Boycotting Capcom

For those who don't know, Capcom has announced that they are cancelling MegaMan Legends 3. This is along side the earlier canceling of MegaMan Universe.

They also appear to have screwed up Devil May Cry, and are already releasing an update to the recent MvC3 and another game on the Street Fighter 4 engine "because now it has Tekken characters in it." Oh, and while it looks fun, SFxT is going to be considered it's own vs. series so it's probably going to get $40 updates too.

Well fuck them. They don't want to give me the games I want, I'm not going to buy other games from them. I don't have the money to keep buying updates to every single fighting game at this point, and DMC looks like shit. Also, no, it's not just Dante's design that makes it look like shit, the whole direction of the trailer is pretentious, his movements look awkward at best, and it looks like the flow of the game will be shit, which is par for the course with Ninja Theory.

Until MegaMan Legends 3 or a truly, truly groundbreaking MegaMan game comes out I'm not buying another Capcom game. Even then I'll never buy the first version of a fighting game from them again, because I know another will come out in a year.

Capcom, while I love many of your series know that your brand name is now going to be like cancer to any game you put it on for me. Hopefully other fans will do the same and you'll realize how much of a pile of douches you've all been once your get rich quick scheme goes down the toilet and fans keep clamoring for MegaMan. The next time you have an idea for a kickass MegaMan game wait until you're sure you aren't going to cancel it before getting our hopes up.

Why the Zerg rule.

I'm not a huge hardcore player of Starcraft. I've never been to a tournament. I can barely hold my own against a "hard" level computer in any of the three games (if you count Brood separately), and my Battle.net record isn't exactly stellar.

However, I have been a fan of the series since the beginning and I love the lore, and I can say, without a doubt, Heart of the Swarm's Zerg focus has me even more hyped than I was for the series triumphant return.

The Zerg race is far and away the most interesting and fun race of the three, and even if I've never wanted to root for them, I've always been attracted to them as both protagonists and antagonists. So I've compiled a list as to why the Zerg are my favorite race in Starcraft.

So we begin:

1) The Zerg fight with their bodies. The Protoss and Terran both use advanced technology and weaponry. Against the Zerg this makes them look weak. The Zerg mutate their bodies and develop skills and abilities that let them rival even the most advanced weaponry in the galaxy. It's like Godzilla vs. the military. The organic beasts are just cool because they don't need the help of technology to be successful. That doesn't mean technology can't be freaking cool in and of itself, but the less used gets more cool points. It's two races to one when it comes to tech, so the Zerg win out with their disgusting organic abilities. It's the same reason Iron Tager's SCIENCE is cooler than the magic and soul powered strength that the rest of the cast utilizes, and unfortunately the Protoss and Terran don't have the utter coolness to make up for this disadvantage like certain Blaz Blue fighters do..

2) Their synergism is better than the other two races. Now this one is up for debate, especially since the name of the Terran ground game is synergism, but the Zerg reap the most benefits for diversifying their force. The other two races only choose one main unit and pick other units to cover that unit. Stalkers and Void Rays cover Collosi, Carriers cover Void Rays, Marines and Medivacs cover Marauders. With the Zerg it's a bit different. Banelings open up walls and take out priority targets so other units can get in, but the other units stall fire long enough for the Banelings to reach the walls and units. Zerglings swarm the enemy to protect Roaches, and Roaches add DPS to kill the enemy before the Zerglings get wiped out. Corruptors protect Broodlords from air-to-air attacks, and Broodlords stop ground-to-air attacks from wiping out Corruptors, but neither is catering to the other like with other races. The Zerg help each other and each unit is equally important for the assault to be successful.

3) The Zerg are always on offense. In Starcraft II even the Zerg defensive units are best fit to serve an offensive army. The Zerg Turrets are mobile, so they can cover the entire base with less of them, meaning less forces need to stay home for surprise attacks. The Queen is terrible off the creep, so she plays D, but her main use is speeding up unit production to help out on quick offense. Sure their offense is based entirely around countering the opponent's build, but it's still offense unlike the other races turtle into steamroll and slow advance strategies. The Zerg pressure and pester like no other race, and their best defense is their economy wrecking offense. The Zerg play like they've got a pair.

