Musings on Late Cold War Naval Aviation

You see this motherfucker right here? This is a Grumman F-14 Tomcat. This is no 21^st century multirole, born of compromise and built by the lowest bidder, shit no. This is an old-school balls-out naval jet interceptor from the Cold War, back when being the baddest aircraft in the sky meant something. This is the bird that you call upon when the Russians are already in the air and think they got you- the commie bastards are already planning dinner. The Tomcat will show them, though. It says fuck manoeuvrability, fuck economy and fuck socialism, getting to wherever the enemy is as quickly as possible and sending Ivan back to Moscow with a bunch of missiles up his pinko ass. Tomcat tucks his wings in mid-flight to go faster like a Goddamn Olympic skier, and those dudes are fast as shit. F-14 goes all the way up to Mach 2.3- do you know how fucking fast that is? I don’t! I have no idea! That is unknowably fast! We carrier launched, too- your boy don’t even need an airbase because he can operate from the fucking sea. That means seventy-one percent of earth’s surface is Tomcat turf before he even takes off. This is the aircraft they flew in Top Gun, and it singlehandedly balanced that movie out into heterosexuality- it’s a street-fighting alley dwelling Tomcat, not some well groomed woman cat that sits on a cushion all fucking day. The F-14 even has two seats, so you can bring your bitch out and watch her swoon at your 28,000 pound feet of thrust- that is almost as much thrust as one of Vin Diesel’s fucking arms. Maybe you’re thinking that intercepting shit is all the F-14 is good for? Well fuck you once, because if it didn’t intercept shit you’d be wrestling your sister for dog meat in a glowing post-nuclear shithole, and fuck you twice because when they stuck a LANTIRN on it, it became an unstoppable bomb dropping ground attack monster. People in the know say that your hairy ass real man dedicated interceptor the F-14 did these missions better than lame nerdy multirole F-18 ever could, like it ain’t shit. Let me tell you this, right now- the free world was never freer than when this cat prowled its borders, but those days are gone. The last free Tomcat took off from a carrier way back in '06- now, only the Iranians still fly the F-14.

SSX Review

SSX is a game you’re probably aware of- I’m sure everyone has played at least one of the great PS2 releases. It’s a high-speed snowboarding game, with greater emphasis on crazy stunts and big air than on pure simulation. The series has been rebooted for the current generation with a new game simply titled SSX, just like the first one to make sure it’s hard to Google search. I played a lot of the older games, particularly the brilliant SSX3, so I’m pretty well placed to assess the latest; does it deserve the weighty legacy of the series? 

The core gameplay is just about what you might expect- ride a plank down a mountain. Slap the face buttons or twiddle the right stick to do tricks to earn boost fuel, which you can expend to increase your speed, somehow- max it out and you enter “Tricky” mode, temporarily giving unlimited boost and permitting even more improbable stunts than usual. Controls are smooth and responsive- ripping down the slopes looks and feels great, and the player can pull sick tricks with ease. Maybe too much ease, in fact- mashing buttons and sticks as soon as you get airborne is a sure way to a spectacular jump, without a whole lot of thought. SSX was never a simulator, but I’m pretty sure being able to do 1260 degree spins without a ramp is something only Marty McFly could dream of, and, though I can’t really remember SSX3, I think that game offered greater variety of tricks. Nevertheless, technical proficiency and strategy is required to succeed; in race events, big air slows you down but generates vital boost, so a balance must be struck between getting the right line and keeping up the boosting. There’s a level progression for each boarder from 1 to 10, and each has their own inventory of equipment bought between runs. Higher levels unlock more and better equipment items for purchase, so there is incentive to keep at it, but it does mean shut-in nerds like me will be able to outperform casual scrubs like you by merit of play time. 

SSX includes straightforward trick and race events, just as you would expect, but also a sweet survival mode. These “Deadly Descents” survival events, where players attempt to go down a completely fucking impossible run without being killed, were actually reminiscent of my efforts in real-world snowsports as a kid, perfectly capturing the technicality and slippery battle with gravity and velocity I experienced. The effortless superheroism of trick and race runs is gone- slipping and sliding, you try to inch your way to the bottom down a nightmare path. Each has some unique hazard that requires specialised equipment to traverse safely- yawning chasms that need wingsuits to cross, freezing temperatures requiring thermal suits and low oxygen environments that cause blackouts without oxygen supplies, among others. The Deadly Descents provide the best moments in the game, by my reckoning- heart stopping moments before the wingsuit opens or as the screen fades to black from oxygen starvation, and these stages provide a great counterpoint to the standard, run-of-the-mill trick and race game modes.

