Button Config pt. R2

OK. Just played the Vanquish demo. Good game over all, like Gears of War, blah, blah , blah... I don't want to talk about that. I want to discuss, yet again, an example of currently released games plagued with god-awful button layouts.

To simplify things I will give aliases to the buttons on an XBox/PS3 controller:

XBox / PS3: Alias
A / Cross: bottom
X / Square: left
B / Circle: right
Y / Triangle: top
LB / L1: L1
LT / L2: L2
RB / R1: R1
RT / R2: R2

OK, check this out. You played Gears of War, Uncharted, or games similar to them; the ones with this new cover system that every game has now a days. You got Gears that uses the bottom button to evade in any direction and also take cover if you are near a wall. So two similar functions for ONE button, makes sense. Similarly, Uncharted, since you can jump in that game, the bottom button jumps, and the right button evades and takes cover. OK, that works.

So lets look at Vanquish. The bottom button evades. OK thats fair enough. But, wait... take cover with the LEFT button?! Why do we need to break up these two functions into 2 separate buttons? When would you ever evade by diving into a wall? Why can you just hold the bottom button to take cover and tap it to evade? To make matters worse, in order to jump over a hiding place, like a sandbag, you press up on the analog and the LEFT button! So if you're used to evading normally with bottom button, similar to jumping, you will automatically assume that you jump over a sandbag with the same button. But NO. You press the button you TAKE COVER with!

The insanity doesn't end there. Take an old school side-scroller like Ninja Gaiden or Double Dragon, and you have an NES controller in your hand. In most cases, the left face button (B) attacks and the right face button (A) jumps. Now lets fast-forward to a game like Devil May Cry or Bayonetta with a current-gen controller. The left button attacks and the bottom button jumps. We are all used to that. Even Uncharted uses left button to melee and bottom to jump.

Now to Vanquish. How do you melee? The left button? No, the left button already takes cover. You gotta press the RIGHT button! Goes against what we are all used to. If evade and take cover were consolidated into one button, we could have had the left button as melee...

It continues. In Vanquish, you will come across these boxes that have ammo, guns, health, etc. You gotta kick the box open an then grab the item. So from the current knowledge that you melee with the right button, guess which button you use to KICK the box open. Right? Nope. Top? Nope, that throws a grenade. Left? Yup. the button you take cover with! Why cant it be the melee button or the top button?

OK... now you have a gun laying on the ground ready for you to pick up. What do you press? The take cover button? Wrong! It's R2???!!! So when I approach an item box, I gotta press two different buttons in sequence, the left button, then R2. Why can't it just be one button, preferably a face button, like the top button. Grenades should be on L2.

Also the game has this Max Paine effect where you go into slow motion. It is triggered by aiming with L1 and evading. How does this make any since? Why cant it just be one button? Like the Left analog button?

Here is my revised button layout of what it should go like:

Bottom: Evade/Take-cover
Left: Melee
Top: Interact/Pick-up Items/Open Doors/Open Boxes/Revive Allies
Right: Boost Slide

L1: Aim
L2: Grenade
R1: Shoot
R2: Reload (only)

Left analog button: Slow-motion mode

There is a button config option, but all it does is swap the front and back shoulder buttons. Big deal... Why not enable the user to edit the entire layout?

Sigh, I was really interested in this game, but unfortunately I can't justify purchasing another game with such poor button configuration.

Button Config

I just recently bought this game on Wii called Mursmasa: The Demon Blade. I heard good things about it and I saw it at a game store for $15, good deal.

The game has a very beautiful art style, using 2D sprites with a cartoon look. The gameplay is classic 2D side-scroller, hard to mess up.

Unfortunately, after inserting the disk in my Wii, starting the game, and began the tutorial, I was immediately disappointed to find out that you jump by pressing UP!!

Why, in the year 2010, after so many 2D side-scrollers have been created since Super Mario Bros. on NES, can't the game designers figure out how to create a decent button configuration? How can such a simple 2D side-scroller have such awkward controls?

So here is the setup for this game using the Classic Wii controller:


Left/Right: Move
Up: JUMP !!
Down: Duck

A: Examine
B: Attack/Block
Y: Special Attack
X: Use Item

L: Switch Swords
R: Browse Item

Start: Menu
Select: Map

UP for JUMP??!! Why? Its so awkward. It only works in 2D fighting games. And to make matters worse, you can't even change the configuration! Imagine trying to play Super Mario Bros. by pressing UP to JUMP.....

