Related Sections: Lists
2008: The best of the rest of the year
So Grand Theft Auto IV arrived. Well, "arrived" in the same sense that an asteroid colliding with Earth would "arrive". This particular arrival left a huge $500 million impact crater. Now it's kind of hard to see what with all the dust and hype. Plus, if you're like me, you're probably going to be busy until 2009 driving around Liberty City looking for all 200 pigeons to shoot. Eleven down, 179 to go! Someone check my math on that.
Lucky for the pigeons, 2008 is still young. Brace yourself for more arrivals. Here, for your consideration, are the five Best of the Rest of the Year, presented alphabetically, because, girls, you're all pretty.
(Safe Harbor: Judgments of "best" are forward-looking statements subject to changes and variations which are not reasonably predictable and which could significantly affect future results).
Fallout 3
For ten years, the vault has been closed on this grim and funny post-apocalyptic saga, which presented moral choices that would make GTA blanch. Soon you can open the doors again and plunge into your own personal post-apocalypse, with the faithful Dogmeat by your side. Think S.T.A.L.K.E.R., but more polished and less Russian.
As anyone who played one of the earliest Elder Scrolls games can tell you, Bethesda has been doing open worlds before they were even possible. Now the developer is marrying the beautiful expanse of Oblivion with the refreshingly unique setting of Fallout. Detractors – and there are entire websites teeming with them – dismiss Fallout 3 as Oblivion with guns. But the joke's on them. Who in his right mind wouldn't think that Oblivion with guns would be frickin' awesome?
How long you have to wait: Until "Fall 2008"
Left 4 Dead
Do you like zombie movies? Of course you do. Here is another rare game that "gets" zombie movies. I'm not talking about dribbling them out a few at a time, Resident Evil-style, in between silly puzzles, dialogue from Japan, and crazy boss battles. I'm talking swarms of the undead, shambling towards you and hungry for brains. And you're not on your own. Left 4 Dead is a cooperative multiplayer game.
Across a variety of maps, the task is simple – get from point A to point B while covering each other's asses – but it won't be easy. You'll have to gather the best weapons you can find as you work your way to the chopper (it's always a chopper, isn't it?). And you aren't just facing mindless undead. Left 4 Dead also works as a team-based game, with one team trying to escape, and the other controlling various uber-zombies who can lay traps, set up ambushes, and coordinate zombie assaults.
Although the premise is great, the real cause for excitement is that Left 4 Dead is from the perfectionists at Valve who brought you the various Half-Lives, Team Fortress 2, and Portal.
How long you have to wait: Unspecified, but probably late in 2008
Mercenaries 2: World in Flames
You know that sense of disappointment you get in Grand Theft Auto IV when you fire an RPG at a building and it remains unscathed? Mercenaries will never do you that way. These buildings know enough to yield to an RPG. But that's just for starters. Order your own tank, call in a daisy cutter, or recruit your own army. With these assets, pretty much everything can come crumbling down. Stealing cars? A peccadillo. Try carpet bombing a city block.
The first Mercenaries was a glorious showcase of freedom meeting firepower, hence the subtitle "Playground of Destruction". You're a mercenary who can navigate among competing factions for different missions, blowing the crap out a detailed sandbox world along the way. This time the developers are going to South America and they're not content to just destroy buildings. In this sandbox, the jungles will burn. Hence the subtitle "World in Flames"?
How long you have to wait: Until August 31, 2008
Spore
Whatever Spore is, it's going to be different. And that counts for a lot when so many games have numbers after their names. The funky creature creator promises almost endless possibilities. The middle parts of the game suggest a crazy mash-up of questing, city building, and conquest. But the most intriguing bit of Spore is how it'll ultimately turn into an online exploration of player-content, navigated via spaceship instead of web browser.
Spore's almost inconceivable concept of single-celled organism to interstellar civilization comes from the mind of Sims creator Will Wright. But as of last year, the hands-on gameplay guy is Soren Johnson, the designer who reworked the venerable Civilization series and gave us Civilization IV, arguably the great strategy game ever made. If anyone can come up with a great idea, it's Wright. And if anyone can give a great idea great gameplay, it's Johnson.