The singleplayer campaign, though showing promise early on, isn’t a whole lot of good. The premise is thus- a team of the world’s top snowboarders, most of whom featured in past SSX games, have united as “Team SSX” to ride the nine wildest runs on the planet- the “Deadly Descents”. One, the now-grown little twerp from SSX3, decides those guys suck shit and resolves to make the descents himself before the SSX team can- suddenly, we have a god-damn race. What this means in gameplay terms is a pretty straightforward progression from rnage to range, doing a handful of events in each locale before tackling the big scary finale. Each range has you take on a new character from the roster, and each character has a comic-book style intro sequence that theoretically gives a little background on them, but which only really serve to embarrass and confuse the player with their absurd lameness. I’m not asking for a serious-face character study in my plank riding game, but zero background would have been better than the horrible fucking caricatures the comics gave. The campaign is really just a platform to get some experience points with each character and familiarity with the core mechanics- in this role it works, but it's short and pretty simple.

It’s the “Ridernet” online functionality that makes SSX really worth looking into, though there are some puzzling design choices. Every course in the game can be raced or tricked down- Ridernet keeps track of your best times and scores and, more importantly, your friends’, in a fashion very closely mirroring the “Autolog” system in recent Need for Speed games. The rivalry this inspires is simply awesome. Drops are restarted again and again, angry messages exchanged, and equipment constantly changed up in an arms race for that top spot. Players feel hatred, true hatred, for close rivals, and awe at those tens of seconds or millions of points ahead. At bottom, this is a slick and compelling leaderboard, though, and the surprise is that SSX doesn’t have a conventional lobby multiplayer. That’s right- you can’t start a race with a couple buddies or strangers and compete with them in real time; a bewildering gap in the feature set. The closest we get is ‘Global Events’; player-created events with fixed parameters imposed on factors like buy-in cost, run time and permitted equipment, where participants compete to make it into brackets ranked from Bronze to Diamond. These can be really cool, especially with rules like “no ice axes” on runs that need ice axes to really spice up the competition, and thousands of players can take part. While you see other riders in real time while participating, it’s really just eye candy- it’s still basically a solo trial. I’d recommend ensuring you have plenty of friends to play with- I added a bunch of people from online forums to help fill out my leaderboards, and without that competition I could see the game getting pretty goddam old, and fast. 

The new SSX, then, is a pretty great game. It’s mechanically sound, very compelling and with a good balance of depth and accessibility. Visuals are crisp and sharp, and while anything with a central theme of snow has an upper limit on graphical variety each range does have its own flavour and style, a commendable feat. The online functions are critical to the experience, and though the game suffers from the omission of lobby multiplayer it is by no means crippled. SSX deftly avoids the classic reboot pitfall of completely ruining the franchise and retroactively souring past instalments- though it has definitely moved on from the old games in terms of style and gameplay, it represents more of a natural evolution than a jarring shift, preserving the raw excitement of its forebears. It’s thrilling, competitive, slick and very cool, if a little goofy in places, and comes with my recommendation as an old fan.  

Ico and Shadow of the Colossus HD Collection

You might not have heard of these games before, but I assure you that you should have. Ico and its spiritual successor Shadow of the Colossus are held by many to be two of the finest games ever made. Both developed by the imaginatively named Team Ico and originally released for Playstation 2, they have been remastered and re-released on the Playstation Store, and can be bought separately or as a bundle at notable discount. In truth, it’s difficult, maybe even futile, for me to try to adequately explain the experiences that these games provide. These are the two examples most commonly trotted out when the validity of the video game medium as an art form is being debated, and with good reason; the atmospheric storytelling and emotive power on exhibition are second to none. 

Ico follows the exploits of a young boy named Ico, who is imprisoned in a castle due to being born with horns, seen as a bad omen by his people. Breaking free of his chamber, he tries to escape, encountering along the way Yorda, a girl also imprisoned in the castle. Together, they seek to escape the castle, pursued at every turn by the shadowy minions of the fortresses fearsome queen. In terms of gameplay, it’s a pretty straightforward puzzle-platformer; the player controlled Ico must escort and protect the vulnerable Yorda to progress. What makes this game real special is the beautifully crafted atmosphere, and the developing bond between the two characters. Despite the language barrier between them, they come together through handholding and their mutual wish to get away from the castle. Obviously, I’m far too fucking macho to be easily affected by such things, but even I was a little touched by the simple friendship and trust they share. The queen’s shadowy minions will take any opportunity to seize Yorda, and I found myself fiercely protective of her- “Unhand her, you shadowy ruffian!” I would howl, as yet another smoky apparition tried to make off with the frightened girl. That alone is noteworthy- Yorda has to be constantly protected and literally guided by the hand. She is defenceless against enemies and lacks Ico’s climbing and swinging abilities, meaning you have to make lengthy detours to accommodate her. In most games, this kind of escort mission is insufferable, a total pain in the arse; here, I felt genuinely responsible for my charge. 

