This list is not comprehensive.  I have limited it to games that I either managed to try at E3 or ones where I received some sort of gameplay-related demonstration.  I made an exception for Fallout 4 and Doom, since the amount of “gameplay” they showed in their presentations is enough to start formulating opinions, but I didn’t manage to get to a number of major titles (i.e. Assassin’s Creed: Syndicate).

THE DIVISION

I started my day with the one game that I believe I needed to play.  Ever since its presentation last year, I was 100% sold on this game.  Then, the total disaster of a presentation this year threw me on the fence.  Forget preordering (something I have sworn off doing), I wasn’t even sure if I wanted to get this game anymore.  I didn’t want to be stabbed in the back every time I walked through the world.  I am a very anti-social gamer, so those games where I feel I need to have human teammates to survive are games that I avoid like the plague.  This is especially true if my human teammates can stab me in the back at any opportunity.

My faith was restored upon playing their demo.  The dev team had us play through the same PvP scenario they showed in this year’s demonstration.  While that still leaves me questioning the story present in this game, I at least know that the general idea will be much more interesting and potentially complex than Destiny.

The dev team assured me that the only PvP areas in the game were the “dark zones”, and while the most powerful items were locked behind those dangerous walls, they were not a required part of the game.  The gunplay was smooth, even if the guns did feel a bit underpowered.  The powers were unique and relatively easy to manage.  The only downside was the cover system in the game, which I hope they fix before launch.  I’m used to the “Gears of War” style system where you click A to attach to a wall, press forward and A to vault it.  But for some reason in this game you hold A to attach to the wall, then press B to vault it.  It felt unnatural.  But I had a great time playing it, so it’s back on my “yes” list.

RAINBOW SIX: SIEGE

The shooter that showed so much promise last year has systematically chipped away at its awesomeness until I’m left with almost complete apathy.  It won a lot of points with me for bringing back terrorist hunts from the Vegas games (something I spent far too many hours playing), but as I expected the destruction in the game has been turned down significantly.  The cartoonish character titles they have been promoting has made me think of this less as a “terrorist-hunt, breach-and-clear simulator” and more of a slower Counter Strike clone.

The destructibility is still awesome, but I found fewer places to use it in the level we played.  There was a lot of concrete and few walls to shoot through.  I think I’ll enjoy this game a lot more than Evolve, but I’m not nearly as excited as I was last year.

RISE OF THE TOMB RAIDER

In a year when Lara is competing for attention with Nathan Drake, I don’t think Tomb Raider really brought enough to the table.  I definitely enjoyed the previous game, so I expect to enjoy this one as well, but I never felt like there was enough of a hook to compel me to pick this game over Uncharted 4.  And that’s not even beginning to discuss the other, big-name action/adventure games like Assassin’s Creed.  I have no doubt that I’ll play this game eventually, but it’s not high on my list.

STAR WARS: BATTLEFRONT

Given that this game was developed on the Frostbite engine, it should come as no surprise that it feels a lot like Battlefield 4.  While infantry combat has never been the main focus in Battlefield, Battlefront seems to have improved upon the formula significantly.  I played the split-screen PS4 coop map on Tatooine and enjoyed fighting the AI.  It was difficult but a lot of fun.  I am extremely disappointed that space maps won’t be making an appearance in this game, but hopefully that shows up in a DLC later down the road.  It would be a shame to miss out on the space combat from Battlefront 2.

PLANTS VS ZOMBIES: GARDEN WARFARE 2

The original Garden Warfare was a disappointment on so many levels for me.  I so desperately wanted split screen and bought an Xbox One copy just to make sure that I had it.  Then I find out that the second player can’t use their own account, they have to use a guest account that only has player 1’s unlocks.  So if you haven’t unlocked everything, your guest will be stuck using the same classes as you.  It was heartbreaking, and ultimately enough to make me stop playing the game.

The devs of Garden Warfare 2 have fixed all of that.  All modes can be played on split-screen, both players can use their own account and have their own progression, unlocks from the first game can come up into the second game.  I played an abbreviated horde mode for this game and loved playing the Imp.  Calling in his Titan and then nuclear ejecting to kill the boss creature was almost as much fun as it is in Titanfall.

UNRAVEL

If you can get over the obvious visual and gameplay comparisons to Little Big Planet, this game has a ton of potential.  The graphics look great, the story is interesting, and most of the time the gameplay was fun.  It’s a simple indie title with the graphics of a AAA adventure game.  Hopefully the developers have enough time to iron out the difficulty spikes (I was unable to finish the demo because I got stuck in an area), but I expect this to be entertaining for a smaller title.

