiser (crime doesn't pay, kids), but they're shallow and meaningless. The excellent assassination missions were only 10 in number, and extra-story missions are non-existent. Can't we be a proper vigilante, stopping bank robberies and security van hijacks? Can't we have a near-endless supply of assassination missions from a random generator? Can't we have something to do, rather than aimlessly wandering the streets and jumping off high buildings? The lack of a proper lobby system meant the multiplayer died out quickly, and while there is certainly fun to be found even now, you'll find yourself longing for activities with more depth, more purpose.

But when a game's only misstep is the player simply wanting more, you know you've got a winner on your hands. Ever since that beautiful teaser trailer threatened to break the internet with the sheer volume of rabid gamers trying to view it, the world knew Grand Theft Auto IV would be special. Lo and behold, almost three years on, you can still slide the disc back in to your platform of choice, load up a save and find Liberty City as breathtaking, stunning, wondrous and alive as it was all those years ago.

It's like you never left.



Want to reminisce about times gone by? Put your comments below, and follow our Twitter - tweet us and we'll do our utmost to reply.

Labels: 2011, Chris Hawke, Feature, Grand Theft Auto IV, GTA4, Looking Back On, Retrospective, Rockstar

L.A. Noire, the long-delayed mystery thriller from Team Bondi, had its first in-game footage shown to the world on Thursday. Thanks to some superb lighting and the best facial animations ever seen in a video game, 2011 has suddenly become a lot more interesting. It's such exciting news that I trawled through the trailer to find all the hidden goodness for you, the eagle-eyed public.

"The case that makes you, and the case that breaks you."


Immediately, we're introduced to a beautiful shot of night-time L.A. Despite the city being 'a perfectly re-created Los Angeles', neither InstAheat nor Guanaco are real brands. The shop in the background looks very highly detailed, though, hinting that some buildings might be able to be entered at will.


This is very early on in the game, possibly the first mission. Our man, Cole Phelps, is still in police uniform (you progress through the ranks of the police as the game goes on), ready to take part in an interrogation mini-game. The terrifying Irish man is your boss. Thanks to ground-breaking facial technology, interrogations are simply watching for facial ticks and trying to spot lies, exactly like in real life.


The beauty doesn't stop with the faces, though; reflections are stunning thanks to Global Illumination technology. This classic 1940s rim casts a pretty accurate picture of the world around you.


Now we get to the 'Noire' bit. Expect plenty of blood and gore as you investigate crimes, searching for clues to lead you to the killer. See the scars around the wedding ring? We'll bet that this unfortunate soul had an affair.


Joy of joys! Thank goodness it's not all mystery and intrigue, as Cole has to fight the dreaded blur effects and lens smudge while taking police photographs of the deceased. It'll be interesting to see how much of a part this will play: will poor photographs make it harder to spot clues later on?


Unique number plates are in, as are hit-and-runs. Hey, it wouldn't be a Rockstar-developed game without them.


Here's where you get to the real action: a high speed chase down the streets of the City of Angels. In the frame before, the car at the front had blood on the bumper. Could you be intercepting crimes as they're happening? Notice the wonderful damage physics, too.


Interesting fact; Midnight Manhunt is an actual film. To wind down after a long day in the office, could it be possible for the player to sit down and watch a movie, à la Red Dead Redemption? This is also the first time we've seen any shots fired; pistols and revolvers are in, and a shotgun is seen earlier in the trailer.

Leave any other observations in the comments below, and be sure to follow our Twitter for more!

Labels: Analysis, Chris Hawke, L.A. Noire, Rockstar, Team Bondi

WARNING: This post contains massive spoilers for both the ending of all versions of Red Dead Redemption, and the final levels of the game. If you do not want to find out what happens, please do not read on.

Red Dead Redemption is an epic game. No doubt about it. From sprawling vistas of dust and dirt, to the starry sky on an endless night's hunting, and all the firefights and horsebreaking inbetween. Rockstar's epic is laden with atmosphere, and you might just get swept away from the main story with the many challenges or the exhaustive multiplayer modes. 'Course, when you return, you're treated to one of the best game endings we've ever encountered. Chris Hawke and Greg Mengel outline what makes the ending so spectacular.

Chris Hawke

Yes, it's sad. Let's get that over and done with first - John's departure from the video game world is tragic. Man tears were shed. Cut down in his prime, he had a good life ahead of him, but instead of growing old with a wife and child, he is cruelly pumped with lead. This upset and angered a lot of people, but it sets up for one of the best endings I've ever experienced.