Shadow of the Colossus offers a very different experience. Players assume the role of a lone warrior, Wander, who seeks to raise his lost love from the grave by defeating sixteen fearsome monsters known as Colossi. These inhabit a barren, hopelessly bleak and forbidden land which Wander traverses on horseback. That’s it, really- sixteen boss battles, punctuated by the journeys from one to the next. It’s an unusual formula, and one that could have fallen flat were it not for the brilliant design of the foes, the unique thrill of each combat and the haunting beauty of the world the player crosses. The colossi are all great lumbering monsters, seemingly made from stone, so the only way to harm them is by climbing over their exteriors and stabbing them in certain weak spots. They’re all unique from one another, and each requires a different strategy to get at the vital spot. A huge amount of work has gone into making these monsters feel just right- the way they move around, the believably heavy thumps of their footfalls and their behaviours in their environments are all brilliantly realised. Maybe the most significant factor in making the colossi feel like real living things is the way they seem to really not want to die. The way they thrash around as you climb over their exteriors, the otherworldly moans of pain when they are injured, the way their big sad eyes look at the camera as you finish them- god damn. I mean, my lawyer has instructed me to state that I am no expert in the matter, but this game makes you feel like a real fucking murderer. The inter-battle exploration segments are similarly believable. The howling of the wind, the rolling, untamed terrain and the drab, bleak colour scheme conspire to evoke the feeling of true, deep wilderness. This isn’t Skyrim or Liberty City, bursting with side missions and secrets, but that’s the point; the lack of life and artefacts on display enhance the lonely wasteland feeling that this world is built to give, and on the occasion that you do find something interesting, it’s all the more so as a result.

The games are from the same developer, and though the storylines are only related by the flimsiest of threads, there are a lot of similarities- the lonely atmosphere, the mystery and otherworldliness. They also share many of the same flaws. There’s a certain clumsiness to the controls, particularly in Ico, that can see you miss vital jumps or strikes. Puzzles in both games often have one and only one solution, which can sometimes be really opaque, especially when you can see a way to progress which is inexplicably ineffective. On more than one occasion, too, the solution is evident but the execution is aggravatingly, infuriatingly and artificially difficult- after spending about ninety minutes in the company of the fifteenth colossus, chipping away at its health eternally while the vulnerabilities stared me in the face, I was ready to snap the fucking disc, which would have been really difficult since this was a digital download. Though the HD remaster treatment has been kind, and the artstyle in both games is great, you can tell they were both originally PS2 games, and, indeed, that Ico was for much of its development intended for the original Playstation- animations and textures are definitely far from cutting edge. Additionally, I found myself dissatisfied with both endings- they felt a little forced, and didn’t give quite the closure I’d have liked, but that might just be me. Nevertheless, these are both fantastic experiences overall- Shadow of the Colossus probably edges Ico out in overall quality, but I would really recommend them both as games everyone in the world should play. The PS3 owners among you should pick this bundle up from the online store, failing that, see if you can pick up a copy for the PS2, since everyone has one of those- hell, ask me nicely and I might dig my PS2 copies from the vault for you. 

As for whether or not these games are bona-fide works of art, as for whether or not any games can be works of art; I’m not sure if I can properly comment. I know a hell of a lot about videogames, and not a lot at all about art. What I will say is this- these games demonstrate the unique ability of games to give the player a deep and genuine involvement in a narrative, something I’ve always been convinced of. I always thought that the complicity and interaction a video game requires of a player makes him a part of the story; it’s not just happening to a character, it’s happening to you. This makes the whole thing that much more effective, and, for my money, is not something other media can do anything like as well. I’d like to think that, if nothing else, lends the medium at least a measure of artistic validity; but, like I said, I don’t know much about art. Certainly, though, these games and others offer experiences that cannot be matched anywhere else.