If I were to design the button scheme, it would go like this:

Left/Right: Move
Up: Examine
Down: Duck

A: Use Item
B: Jump
Y: Attack/Block
X: Special Attack

L: Switch Swords
R: Browse Item

Start: Menu
Select: Map

See. What's wrong with that? B is Jump just like any other 2D side-scroller.

In general, I hate games that have bad control configurations, it just ruins it for me. And it seems that so many "Next-Gen" games have this problem. I'm talking about PS3 and XBox 360. Not only do they need to use every single button on the controller, but also pointless button combinations, like holding LB and the D-pad to change your weapons, instead of just pressing the D-pad. (Freaking Army of Two). And we are talking 16 buttons in total! 4 face buttons, 4 shoulder buttons, the 2 analog buttons that you press?!, Start and Select, and the D-pad. AND you must use them ALL! Games like these instantly turn me off.

I Just Can't Kinect...

Now that Microsoft has finally unveiled its final version of its motion controller, I am still not convinced that it can do anything but casual or "get fit" type gaming, and I still think that Microsoft is not really using this technology in the right way.

The major problem I see with Kinect is that there is no way to make a character independently walk or run. If you go back and look at all of the demos they showed, the on-screen characters are either standing in one place with very little movement, or moving "on rails" like Virtua Cop. If you actually tried to make movement 1-1 using only the Kinect, you would start to walk out the house. Without some kind of controller, this basic function is just not possible. But since Microsoft has been nailing in this concept of no controllers and no buttons to learn, I dont think that they will ever add some sort of a controller.

Force feedback, or rumble, is also a big issue. You are just flailing your arms around in empty space and not feeling any kind of reaction?

Microsoft needs to consider using the XBox 360 controller along side with Kinect as an additional control mechanism, rather than just completely tossing away the controller. They could do some interesting things with that. Like an FPS game where you can use the controller for basic movement and shooting and use Kinect to raise your hand and throw grenades or direct other troops. Or how about an RPG where you can actually talk to NPCs.

The subsequent issue is that they are not able to use the technology with any of their most popular titles, like Halo, Gears, Fable, Mass Effect, etc. I think the only way you will convice the "hardcore" (I hate using that term) audience that Kinect is worth getting is to incorporate it with these franchises. If all it can work with is Forza, then why not just get a wheel controller?

Nintendo was able to use thier Wii controller with their franchise titles like Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Mario Kart, etc. Even Sony, regardless of whether its a blatant Wii rip-off or not, they were able to use the Move with SOCOM 4, Dead Space 2, Resident Evil 5, etc. and even showed a new game called Sorcery, where you are walking around in 3D. Microsoft did NOT show Halo, Gears, Fable, etc with Kintect because it simply does NOT WORK without a controller.

Without a controller, the Kinect is limited to "get fit" games, on-rails shooters, boxing games, and casual family titles. Speaking of boxing, why didn't they show their take on Punch-Out!! That would have been a perfect match.

Right now it just looks like Microsoft simply bought this technology just to have it on their platform and market it as the controller with no buttons. It still looks like an unfinished, experimental project. The technology is THERE, but the innovation and creativity isn't. It just landed in the wrong hands. If Nintendo had their hands on this technology, they could really do something magical with it.

If all Microsoft wants to do with Kinect is to appeal to casual gamers, then that would be a huge shame.

Finally...

Before E3 2010, I was feeling really frustrated with the current state of gaming. I felt that there were too many sequels, too many "gun-toting, sci-fi, military comic book heroes in space suits shooting a crowd of alien zombies in a dark, post-apocalyptic war zone" type games, and not enough of the types of games I used to play when I was in high school and college.

The first day of E3 was pretty lame. Microsoft, EA, and Ubisoft had pretty boring shows. I have never been too interested in any of their games to begin with. Other than Metal Gear Solid: Rising's trailer, everything was pretty predictable and lack-luster. Natal, (or Kintect or whatever) was pretty wack. Just a bunch of casual "get fit" stuff, and things we saw on the Wii (and even PS2) years ago. Bulletstorm was OK, but FPS is not really my thing.

But all that changed the second day...

Nintendo came out swinging with announcements, dominating this years show with a load of new stuff on the Wii. Zelda, Epic Mickey, Kirby, Donkey Kong, and Golden Eye all looked amazing. Not only that, they debuted the Nintendo 3DS with the return of Kid Icarus, and a truck load of other stuff. Its like they didn't have enough time to go into any detail. Its like everythings coming back. Finally, games that I liked when I was little. And there's COLOR!!