How long you have to wait: Until September 7, 2008, although you can download the creature creator on June 17th
Starcraft II
If you listen closely, you can hear a buzzing sound. That's South Korea ready to explode with anticipation. It's been ten years since Blizzard all but reinvented real time strategy games by co-opting the Warhammer 40,000A.D. license to come up with their own strange universe, in which humans, icky bugs, and mysterious aliens fought each other over distant worlds, inexplicably afflicting South Korea with a national obsession bordering on hysteria. But even among us level-headed North Americans, Starcraft established the model for real time strategy games: three very different races, each almost its own separate game.
Whether Blizzard can do it again remains to be seen. Real time strategy games have come a long way (it's almost painful trying to play the original Starcraft). Blizzard can't rely on its usual trick of imitating an established genre and then polishing the dickens out of it. The best case scenario: Starcraft II lifts the genre out of its relatively hardcore niche and makes it fun for everyone again. The worst case scenario: After ten long years, those of us who like RTSs get to revisit one of our favorite universes.
How long you have to wait: Okay, I'm going to level with you. This one might not even make it this year. Blizzard is notorious for just skipping the holidays, so Starcraft II may very well slip into 2009.
By Matt Gallant at 1:15 PM ON 05/30/08
"As anyone who played one of the earliest Elder Scrolls games can tell you, Bethesda has been doing open worlds before they were even possible."
Too true! Awesome joke.
By mocoso at 1:46 PM ON 05/30/08
Fallout 2 was partly awesome because it was turn based and had third person perspective with cam showing the entire field. This new game is oblivion w/ guns and the game play is nothing like the original fall-out games where hard core strategy was needed. This may or may not be another shootem' up game. We'll see.
By Joshua at 2:16 PM ON 05/30/08
Uh-oh (looking at post above me)... did someone tip this site off to NMA and/or RPGCodex? Run for your lives!
By bed at 12:52 AM ON 05/31/08
pfft - Warhammer Online!
By Benjamin Barker at 2:12 PM ON 05/31/08
Great new blog, by the way. I'm addicted to them, and now there's another one aside from Rock, Paper, Shotgun I know has fun, good writing.
I'm an NMA/Codex sympathizer/lurker. I can't work up that much vitriol over video games, but I think the misgivings are generally reasonable, if not the emotions. I never played Oblivion, but I hated Morrowind enough. The Codex "hive-mind" loved Fallout, shouted emperor's-new-clothes at Oblivion, and then Bethesda bought the Fallout rights, so it was a perfect storm. But 3D real-time games with RPG characters are inherently problematic and make it less of a role-playing game, I least the kind I like, and it seems Bethesda's games never approached the level of wit and character in Fallout... Anyway, I'd suggest at least not calling it "Bethesda's saga", that's misleading (on the off chance anybody reading a brand new video game blog doesn't know the story already).
By Tom Chick at 7:54 PM ON 06/01/08
Very good point, Mr. Barker. Fixed!
By LKJ at 2:19 PM ON 06/02/08
>But the joke's on them. Who in his right mind >wouldn't think that Oblivion with guns would be >frickin' awesome?
Easy.
Everyone who like Role Playing Games.
Oblivion was the first TES Action Adventure (with some RPG Eliments).
By picky at 2:21 PM ON 06/02/08
""did someone tip this site off to NMA and/or RPGCodex? Run for your lives!""
Run run, here come reasoned arguments!!
""But the joke's on them. Who in his right mind wouldn't think that Oblivion with guns would be frickin' awesome? ""
Erm, people who like fallout but not oblivion?
Time to take my pills, cus obviously I'm not in my right mind.
""It's been ten years since Blizzard all but reinvented real time strategy games""
All but reinvented it by making a Dune 2 clone?
""Blizzard can't rely on its usual trick of imitating an established genre and then polishing the dickens out of it.""