Shit, look at me all serious-faced, talking about “the validity of the medium as an art form”. What am I thinking? I’ll stick to poop jokes in future. Next up- Crysis PS3. Stay tuned.

Modern Warfare 3 Review

Another November, another Call of Duty title. The business model of this huge military-fps series is as regular as my bowel movements, and almost as stinky. Nonetheless, I picked up this year’s release, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, along with maybe eighty percent of the human population. I did so with some trepidation, considering my dislike for last year’s, and the worrying events at developer Infinity Ward since the last game, but I was hopeful that it would once again capture the hugely compelling action of the older games. 

some scrubs I'm gonna kill later

 

Nobody plays these games for the singleplayer, obviously, but since it’s part of the package I played through it, so let’s mention it and get it out of the way. The narrative is mostly stupid, Michael Bay movie shit. It’s the near future, and the big baddie Makarov has, through the events of the past two games, played the powers against one another to cause all out world war. Russia has invaded mainland USA, somehow, as well as most of Europe. The player switches between characters, variously fighting the regular Russian military and Makarov’s personal terror cell. Not a bad setup- a little overt, perhaps, a far cry from the relatively muted, Clancy-style narrative of the original Modern Warfare, but plenty of scope for the high action set-pieces the series is famed for. And action there is, relentless action, with the standard infantryman play interspersed with decent turret sections- exactly the gameplay formula we’ve come to expect. Which is fine, really; it’s a competent formula, and though it’s a little stale by this point, there was no real call for a hotbed of gameplay innovation. That said, I don’t think it comes off as well as the older games. Modern Warfare was never The Elder Scrolls in terms of freeform gameplay, but this game approaches monorail levels of linearity- you follow your boss from setpiece to setpiece, and stray not a fucking inch or you will die. The dreaded quick-time event makes a few appearances as well, perhaps surprisingly a series first. This definitely gets grating- the campaign is not long, clocking in at about six hours on the higher difficulties, but I was bored as all hell by the end. In terms of gameplay, it’s not terrible- it works without any huge bugs I can recall, and everything is at least as polished as a game this heavily recycled should be.

Special mention goes to the finer details of the singleplayer narrative for being the most unrelentingly retarded crap I’ve experienced in years. I’m not asking for Pulitzer Prize shit, here, but holy god damn! Call of Duty 4 set the bar for a storyline that was thrilling without being overtly overt. This game flies an F-22 into the bar, blows up the stadium, and then escapes to Hogwarts on a rocket jetski. I get the feeling the developers were given a list of landmarks to shoehorn in at all costs, and the result is a game that is more like a sightseeing tour than a special operation. Turn your brain all the way off for this one, otherwise it will ask annoying questions, such as-

• Why is the roof of the New York Stock exchange a good place for jamming equipment?
• Why are the Paris Catacombs a good place to stage an invading army?
• Why is there an army of terrorists aboard the Russian president’s plane mid-flight?
• Why does a 30 second segment need to show dozens of union flags, a red bus, the Houses of Parliament, a football, a red postbox, a red phonebox and Tower Bridge to demonstrate that it takes place in London?
• Why does the chopper pilot fly into dangerous conditions with no co-pilot to assist him or to operate the cannon, but instead have the player character remotely control the gun using some sort of iPad while fighting on the ground?
• Why did the developer think that in a post-Team America world it would be okay to, without irony, blow up the Eiffel Tower?
• Why did I buy this stupid fucking game?

There are no answers to any of these, or the dozens of other head scratching moments, more satisfactory than “because it was kind of cool”.

me headshotting some scrub

Multiplayer is what everyone who’s anyone cares about, of course. Again, it’s outwardly similar to past games- the same progression system, the same weapon mechanics, the same killstreak reward system- veteran players will be immediately at home. It’s the finer details that really let it down. The design of the all new maps is genuinely heinous- they are all small, single-level affairs, highly cluttered with very limited sightlines and an emphasis on spamtastic point blank engagements, nothing like the complex arenas of past MWs. The slight tweaks to weaponry have also had, in my eyes, a negative effect; damage is up, recoil is down. High fire rate weapons are depressingly effective as any gorilla can mindlessly spray his way to victory. Weapon customisation has been needlessly simplified such that instead of completing specific challenges to unlock different upgrades, players simply unlock everything through scoring points with the weapon. The “perk” system that allowed players to choose from a selection of bonus abilities has been reshuffled once more, and it seems to me to no longer offer quite the playstyle variety as in the past. Killstreak rewards, too, have been reorganised. There are now distinct “strike packages” that offer different rewards with different acquisition methods- the Assault package gives the player offensive rewards, typically attacks from aircraft, for the traditional kills without dying model, the Support package grants team-friendly bonuses, without resetting after deaths, and the Specialist package gives the player access to extra perks based on his performance. These fresh features are pretty cool, but between the ease of dying to some lucky scrub and the bizarre skyline clutter that blocks the sightline of support aircraft, killstreaks aren’t nearly as reliable or effective as in MW2. All in all, I think this is the worst Modern Warfare yet, with nothing over its predecessors other than a few UI improvements. Those games were crack cocaine for me, but this shit is like Vege-Crack.