So, you killed Dutch. Or rather, he jumped off a cliff - it doesn't matter. What's done is done, and now you get to go home to your loving family, all hugs and kisses, as the sunset falls over Beecher's Hope. Fin. Except Rockstar don't do cliche. Instead, John comes home to the truth - a broken family tearing itself apart, held together only by the desire of a better life for the child. This really shocked me - instead of the cinematic tearjerker followed by credits, you actually get missions. On a farm. As a dad. Woah. Literally hold your horses. That's a pretty daring choice by the developers, and luckily for them, it works brilliantly.

You see, while you've been shootin' and lootin', you haven't really known much about John. He could be replaced with Eastwood's 'Man With No Name', and it would still tie in with the player's trigger-happy escapades. Here, in the farm, you get to see John Marston the man. He shoots crows out of the corn silo because he wife wants him to. He worries his son reads to much and ignores the world, and then takes him out to hunt. He tends to the cattle and looks after the farm. Hell, they could have thrown in a 'Set The Table' minigame and it wouldn't have looked out of place. Far from being dull, it's the cinematics that make this part of the game so important.

You find that John and Abigail are going through hell just for a better future for their son. John wants Jack to be happy, and to live his live to the full, whilst the farm's income plummets and it's getting harder to get food on their plates. Here, you as the player really connect with John. You see his kinder, warmer, more gentle side, in direct comparison to the mowing down of Dutch's Gang in the previous mission. John Marston is trying to makes ends meet for his family by any means possible, and if that means swallowing his pride and hunting former friends, then so be it.

And then the real kick in the balls. Or rather, in John's case, bullet to the face. His death is sudden and unexpected, brutal and over in a flash. And having just started to build up a picture of the man John Marston really is, all at once he's no longer there. It really shows off Rockstar's incredible storytelling ability. All this time, you've played as John, but actually, your narrative viewpoint has been that of Jack, his son. Jack never really got to know his dad, and that fits in with the player's perspective - yes, you knew who he was, a little bit about his past, but there was so much more to discover - only sly hints of his mother, and what he did in his gang, paint a picture of his past. So, that switching of playable characters from John to Jack isn't just a cheap way of giving some length to the game, but a really stroke of genius - in many ways, you become what John never wanted you to become. You roam the wastelands, in search of revenge. You have no purpose other than to kill Edgar Ross. And when you finally do, you feel empty.

That's it - you've killed the man who murdered your father in cold blood. But was it really worth it? Does that right your wrongs? The fact that the credits roll straight after this encounter also makes this even harder to bear, as you start to realise that all your efforts as John - all you journeys and quests just to reunite your family - has blown it apart. To quote John himself: "[Jack] ain't gonna be no frontier gunslinger, killing and running in no gang". And what did you just do? You crossed half to map to kill a single old man. What would John say? What would your father think, knowing you've become the very thing he struggled to save you from? Far from, say, Uncharted 2's 'sunset and banter', Red Dead is bittersweet and heartbreaking.

Red Dead Redemption may just seem like a catchy title, but it's a clear condensation of the game's main question - can you redeem yourself through bloodshed? Does the death of Edgar Ross really make up for the death of John Marston? Was John a hero, dying for his family, or did he get what was coming for his wicked ways? If there were ever a game to write a thesis on (and I'm not saying there is), Red Dead Redemption is it. It's a beautifully crafted, perfectly put together and thought-provoking experience that betters most Hollywood movies.

Greg Mengel

Before you read on, be warned - before you click on any links, know that most of them lead to movie endings which all contain major spoilers because, well... they're endings. Every movie linked is worth seeing without having its climax ruined, so jump carefully.

Good story endings, like Narwhal sightings, are rare occurrences that most humans find themselves wanting to witness multiple times after experiencing once. It doesn't matter whether they're found in literature, games, film, song, family legends passed drunkenly over the kitchen table amidst mashed potatoes and Grandpa's racist slurs... a great ending to an equally engaging story will bind itself to a person, periodically waltzing across the forefront of their memory years after it was first seen, read, or heard. There are some that kick ass. Others, that delve into philosophy and the deep meaning of life, will make you think. Still more make you weep like a freshly-chicken-poxed, toothing infant. Every now and then, when the cosmos aligns just so, a story ending will come along that manages to inspire all (and more) of these emotional happenings at once. Red Dead Redemption is one of those cosmos-aligning tales that wraps itself up in a way that will stay with you years after you've put the game disk away and moved on to bigger and newer - though not necessarily better - titles.