4) The Zerg have the most unique design. Terran: Space Marines. Protoss: Proud Ancient Civilization on its last legs crossed with an artificial race that rebelled. Zerg: Tyranids crossed with possessing parasites, an artificially created race gone bad, living buildings, and evolution driven by cancerous cells, as in cancer super powers. One of these may have started out pretty derivative, but their end result is easily the most unique and well thought out. The reveal that the Protoss are artificially created comes close since they're also the oldest of the main races, but it's not nearly enough to take the crown.

5) The Zerg are still an enigma. 3 games in and the Zerg are still mysterious. Maybe not as much as before, but it's still around. Their original name was the Nightmare Invaders, and they're still an unknown terror like a nightmare. What was the Xel' Naga's plan for them? Are they limited to the sector we're seeing or not? What exactly is creep? These questions still persist, and their greater amount of mystery makes them more interesting.

The Zerg win, like a boss.

The Legend Continues... or of Continues

So, after being severely busy (read: lazily sleeping in) for quite a while there's nothing like school to get you off your bum and writing again. It seems that when I'm busy I'm more likely to do stuff like this, but if I'm too busy I obviously don't have the time, kind of a sweet spot I got to hit.

So, anyways, I have finally finished Zelda II, obviously, and am actually nearly done with Link to the Past, giving this one a really long chance to soak in, which I really wasn't planning on doing.

Now then, Zelda II, what to say? Much like Zelda I it's strength lies in it's simplicity and challenge (at least at first). It's quite cryptic, but hints are reasonably well given up until around 2/3rds of the way through the game takes a dump on your brain.

Released in Japan in 1987 and America in 1988, only five months after the first game, it is quite an interesting case. Much like Castlevania II, it tries to add in more Adventure and RPG style elements, although much more successfully. It shares a lot of similarities with the first game, but right off the bat you'll notice it's completely different, and not just because it's a side-scroller.

You're not in Hyrule anymore... wait.

To call Zelda II a great game would be a little difficult. Even 'good' ends up feeling a little awkward. It's not a bad game by any means, and much of the time it is quite fun to play, which is pretty much the best thing you can say about a game, but other times it's frustrating, or rather interesting to say the least.

The game is filled with experimentation, and why shouldn't it be? It's one of the first games to blend genre elements without being a complete mess, and actually crossing a platformer, an adventure, and stat building elements all into one game. However, as you've probably guessed from the way I've been talking about it, a lot of the time these experiments are exercises in frustration, and it's unfortunate, because underneath it all lies the potential for one of the greatest games on the system.

This is widely considered the black sheep of the franchise, so you probably already know a lot about it. So instead of raging on everything bad right away, lets try and see if they're actually all that bad or not.

The first thing that comes to mind when people start ragging on the game is the combat, or more specifically, "Why is Link's sword so tiny?" It's true that Link is twice the size he was in the previous game, but the sword is the same size so it now resembles a long dagger. But man up you pansies. The combat in this game is actually one of the best parts, and nearly flawless. The hit box of Link's sword extends out to the absolute last pixel of the thing, and every enemy in the game likewise has such a delicately crafted hit box. Link's range is short, but never disadvantageous, and if something looks like it hits, it does. This makes the game challenging and require strict timing, but it also makes it very fair about it. The game feels like it respects you, the player, more than other games at the time, even the first Zelda. It doesn't have you walk into a room and suddenly have 8 Darknuts staring you in the face and just being a jerk. The game is insanely hard, but it never really puts you in a situation where you can get surrounded by enemies faster than you like the first. There are enemies that will block most of your hits, but you can block their hits in turn, they're exactly like you (unless you jump). It expects you to be a big boy (or girl) and pull your own weight, and in turn it's not going to be a jerk. Score one for Zelda II!