I was pleasantly surprised by the ‘Spec-Ops’ cooperative segment of the game, especially compared to the poor showing from the more staple singleplayer and competitive multiplayer parts. Split into Missions, where players must complete a set task or scenario, and Survival, where they fend off ever more ferocious waves of enemies for as long as possible. Playable splitscreen or online, it’s very competently executed, and quite compelling. Missions are usually under ten minutes long, but if you die you are put back to the very start. There’s a really strong one-more-go mentality with these, and you’ll find yourself discussing tactics and manoeuvres to get to the finish. I’m not sure if there’s quite the same variety as MW2’s coop missions, nor the same steady increase in challenge, but there’s plenty of fun to be had with these. Survival mode is also really cool, doubtless an acknowledgement of the Treyarch games’ hugely popular zombie mode. It’s the standard waves-of-foes gameplay you’d expect, with weapons, equipment and air support requisition points to summon extra gear with the cash you earn for killing enemies. These are linked to an unlock system akin to multiplayer- what you can call in depends on your experience level. I’m not sure it works as well here, especially in the splitscreen context- I had giant machine guns and automated sentries while my buddy was forced to make do with only an ancient shotgun. Still, it adds a bit of depth, and replayability, which might otherwise be lacking. The survival mode is let down a little by being stuck on the same horrible maps as multiplayer, however. Seriously, these maps are shit.

 me killing some other scrub

There’s also the Call of Duty Elite thing, I guess? It’s like a stat tracker, I think, and also a delivery system for CoD related content. I had a look at it, though I don’t really see the point. You can look at some really detailed statistics, and watch policemen play MW3 with firemen, apparently. You can also buy a subscription that unlocks enhanced features and includes access to all the map packs and other DLC as they become available, which they haven’t at the time of writing. I don’t really know what to say about it. It works fine, with a smooth if a little confusing interface in the console application, so maybe it’s of use to someone? 

Modern Warfare 3, then, is about what I was expecting. It’s pretty competent in design, if flawed in places, full featured and pretty well polished. The engine tech was a little dated when it was used in CoD4, and there’s not been much changed since then- it’s definitely not cutting edge technically, especially compared to competition like Battlefield 3. It’s a by the numbers Modern Warfare game, basically just this year’s instalment. Personally, I don’t like it nearly as much as I did the first two. Those felt like games the creators wanted to make; this feels like one the accountants wanted. That’s not exactly surprising- while it’s possible that the creative talent at Infinity Ward remained in their comfy jobs during the staff exodus, and the jobsworth hangers-on jumped ship to the newly founded and unproven Respawn, my money’s on the reverse. Frankly, there is a pervading stink of playing it safe, simplification and of pandering to the low-skill, casual player who has become the target audience. CoD4 multiplayer was enjoyed by the casual gamer as it was straightforward and compelling, but also by the hardcore neckbearded asshole like me because of its depth and variety. MW3 will be enjoyed by the casual gamer because it was made purely with him in mind.

In Which I Get Real Excited About Something Probably Meaningless

BREAKING: some guy wore a t-shirt. The ramifications are potentially huge. What? Oh yeah, sorry. A Valve employee wore a t-shirt, and that t-shirt says “Half-Life 3”. Now it’s a big deal, right? Spotted by an employee of Uber Entertainment, developers of the rather good Monday Night Combat, at an industry event, the offending garment is pictured below. 

Half-Life news gets me very excited, no matter how totally inconsequential it is. Four goddamn years have passed since fans were left hanging in the middle of an unresolved narrative by the last game, and Valve have said about twenty words about the future of the franchise in that time. It’s complete fucking radio silence on one of gaming’s most beloved series, it’s become a joke, the new Duke Nukem Forever; I think a little excitability is excused.