Sony topped it off with a good show as well, with Portal 2, LittleBigPlanet 2, and the long overdue Twisted Metal. And after seeing the Move motion controller in action, I was finally convinced that it was worth it. I am glad they didn't show some lame "get fit" or bowling games. They showed GAMER's games. I didn't care that it was a Wii rip-off because it was a damn good one. It seemed alot more accurate that the Wii's.

After seeing the line up of titles coming soon, I am as excited about games as I was as a kid again. My list of interesting upcoming games increased from just 4 to well over 20!

Wii:

• Zelda: Skyward Sword
• Metriod: Other M
• Epic Mickey
• Kirby Epic Yarn
• Donkey Kong Country Returns
• Sonic Colors
• Sin & Punishment: Star Successor

Nintendo 3DS:

• Kid Icarus Uprising
• Star Fox
• Mario Kart !!!!!!

Playstation 3:

• Portal 2
• Metal Gear Solid: Rising
• Vanquish
• Mortal Kombat
• Twisted Metal !!!!!!!
• Sonic the Hedgehog 4
• KungFu Riders
• Marvel vs Capcom 3
• Hard Cops: Uprising
  

PSP:

• Valkyria Chronicles II

and so much more..

One thing I noticed with this years E3 is that everyone is going back to the old-school, which is great. Mortal Kombat, Golden Eye, Donkey Kong, even Sonic! This is a dream come true. Yes, not one, but two Sonic games that look, dare I say it, good!

And finally we can see some color in games again. For a while, all we were getting was games where the only colors were grey, dark grey, black, dark black, grey black, and crimson red.

And finally we are not overflowed with games where all you see is a gun on the lower part of the screen or dark depressing war-torn environments.

I hope this trend continues. Yay for gaming.

Overused Themes in Video Games

Whenever I go online to look up the latest video game buzz, I notice that there are certain themes that are taking over the market. Whenever I see that a game carries one of these themes, no matter how good the game might be, I seem to automatically overlook it. I am not saying that I don't like particular games that fall into these themes, Its just they don't seem to catch my eye immediately when I'm browsing through video game news and I never notice them until they have been out for a few months already.


SCI-FI / SPACE
If it takes place outer-space, galactic armies in space suits with laser weapons, aliens taking over the world, space ships, etc., I immediately loose interest. Mass Effect, Half-Life, Doom, Lost Planet, any Star Wars game, and of course Halo. (If there is one game series I simply don't give a damn about, it's Halo.) The only sci-fi themed game that can keep me interested is Metriod, but that's because of nostalgia and the fact that Metriod games tend not to have so much dialogue, which I like. Maybe it has something to do with the character design in many sci-fi games, they look so boring. When I look at the characters in Mass Effect, they seem so bland and uninspired, and Master Chief is just some guy in a space suit. And the whole outer space thing is tiresome. Blasting into space in a space ship shooting space aliens with your space lasers. And whenever you're in some hi tech building or vessel and activate something or hit a switch, you get that female computer voice that says, "Opening Door", or "Initiating Sequence", or "Access Granted". Its so ANNOYING and BORING. Make it stop!


MEDIEVAL / MIDDLE AGES
Knights, ogres, wizards, elves, dragon slayers. Games in this category include Elder Scrolls: Oblivion, Assassin's Creed, and World of Warcraft. All of these games look the same to me. The armor, the monsters, the weapons and the environments all look as if they were watching too much Lord of the Rings. Even to some extent, Zelda fits in this theme, but at least there is much more creativity put it to it. Its a shame, because I hear Assassin's Creed is a pretty good game, but I just can't get over how boring the setting looks.


ZOMBIE / UNDEAD
Resident Evil, Left4Dead, Dead Space, Dead Rising, House of the Dead. Please kill me already! I know some of these games a good, but I don't think I can get hyped for another game where you take down a bunch of flesh-eating zombies, even if it looks decent. How about a game where you play AS the zombie? You could eat brains for health. You could take body parts from your victims as upgrades. Mix it up a bit.