Me attempting to get screenshots using an emulator and keyboard whilst typing this review. The game is unforgiving for mistakes, but they're your's to make.

The next big thing that gets everyone's panties riled in a bunch is the leveling system. "Zelda shouldn't have experience bars!" Yeah? Well screw you. The experience system is far, FAR from perfect, and usually it's more irritating then it needs to be. So why am I standing up for it? Because so many games nowadays have unnecessary experience systems that are way more irritating than they could be. Zelda II's system is actually pretty decent. You gain experience at a decent rate, there's a clear sense of progression, there's a real set of incomparable choices to make: "Do I want more attack power now, or should I wait so I can get my next defense boost earlier?" and the grinding for experience doesn't take nearly as long as rupee grinding in the previous game. To strengthen my incomparable argument a bit, while it is true that you will eventually get every upgrade, the mid section of the game is where it really starts wracking up the difficulty, so the stats you can get before that are going to determine exactly how you're going to tackle the situations, leaning you towards a more aggressive or defensive manner. While the experience system isn't exactly good, it doesn't deserve the hate it gets either. It's there, it doesn't hurt anything, just deal with it.

And now we're going to get into some of the real hiccups of the game. "Why the hell is this game so cryptic?" Well, for starters, it's no more cryptic than the first game. Just thought I'd throw that out there. This is still an issue though, because Zelda II is a much bigger game, I mean just compare the overworlds for a second:

That red square is a mini version of that first picture. Zelda II is huge both in scale and in comparison.

So here's where the main issue with the game comes in. Tips you may have learned won't be very useful. You won't know where to go with that information, and when you get there you may have forgotten what you were told. It's fairly simple in the earlier parts of the game, but once you hit around Dungeon 5 or so everything just becomes really confusing and you'll probably need a guide. It's a hassle to try and figure out where to get what each town needs, and what item does what without some help, trust me on this one.

But lots of games are cryptic and strange, so clearly that's not the only problem with this game. Well there is one other: This game gets hard. And I'm not just saying difficult, I mean it goes all balls to the wall. It starts out pretty challenging, but, and this is coming from a guy who once beat all three NES Ninja Gaiden's and all three NES Castlevania's in one night, the Great Palace is freaking insane. It took me weeks of on and off play to chip away at that thing. It is long, and it is tough.

Abandon all hope now.

Unfortunately, this game is a little less forgiving with deaths than the others in the series, and it likes kicking you back pretty far even though it lets you keep any items you got. So I'm really not ashamed to call the insane difficulty a flaw in design since it reaches the point where it ceases to become more satisfying to beat than it was trouble to do. Completing a really hard game is incredibly satisfying, and the reason difficulty is a very important aspect in games. But difficulty always goes hand in hand with pacing. You have to offer up a climax to the challenge often enough to keep the player interested. Zelda II is generally very good about this, and it always feels good to beat the tough, but moderately sized dungeons. But the Great Palace, while you can never call it unfair, just reaches the point of tedium in how long and difficult it is, and near the end it just isn't fun anymore.

But let's end this on a high note, ha puns. Zelda II's got some of the best music on the NES, especially that classic dungeon theme everyone knows. At nearly two minutes long that song pushes the boundaries of everything I, and I expect other people, thought they knew about the limits of the system. Sure the game doesn't have the iconic Zelda theme, but quite honestly, it doesn't need it. The game far and away stands up on it's own, which is good, because the rest of the game is so different it really needed to stand on it's own merits anyways.

So Zelda II is, overall, a mixed bag. It's good for most of the game, but the late game confusion (why does the "Spell" spell raise a building from the ground?), and the utterly brutal Great Palace make it difficult to recommend the game. Check out the soundtrack if you like Midi chip tunes, but other than that I'm going to have to say, Don't Play this one if you're newer to the series and not hellbent on it. It's just a little too rough for it's own good.

One last thing: http://3dnes.blogspot.com/

See you next time.