This is weird, though. Why the fuck does this guy have a Half-Life 3 shirt? The game hasn’t been announced, they haven’t even finished with Half-Life 2’s episodic expansions. Did he make it himself to wear around the office, get a laugh from his coworkers while they continue to not make it? If it’s official HL3 merchandise that raises even more questions, chiefly- why does official HL3 merchandise exist? Valve are incredibly tight-lipped whenever anyone asks them about the future of Half-Life, and this is the closest to official word there has been. They’re not above simply messing with the fans, but to do so with Half-Life 3 would be cruel; there’s a huge amount of love out there for these games, and their continued absence hurts everyone that cares.

Putting my analytical hat on for a second, since I rarely get to do so for my paranormal detective agency, the shirt looks strikingly similar to one they sell already, bearing the official HL2 logo. There’s a notable difference, though- on that one, the iconic lambda is within the circle and the 2 is without, but here the big ol’ 3 is centre-stage- whether it’s official or otherwise, the designer didn’t want it to be mistaken for the old logo, they wanted people to see that three. I’m no artist, but that makes sense- it’s still distinctly HL, but the emphasis on the three gets nerds like me all excited. Not sure what that actually proves, though. I guess it shows a little more work than simply swapping the number has gone into the logo, which means that if it’s a fake it had at least a moment’s thought given.

It’s hard to tell what to make of this, but I’ll hope against hope that there’s something big coming. Four years is a long-ass time, after all.

Grander Than Ever

Contrary to popular belief, Rockstar Games’s Grand Theft Auto is not just a series about stealing cars and murdering prostitutes. These are, of course, vital gameplay elements; but there’s a little more to the thing than the tabloids, those bastards who get paid for writing stuff, would have you think. They’re games that create a living world, one full of people and attention to detail, of believability and finger-on-the-pulse parody. They’re games that give the player freedom to do as he pleases, and that provide plenty of things to be free to do. They are games that tell a story; one of mobsters, drug deals and psychotics, but also one of comedy, with dark humour oozing from every pore. They are games, as should be obvious, of which I am rather fond. And I felt the closest a miserable bastard like me gets to joy when I found that there was to be another.

While it might not be surprising in and of itself to know that one of the biggest series in entertainment would be updated, there is, I think, a crucial conceptual leap from “sooner or later there will be a new GTA” to “GTA5 is a real thing that is being made, and there is a trailer embedded below”. Announced, in typical Rockstar fashion, with a single cryptic tweet, the latest instalment in the crime-action franchise has been revealed to the world with this first trailer.

A nice trailer, undeniably. But what does it tell us? Speculation on the internet is already rife about the game, but here are the details of which we can be certain- GTA5 is taking the series back to West Coast USA, centring in Los Santos, the game universe’s mirror of Los Angeles, and is set in the present day. We’ve been here before- 2004’s Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas had you play as a young street thug from one of Santos’s criminal gangs on a wild adventure around the state, battling with rival gangs and corrupt cops in the pursuit of money and of street justice. While that Los Santos was one of three in-game cities and relatively cramped, looks like the GTAV rendition, given that it seems to be the main event this time around, will be far larger and hugely more detailed, much like the reimagining of Liberty City between GTA3 and 4, which had it much more closely resembling real life New York. The fan-favourite fixed-wing aircraft seem to be back, and I’ll wager they can be player controlled given the outpouring of entitled whining when GTA4 omitted these from its vehicle roster. The shots of mountains and fields confirm that the countryside surrounding Los Santos will be featured in some capacity, too.

Why go back to Los Santos? GTA: Vice City was very popular with its ‘80s faux-Miami setting; why not return there? For the answer to that, we need only listen to the first line of the trailer. “Why did I move here? I guess it was the weather. Or, ah, I don’t know, that thing, that magic.” As well as being the words of a jaded former mobster/federal agent who may or may not be the player character, this is a message from Rockstar to the fans. Setting is as mission-critical to these games as Hellfire missiles are to an attack chopper. New York City is an amazing place, and so was its replication in GTA4’s Liberty City- the capital of the world, the great melting pot, the gateway to the new world and all the other lame-ass clichés. Los Angeles, maybe thanks to its mystification through Hollywood and the media, has a similar magic of its own, an enduring and unique charm. Miami is a superb place for an ‘80s setting, yes; shit, I think Miami was where the ‘80s started and spread forth, the source of all the world’s eighties. But Rockstar doesn’t tend to go over old ground, and outside that grubby decade, what is Miami? Some greasy town in Florida; nothing compared to the City of Angels. Additionally, while the rampant gang culture around in nineties LA has subsided somewhat, I think much of it is still a dangerous-ass place to be, too; this is a game named after a criminal act, after all. I’m real excited to see what Rockstar brings to the table with this game world; they’re the best in the industry at making a world that feels like a real place and not one that revolves around the player, and every game they’ve brought out since GTA3 has improved in this area.