Oh, no wait, turns out they didn't reinvent it, but just copy, nice save.
But the real question, how much were you paid for this advertisement?
By Granny at 3:34 PM ON 06/02/08
"But the joke's on them. Who in his right mind wouldn't think that Oblivion with guns would be frickin' awesome?"
Everyone who wants a true sequel and not some dumbed down action game with RPG elements (mind you, there is nothing wrong with a dumbed down action game, if it's not a sequel to Fallout)
By Ralod at 4:17 PM ON 06/02/08
First off, love the blog. Tom Chick, love your stuff , have been a fan from the stuff in CGW and GFW mags for years(RIP to both).
But on Fallout 3, I am sorry to say you are wrong here. Why would people not like Oblivion with guns? Because we expected a fallout sequel to be a fallout game, not Elder scrolls 4.5. Even if you put aside the fact the game is no longer an rpg but an action game. The quality of dialog, and the humor from fallout is something that the hacks at Bethesda have shown time and again they are not able to emulate.
The tactical Combat is what made fallout1&2 good games. The story, humor, and characters is what made them great games. Seeing as they have stripped the combat out, and they have writers that, lets be honest here, would not be able to write for a sci-fi Saturday night movie, what of fallout is left?
By Tim James at 4:44 PM ON 06/02/08
Man, if Fallout 3 was a more-polished version of STALKER, I would crap my pants. But I think the latter game has its own separate atmosphere, and I'm pretty sure I'll love them both.
By Matt at 5:41 PM ON 06/02/08
"Detractors – and there are entire websites teeming with them – dismiss Fallout 3 as Oblivion with guns. But the joke's on them. Who in his right mind wouldn't think that Oblivion with guns would be frickin' awesome?"
....
By Copernicus at 8:49 PM ON 06/02/08
"As anyone who played one of the earliest Elder Scrolls games can tell you, Bethesda has been doing open worlds before they were even possible."
Darklands did it two years before Arena.
"Detractors – and there are entire websites teeming with them – dismiss Fallout 3 as Oblivion with guns."
And have you ever tried to discuss the criticisms they have with them? Refute their validity and all that?
"Who in his right mind wouldn't think that Oblivion with guns would be frickin' awesome?"
Games journalism at its finest folks. Drink the developers' kool-aid, bash all criticism. Bethesda knows best. Amen.
I like reading your reviews and most of your opinions of games match mine Tom.
But seriously why go after the detractors? You game journalists obviously aren't doing your jobs criticizing the developer (every "professional" FO3 preview is practically already handing out the 10/10s, editor's choice to Bethesda and for all of the wrong reasons). Have you seriously even played Fallout 1?
By alphatmc~'s twin at 9:13 PM ON 06/02/08
"Detractors – and there are entire websites teeming with them – dismiss Fallout 3 as Oblivion with guns. But the joke's on them. Who in his right mind wouldn't think that Oblivion with guns would be frickin' awesome?"
Ugh. I cringe everytime I see one of these.
BethSoft is a multimillion dollar dev studio with millions of fans, but (oh noes!) a few websites don't like their latest game! Quick, time to bust out the brownest-nosed defense you can muster before...what exactly?
No really, explain why every gaming media outlet feels the urge to defend Bethesda against any and all criticism. Are you all on the take? Are you trying to butter Bethesda up so that you can some sort of preview/interview? Are you just fanboys? What gives?
I mean, I guess I could understand it if the complaints weren't at all legitamate, but fan's main complaint - "Fallout 3 is a sequel that, gameplay-wise, seems to have more in common with Oblivion than it does its predecessors." - seems pretty understandable to me.
On a side note, I wish everyone would stop lauding Daggerfall as an example of Bethesda's brilliant open-world design. Newsflash - since Zenimax took over everyone who worked on Daggerfall ('cept Todd Howard who didn't really do much on it anyway) has either left, been fired, or been sued and fired. You might as well praise the White House for their brilliant handling of the World War 2.