Chris did a great job explaining the meat of what happened at the end of RDR - I'm not going to lengthen this article by repeating an already-sound recap and analysis. What I'll do instead is add some zest to the steak that was his segment by sprinkling it with a healthy dash of the thoughts I had as I shot Edgar Ross to avenge my dead father. Eight times, in the face.

As an American, the "redemption" theme of Red Dead Redemption holds a special meaning for me, as it reflects one of the historical philosophies of the good old US of A - the ability to improve your lot by putting hard, honest, innovative work into the frontier. For the first century of American history, this was possible, and people from the east (and the entire globe) migrated to the North American west in hopes of manifesting their own destiny. The poor could make themselves rich, the degraded could build communities where they had influence, and (heeere's Johnny) criminals could leave their lives of sin and violence behind in favor of living a peaceful life. Around 1900, the west was nearly filled up. Cowboys outnumbered Indians. The buffalo was nearly extinct. Fenced ranches and farms, not open prairie, dominated the frontier. Scenic landscapes of purple mountain majesties and big skies, barely touched for centuries, were now lined with railroads, and sometimes even paved streets and telephone lines. More than a few American thinkers saw that a huge change was coming to the west that would be hard for old westerners, who saw the freedom and lifestyle of Old West as pure, and modernization as corrupt, to adapt to. Cue John Marston.

John Marston is very clearly a symbol of the Old West. The man was born of a frontier prostitute and raised by a train-robbing, hard-drinking traveling posse. The man can barely read, and if confronted about that fact, he'd be the first to admit it. He's seen nothing but hard times, and wants nothing more than to live a better life. His method? Building a home the way people used to when they went west - by straightening out, settling down in a little corner of the American landscape, and carving out a niche for himself with dedication and hard work. For awhile, things go according to plan, and the "way" of the Old West works. John leaves his old posse, falls in love and gets married (to the former posse whore, who also wants a better life), builds himself a ranch, has a son (Jack), and tries to forget the way he used to live. Unfortunately, agents of the encroaching federal government (and cheerleaders of modernization) don't forget, nor do they forgive, John's past life. Just as the Old American West couldn't help being swept away by the "forces of modernity" that transformed the frontier, John couldn't free or absolve himself of past sins through dedication and hard work. The forces of modernization changed the futures of both.

Through the entire plot, this theme is explored in amazing detail by way of conversations between Jack and just about every character he comes across, from the ranch princess Bonnie MacFarlane to the Mexican revolutionary Abraham Reyes (a Zorro in his own mind). Nowhere is the frontier thesis explored in more detail than during conversations between John and the signer of his eventual death warrant, the government official Edgar Ross. When John discovers Ross has betrayed him, sending US troops to apprehend him at his ranch, he accepts his fate in perhaps the most frontier way possible - going out in a gun blaze of defiance and glory. John was the glue that held his family together - with him gone, they are almost guaranteed to dissolve as a unit, and the player knows it. It's a sad moment, a badass moment, and a moment that leaves you alone with your thoughts. Then you get to play as Jack, and Chris already covered all of my thoughts on why that's so awesome in it's own right.

So there's my take. Simply summarised, Red Dead Redemption's mixture of great plot and believable character psychology (discussed by Chris)and true-to-the-era historical theme and setting (described by me) all combines to create an ending that is exciting, intense, introspective, moving, and unbelievably badass - one of the best endings ever to grace a game.


Want to add your own thoughts? Comments below, and follow the Twitter.

Labels: Analysis, Chris Hawke, Feature, Greg Mengel, Red Dead Redemption, Rockstar

Rockstar Games, the studio behind the critically-acclaimed Grand Theft Auto series, has released the first trailer for the second downloadable addition to GTA IV, The Ballad of Gay Tony. Like the previous expansion, The Lost and The Damned, players will not take control of the GTA IV protagonist Nico, nor will the story revolve around the events of GTA IV. The game puts you in the shoes of Luis Lopez, a drug dealer and bodyguard of the titular Gay Tony.

Rockstar creative director Dan Houser also recently announced that the upcoming expansion, as well as the previous downloadable installment, will be released on a stand-alone disk. The package has been named Grand Theft Auto: Episodes From Liberty City, and will not require the original game to be played. This bundle, as well as its downloadable counterpart, are set to be released on 29 October 2009.



Tyson

Labels: DLC, GTA4, Rockstar, Tyson, Tyson Breen