Trailer doesn’t give us too much info about characters. Rumour is there might be multiple protagonists this time around, which is conceivable- GTA4’s episodic expansions each had their own player character, whose tale was distinct from but overlapping with the others, and I could see a similar structure being put into this game. There’s a streetwise looking black guy who appears a few times in the sort of positions a GTA protagonist finds himself in, but it’s hard to be sure. One real interesting thing is the older looking fella at forty seconds in. That face matches the voice somewhat, which is cool, but what’s got the rumour mill working overtime is the noticeable resemblance to Vice City’s Tommy Vercetti. I’m not entirely convinced by that one; Rockstar are perfectly capable of making new characters without dragging up old ones. It’s not inconceivable- dude does look a lot like how Tommy might look after twenty-five years aging and ten of graphical enhancement, and it could be nice to give an aging mobster character that sort of familiarity twist- but the only reason I’m entertaining the idea of that being an older Tommy Vercetti is the fact that, well, it looks a lot like an older Tommy Vercetti. Character design is another thing that has been improving steadily, so this is likely to be top-notch.

Couple other interesting things to note. There’s a dog visible in the first shot, which, combined with the plenty of countryside shown, suggests that the game will have a variety of animals á la Red Dead Redemption. There’s an electric roof animation, hinting at a deeper vehicle system, and the dudes in masks robbing something have assault rifles fitted with suppressors, possibly indicating some degree of weapon customisation. The jet that screeches past the camera looks to be a fighter, and my guess as your friendly neighbourhood military nerd is that it’s a new version of San Andreas’s Hydra jet based on the real-world F-35. There’s probably stuff I’ve missed, I can’t see worth a goddamn- maybe you should mention it in the comments.

Maybe I’m just a dribbling fanboy, but this one trailer has me really stoked already. GTAV should be one to watch. Tune in sometime vaguely soonish for a review of Battlefield 3, and, if I can be arsed buying the same game for the fifth time, maybe Modern Warfare 3 too.

Tanks, World of

Do you have any idea, any idea, just how interesting the history of tank combat is? I'll tell you; shit is incredibly interesting. Did you know, for instance, that the differences in Soviet and NATO tank tactics can actually be observed in the design of the tanks themselves? The ruskies favoured aggressive, advancing-under-fire doctrine, and consequently, the tanks are low-profile and manoeuvrable. NATO didn't play that way, oh no. NATO doctrine dictates that you roll up on the crest of a hill, exposing just your turret, depressing the gun and blasting on fools from behind the protection of geography. The extra gun mobility needed by this approach requires a taller turret, giving the vehicle an increased target profile, though one that is ideally hidden in a hull-down position of cover. Ain't that interesting? No? Well, shit. Guess I'll skip the ten thousand word essay on armoured warfare. Fortunately, the knowledge isn't required to enjoy World of Tanks, an interesting free-to-play game from wargaming.net.

It's not easily genre-able, this one. It's probably an action game, firstly- standard battles pitch teams of 15 tanks up against one another on a variety of maps. To succeed in battle, you need to employ some degree of strategy, since it's just a little more complex than your average Black Ops match, though the same could maybe be said of . In addition to the rootin' tootin' shootin' side of things, we have some RPG-style progression out of battle- you buy tanks and upgrades for them with credits earned in battle, and watch your crewmen increase in skill like some kind of militarised Pokémon. An unusual game, then, but a good one? Maybe.

A garage brimming with my totally sweet vehicle selection.

You start off with three frankly heinous little wagons in your garage, one from each of the Russian, American and German lines. After a few battles in these poorly armed, slow, paper-armoured deathboxes, you might have scraped up enough funds and experience to upgrade. In terms of vehicles offered, World of Tanks is certainly impressive- there are five classes of vehicle- agile Light Tanks, versatile Mediums, powerful Heavies, long range SPG (self-propelled gun) artillery wagons and ambush-focused Tank Destroyers, with each nation having intersecting lines for each class in ten tiers of increasing potency. There's a whole lot of historical accuracy here, with tanks from the inter-war period through to the early '50s, though dozens of the tanks available seem to have been prototypes that never saw combat. Nonetheless, the attention to detail is commendable, almost alarming- each tank has realistic options for equipment and meticulously detailed models, including the positions of crewmen and essential parts with regards to incoming fire. I saw a thread on the (well-trafficked) official forums where digital tankers were genuinely digging up blueprints and design documents for these sixty or seventy year old machines to find the ideal spots to place that killing shot.