By decline at 12:01 AM ON 06/03/08
"As anyone who played one of the earliest Elder Scrolls games can tell you, Bethesda has been doing open worlds before they were even possible."
yes but anyone who played wasteland or sentinel worlds or the many other games pre elder scrolls knows your comment is crap.
and since you are knocking GTA4 (which i'm not even a fan of by the way) for the buildings not yielding to rpg's...do you think F3 is going to be any different? heck even in 1988 you could shoot a door apart. unlike oblivion where the crappiest door old wood wouldn't yield unless you had the special key. can't see the game for the graphics huh?
By NMA at 12:44 AM ON 06/03/08
Behte$da sucks, they couldnt make a game if they live depend on ti. They dont know what makes fallout if it bites tehm on the a--. FUCK BETHED$SA
By gc051360 at 12:49 AM ON 06/03/08
I echo the sentiments of the supposed "lunatic fringe"
Why do game journalists feel the need to bash a fanbase?
You are supposed to be critical of games. Not attack anyone who doesn't fall right in line with the hype machine.
By Picky at 4:21 AM ON 06/03/08
"Man, if Fallout 3 was a more-polished version of STALKER, I would crap my pants. But I think the latter game has its own separate atmosphere, and I'm pretty sure I'll love them both."
And this people is the fallout target audience, Action game fans. Now that's not a slight on action game fans, but fallout wasn't an action game, and that's the fans main grip, it's not a fallout game, but a spinoff.
"And have you ever tried to discuss the criticisms they have with them? Refute their validity and all that?"
What a wacky world you live in.
"On a side note, I wish everyone would stop lauding Daggerfall as an example of Bethesda's brilliant open-world design. Newsflash - since Zenimax took over everyone who worked on Daggerfall ('cept Todd Howard who didn't really do much on it anyway) has either left, been fired, or been sued and fired. You might as well praise the White House for their brilliant handling of the World War 2."
Facts have no place in modern games journalism.
By Black at 5:18 AM ON 06/03/08
"the joke's on them. Who in his right mind wouldn't think that Oblivion with guns would be frickin' awesome? "
Probably people who liked Fallout but didn't like Oblivion... Duh. And people who like CRPGs, not puny action-rpgs. Way to go, professional journalism at its best.
By FCK at 7:07 AM ON 06/03/08
Wow this list has got to be a joke... none can be so stupid they write junk like this. I really hope your bribes are great, because all integrity and morality is absolutely gone.
By Tom Chick at 6:04 PM ON 06/03/08
Whee, what a donnybrook! You RPG Codex fellas are a rowdy bunch. But welcome anyway!
I do apologize if I offended anyone, as my intent was more to rib the Fallout 3 detractors rather than whack at them with a stick. I understand your reservations about Bethesda's plans, and I understand many of the complaints about Oblivion. No disrespect intended with the "in his right mind" comment. It was a goof. I'm sure y'all have heard much worse in your careers as Fallout 3 detractors.
But mostly, I just want to remind you guys that the five games here are purely a subjective choice. Those are the big titles I'm personally looking forward to. If your list is different, let's hear it. Because you can only get so much mileage out of correcting me on the nationality of STALKER and how long Bethesda has owned the rights to Fallout. :)
-Tom
By Picky at 5:30 AM ON 06/04/08
"as my intent was more to rib the Fallout 3 detractors rather than whack at them with a stick."
Yes, but why?
Only the fan sites seem to be questioning Bethesda, and the change of direction in game play they have taken (and its not evolution, its change from one game style, pnp turn based rpg, to another game style, action based fps/rpg). Every other games site I know of has taken it upon themselves to bash fallout detractors, labelling them with such terms as you have, without actually debating their points. The main grudge from fallout fans being, its not fallout in spirit, not that it’s a crap game (though I personally won’t like it as I didn’t like oblivion, personally).
And I can point to dozens of websites/mags that are perfectly aware of oblivions flaws (yes it has them, mainly the Radiant “Ai”, the bugs, the generic landscapes, the bugs, and the bugs), yet either they paint Bethesda as the “rpg gods” and brush such faults under the carpet, or gush about how well it’s been handled this time (because Bethesda said so), neither of which comes across as very professional or critical. Nobody is asking hardball questions anymore, and not just with fallout.