POST-APOCALYPTIC
The plot usually goes like this: There was some huge war or some nuclear accident, and the whole world is in ruins, and its up to a large football player with a big gun, a scar on his eye, and a dark past to save it. Gears of War, Darksiders, the new Bionic Commando, inFamous, Resistance, and Fallout come to mind. These games always look dark and gray with no variance in color. The box art always consists of the main character with a weapon in his hand and the smoky ruins of a big city in the background. I feel like once I have played one game with this theme, I have played them all. Its just so boring. The characters are so depressing, they have no life or personality to them. They always have a frown on there face. Lighten up, will ya. Its just a game!


COMIC BOOK
X-men, Spider-man, Batman, you name it. The thing about these games is that they are too predictable and there is too much dialogue. You already know the powers, who you will fight, all the secret outfits, etc. I have already played this game 10 years ago. Leave me alone! For example, even though I know Batman: Arkham Asylum is a good game, I just don't feel the need to play it. I know the plot, I've played other Batman games, I've seen the movies, I've watched the cartoons. I've had enough. Same with Spider-man and X-men. If I want to get into Batman, I'll just watch a Batman movie. If you want to get me interested in another Batman game, make it based on the 1960's TV series with Adam West. Now that would catch my eye.


MOVIE BASED
These games never surprise me. Obviously trying to make money off of a recently released movie. They are never polished, always rushed to the shelves. Boring and predictable. Transformers: THE GAME, Ironman 2: THE GAME, Avatar: THE GAME, etc. Whether its a game based on a good movie, or a game based on a bad movie, the game always turns out to be crap.


MILITARY / ARMY
These games tend to be too realistic to me. The whole purpose of video games is to escape from reality. Any Call of Duty game, Battlefield, Metal of Honor, SOCOM, etc. Also, they tend to revolve around World War II. All of these games are the same. Same weapons, same vehicles, same environments. Pistol, sniper rifle, grenade launcher, machine gun, shot gun, etc. I can never get excited for these types of games. Whenever I watch someone play them, I start to fall asleep. Old and predictable. Next...

No Wii Can't

I like the Wii, but as a piece of hardware, it needs to do better. Its like they cut off alot of features just to make it cheap. But in the end, you end up buying so many damn peripherals which should have been built in to begin with. Here are some hardware and software issues that piss me off about Wii...

Why can't it play DVDs?
I can live without HD, but DVD ability needs to be available. Even if you want to make the Wii as cheap as possible, why not make it an option? Make it one of those WiiWare channels you can download for a small fee so that people don't need to hack it to death? It already has a remote, it would be a perfect fit.

No Stand-alone Classic Controllers?
Why do I need to plug the Classic Controller into my Wii Remote? Yes, it looks stupid, but its not just a cosmetic issue. Right now I have 2 Remotes and 2 Classic Controllers, yet I'm still only capable of accommodating 2 players on a few Wii games when it should be 4. I have 4 controllers. There should be stand-alone Classic Controllers that have there own battery, sensor, rumble, etc. What a rip off...

Classic Controller Button Layout Sucks
The controller is fine except for the shoulder buttons. There is the usual L and R. But ZL and ZR? I thought the Wii was all about simplicity. I understand that Z is there because of the Gamecube controller, but why 2? and why name them ZL and ZR? Its like it deliberately tried to make it the same as a Playstation controller by adding an extra button.
To make things worse, the Classic Controller PRO positions the shoulder buttons exactly like Playstation's, BUT placing L and R in FRONT of ZL and ZR, contradicting the position of the Gamecube controller where the R button was BEHIND of the Z button. It swapped positions. This was really confusing when I tried to play Mario Kart Wii with this controller. I was trying to hop and shoot items with ZL and ZR rather than L and R because I was used to the Gamecube controller. So now, I just wasted my money thinking that the Pro was better. Now I am back to using the regular one.

Still using AA batteries?
C'mon! There are 2 USB ports on the back of the machine. Why not use those as a way to recharge built in battery within the controller, like the PS3? Sure it may cost a little more in the beginning, but you will save more on buying batteries and be more environmentally friendly. Why do people need to go out and buy these chargers from 3rd parties? This just adds to the mess of peripherals clogging the Wii market.

Wired Infrared Sensor
It looks stupid. That really long, thin wire is so freakin' annoying. Its hard to keep it neat and even store. It should have hooked up to a USB port instead of creating another port on the machine. That way it could have been wireless and rechargeable and not be such a nuisance. When the wire gets in the way of the TV screen, you have to ball it up and chuck it behind the TV set, getting tangled up with the rest of the junk back there.