Into the fray! I took a screenshot before the enemy appeared because I did not wish to put virtual lives at risk.

The progression system is solid. Players spend experience to to unlock new parts for their tank, which also unlocks further research- the classic 'tech tree' approach. There's a lot of depth, here; researching appropriate advancements is vital to keep your tank competitive, and there are a hell of a lot to choose from. Engines, turrets, guns, suspensions and radio units can all be swapped out. Most of the parts available are straight upgrades, but each tank generally has a range of guns available with variations in rate of fire, accuracy and firepower. There is an awful lot of fucking grinding, though, which can prove a real pain. I wanted to get into the Russian Medium tank line, which includes the legendary T-34 series and ultimately the venerable T-54, arguably the first true Main Battle Tank; a delicious prospect, as I'm sure you would agree if you knew what that meant. However, to get even as far as the T-34 (a vehicle without which your sorry ass, reader, might well be speaking German), I had to progress all the way through the light tank line. Light tanks suck man balls, though, and grinding through was a real drag. Because there is so much grinding (this is an MMO, after all), I worry that it would be all too easy to stick a whole lot of man-hours getting locked into a line that isn't as much fun as you thought it'd be. This is reduced a little with recent additions to the tree whereby you can move more easily between classes, but it remains a concern.

The pre-round period is filled with tension, motivational speeches and shit-talking.

The actual gameplay is pretty fun. Two teams of fifteen vehicles line up against one another on about a square kilometre of semi-accurate historical battlefield. To win, a team must either destroy all enemy vehicles (there are no respawns) or capture the enemy base. A lot of work has gone into the combat; intricate mechanics are present for spotting enemy vehicles, shell penetration and tank damage. There's a potent one-more-match mindset the game invites you into, probably because of the one-life system, reminiscent of Counter-Strike. To survive in combat, you must be fairly thoughtful- positioning and movement is key. Speeding out into the open battlefield will almost certainly leave you with thirty tonnes of burnt out paperweight in short order. Unfortunately, some of the tactics are nullified by the relatively compact maps. These play too much into the hands of the heavy tanks; their crazy armour and god-like firepower is quite a bit more helpful than the extra mobility of the light and medium vehicles. It’s not that badly balanced, (though the developers are Russian, so the Soviet tanks have characteristics between ‘exaggerated’ and ‘nightmare death chariot’) and they are working on it, but the issue is present. Another balance issue comes from matchmaking. Since the available tanks range from inter-war experiments to two-hundred ton prototype tracked mountains, there’s a tier system, and you theoretically get matchmade with tanks around your own tier. I think you can end up with too many extreme-tiered tanks; it’s not much fun to play in a team with five tier-fives against one with five tier-eights, but this seems to happen all too often. It’s not crippling, and if you find the wrapping paper of your mid-tier tank torn asunder by the berserk child at the controls of some steel monster, you can just leave the battle and start one in a different tank, but too often I see a tier-four light matchmade with some tier-nine heavies, and pity that fool.

This guys about to taste some hurt. Or he would be if i hadn't got a bloody ricochet.

For a free game, the production values are great- tanks are meticulously modelled, and a whole lot of effort has clearly gone into their recreation. In fact, for a free game, what faults it has are pretty minor. That said, for a free game, there are an awful lot of ways to spend money on it. You can buy a premium subscription, increasing your credit and experience income, premium vehicles if your time is too precious to grind through the trees to get tanks the proper way and premium ammunition to penetrate thicker armour. You start with a (fairly healthy) five garage slots, and more can be purchased for real money, stuff like that. The devs have, I think, struck that difficult freemium balance where paying real money is both worthwhile and non-essential; even the extra-penetrative shells don’t give much ingame advantage since they don’t do more damage than the standard ammo- essentially they just mean you are less hosed against tanks tougher than your own. At higher levels, the income bonus from a premium subscription is the surest way to make any kind of progress, yes, but at no point is it essential, which is very agreeable.

So, if you find yourself with a desire for some WW2 armoured action, but no desire to pay for it, I could not, in good conscience, recommend any game over World of Tanks. Since various goverments and school boards have rejected my calls for the art of tank combat to become a mandatory part of primary education, it might be the only way you can learn this vital skill.