So yeah, where was I anyway. Whilst this may be an opinion piece and not a review, it pretty much comes across as a paid for advert (not just for fallout), and when you sprinkle the inevitable “ribbing of fallout fans”, then you’re asking people to treat this with contempt.
And why do i care you may think? Because i wan't to see games reviewers to start being critical, and stop handing out the 10/10s.
By Public at 7:52 AM ON 06/04/08
That was the most amateurish review I've ever read!
By Jorian Drake at 12:19 PM ON 06/04/08
Bethesda games are way different than what the real fanbase of Fallout hoped for, as the game went through the developement of F3, the fears of the people seem to become truth: it will be oblivion with guns, and the developers go for mass sales, not quality or an F3 that is deservingly built on the former 'episodes'
this is one of the worst reviews i ever read
By Justin Fletcher at 4:44 PM ON 06/04/08
This is, without a doubt, the worst review I have ever read. Partially because it didn't mention The Force Unleashed, but mostly because it isn't a review.
By Tom Chick at 6:25 PM ON 06/04/08
I just want to add my voice to say that, yeah, this is really a terrible review.
-Tom
By daniel at 6:13 AM ON 06/05/08
theres already an entire horde of beth fans praising oblivinon for whatever reasons, nothing new with your thing
but why would they butcher the name Fallout in a totally different game I don't know
Fallout would not be what it is without us, and you may put us old fans down as much as you like, you wont change that...
and Beths Fallout will die in interest in a year or two after release, and the originals will still hold like they already did for a decade
we cant do nothing, except dont buy that pathetic excuse for a fallout game, and your victory in a uncalled war on a really great group of people that the FO community is... will be meaningless
By Jimbo at 4:38 PM ON 06/05/08
The first time I heard about fallout 3 I thought awesome oblivion with guns but then I picked up a copy of fallout now I'm hooked and I'll be damned if fallout3 is oblivion with guns.
By Richard at 6:28 PM ON 06/11/08
Well maybe I come at this from the wrong perspective, having played and loved Oblivion before playing Fallout 1 and 2, but criticising Oblivion for being buggy while worshipping Fallout seems a little odd, I have not seen a buggier game than Fallout for... well for ever.
So everyone is up in arms because Fallout 3 will not be the same as Fallout 2, well I suspect thats change for you. I, for one, think that Fallout 3 will improve upon 1 and 2 in many of the most fundamental ways in which I would criticise the original games. Sure a sense of humor is important, bizarre cross references are cool, but fluid flowing gameplay might be nice too. Graphics add so much to a sense of immersion and Bethesda can offer those. Bottom line is that it didn't look like after 10 years anyone else was lined up to make a faithful Fallout 2 remanufactured game, so I say Kudos to them for trying.
Lastly, thanks Tom for writing the review, it seems some disagree with your point of view and decide that rude and idiotic attacks are called for, but I would like to thank you for spending the time and effort to put it together.
By AltarusD at 4:31 AM ON 09/29/08
Well Ive looked over alot of the hype the discussions the bashing and all. And being upfront I am an old time fan of fallout one and two. To be honest with you I dont really care who decided to pick up the ball on this one. Im just happy that after all this time someone figured out that it was worth picking up. I will admit that I am nervous about them taking a once loved game and tearing it apart but I can also be hopefull that they have taken the time and effort to put together the game I loved with the look and feel of what they can do these days. If they can keep the story line the characters and incorperate a smooth well rendered version of the game I love then more power to them. If they fail misserably and destroy the name then so be it it will just get tossed into the junk pile with many other games out there. As far as everyone getting so worked up over it. Wait and see before you bash the hell out of it. Dont get me wrong I will be bashing away myself if they ruined it but we shall see soon.
By fedichico at 6:18 PM ON 01/07/09
hello let me play
fedichico:
hello let me play...More »