Interface Navigation
Why can't I use my Gamecube controller to navigate the Wii interface? If I dont use a Classic Controller, I MUST point the Wii Remote to the screen to choose my channels, I can't even just use the D-pad to move the cursor. All I want to do is play Smash Bros. I don't NEED the infrared sensor. I just want to turn on my Wii, plug in a controller, choose the game channel, and start playing. I don't feel like looking for that damn infrared sensor with its long wire, and trying to find my cursor on the TV screen.

No USB Drive Memory?
I should be able to save my game on my own USB flash drive. Again, USB inputs exist on the back. Take advantage, man. And many Wii games don't allow you to copy the save, so if my Wii breaks, I'm screwed. If you are worried about piracy, at least let me save my Wii games on a Gamecube memory card...

Too Many Peripherals
I take a look at my PS3, I see the machine and 2 wireless controllers. Nice. Then, I turn to my Wii, I see the machine, 2 remotes, 2 classic controllers, 2 nunchucks, 2 Gamecube controllers, an infrared sensor with a long ass wire, and battery charger. Insane. Not to mention the Gamecube memory card and Wavebird adapter sticking out of it.

Super Sonic Sucks

After going back and playing Sonic the Hedgehog 2, I realized that the birth of Super Sonic may have been the first event, along with the addition of too many characters, that led to the downfall Sonic and why Sonic 1 and Sonic CD will remain, forever, as the two best games in the entire franchise.

Why does Sonic need to become Super? He already runs fast as hell. Its overkill. The idea of Super Sonic looks like it was ripped straight from Dragonball Z, getting 7 chaos emeralds (dragonballs) and turning Super Saiyan. There's already an item that makes you invincible and super shoes that make you faster. Oh, and he can fly too? That makes Tails pretty useless.

In Sonic 1, you got all of the emeralds to make a better ending. Same for Sonic CD. I think that was enough. In Sonic 2, what if I don't want to be super? I bust my balls trying to get all the emeralds and turn super against my own will after collecting only 50 rings. Furthermore, I start to loose rings at a rate of 1 ring per second, and if I run out, I'm screwed. It totally ruins the core gameplay.

And ever since then, whenever Sega creates a new Sonic game, the inclusion of Super Sonic is an absolute requirement. This is why Sonic 1 and CD are the best, because Super Sonic doesn't exist in those games, and the focus is Sonic, a little blue hedgehog, who from the beginning of the game, has all he needs to defeat the evil Dr. Robotnik in the end.

The Worst Mario Characters

After playing through and unlocking things in Mario Kart Wii, I really had to ask Nintendo, Why? Why shoehorn so many ridiculous characters just for the sake of having more characters?

Waluigi

He is the number 1 most pointless character in all of the Mario universe. He really has no back story, only existing as a counterpart of Wario, not even related to him. The name is awkward to pronounce, his outfit looks stupid, and his voice sounds horrendous. And whats up with his icon, an upside-down "L"? What's next, Wapeach and Wadaisy with and upside-down "P" and "D"?

Baby Daisy

Like Daisy, a nearly pointless character from Nintendo's back catalog, but a baby. If Baby Peach wasn't enough, lets take it even further and take the counterpart of a baby form of Peach. It shouldn't even be allowed for these babies to drive a go-kart. Can you imagine playing Mario Kart Wii, looking at the character select screen and saying, "You know what?, I think I'll choose Baby Daisy. Yea, she seems like a good choice."?

King Boo

Not just a ghost, but one that wears a crown. Why a ghost needs to drive, I dunno. And shouldn't he be able to drive through objects and be invisible? He IS a ghost. Isn't that what the Ghost item did in the previous Kart games?

Bowser Jr.

How many kids does Bowser have?! I think this makes 8. They all appeared together in New Super Mario Bros. Wii. Why make a new Koopa kid when you already have 7 to work with?

Toadette

Isn't Toad enough? There isn't a need for a girl version. Fungi reproduce asexually, so the concept of male and female mushrooms makes no sense. She also has the most annoying voice in the entire game. And whats up with the name? Lets see we got Toad, lets just add -ette at the end like the Smurfs did.

Dry Bowser

Ok.... Dry Bones was OK, but Dry BOWSER? Just because he made a small appearance in New Super Mario Bros., he becomes a full fledged character? What's next? King Dry Baby Wabowserette Jr.?

I didn't include Diddy Kong and Funky Kong because they are not really Mario characters. Nevertheless, neither of them were necessary in Mario Kart.