That being said, it made me want to pick up the Little Big Planet games first.  Somehow I have completely neglected that series.

NEED FOR SPEED

Why are there so many “reboots”?  Do developers know how annoying it is to have to distinguish between The Need for Speed and Need for Speed?  Or how about Medal of Honor and Medal of Honor (2010)?  If something is going to be an HD remake, giving it the same name is fine.  But if it’s going to be a new game in the vein of the original title, give it an original name.  Like Wolfenstein: The New Order.  It’s a lot less complicated to keep track of what you’re talking about.  This is especially true when you title a game the same as the franchise.  When I talk about Need for Speed, I’m now going to have to add on “the game” every time I say its name (or just give it a different name like “New Need for Speed).

That aside, I’m pretty excited for this.  This is basically Underground 3 (which is what they should have called it, the cowards).  I love the customization, the car selection, the setting, and the open-world feel to it all.  If it’s even half as ambitious as the demo indicated, I’m expecting to have a good time.

GEARS OF WAR: ULTIMATE EDITION

My team might have lost our TDM match at E3, but it felt really good to retake control of Carmine and carve up some locust with my lancer.  There’s really nothing else that needs to be said.  This will be a must-buy for me.  If you played the original Xbox 360 version, you should be aware that this version includes the PC-exclusive chapters.  They’re both short, but very entertaining.  In one you get to kill the Brumak that chases you away from the Fenix estate.  (I talked with Rod Fergusson right before watching Tomb Raider, he verified that these chapters would be included).

FORZA 6

Having played very little Forza, I can’t say for sure whether this is a significant improvement from Forza 5.  I was disappointed by the lack of tracks in that title, since races tended to get extremely repetitive very quickly.  If this one has more tracks, I’d consider buying it.  But I tend to gravitate more to arcade racing games like Need for Speed over the realistic ones like Forza.

XCOM 2

In Enemy Unknown, I created a task force of just my friends and had them go out to save the world.  I made sure to keep every one of them alive.  While I am disappointed to see that we failed at our assignment to save the world, I think it’s a step in the right direction for gameplay.  I can’t wait to remake my team and send them out to take on this new alien threat.

FALLOUT 4

While this game’s announcement wasn’t entirely unexpected, the sheer amount of content in this game is unbelievable.  The potential for greatness here is crazy.  Armor customization, the ability to build and defend your own towns, fully voiced main characters of either gender.  I am really excited for this game.

THAT BEING SAID, I am certain the launch of this game is going to be horrendous.  The amount of different content present significantly increases the amount of game-breaking bugs that will make it through the QA filters.  I would not be surprised if this game remained unplayable for months after launch.

DOOM

I wanted so badly to get a chance to test this game out, but as usual Bethesda hid it behind closed doors.  Still, compared to the disappointment that was Doom 3, Reboot Doom brought down the house this year.  Hardcore “fans” can complain about the potentially linear level design all they want, the modding tools built into every copy of this game, regardless of platform, are far more powerful and have far more potential than anything the designers could come up with on their own.  This game has all of the potential of Unreal Tournament 4, but with a much wider potential user base.  I can’t wait to see what people come up with for this game.

ROCK BAND 4

I played one song on expert bass and fell right back into the groove.  I have missed the good times I had with this series.  It felt a lot like Rock Band 2.  If I can keep my songs from the previous Rock Band titles, I’m 100% sold.  If not, I’ll get it eventually, but maybe not right away.

MAD MAX

I finished off my time at E3 with what I considered to be a complete wild card.  I saw a theater demonstration of Mad Max two years ago.  While it was interesting then, I was very curious to see how the game played.  Like The Division, I considered this gameplay experience to be a “make or break” for whether or not I would end up buying the full game.  And, like The Division, the game did more than enough to convince me to jump on board.

The driving is relatively smooth and the chase sequences are exciting enough to get me into the groove.  It may not be as interesting as Assassin’s Creed’s naval combat, but the little twists and turns present in the vehicular carnage make this a fairly interesting game.  The customization looks cool on the surface, but I didn’t have the opportunity to upgrade very much.  It won’t be as expansive as Need for Speed’s but it should be good enough to make the car feel personal.

My limited time with the hand-to-hand combat of the game felt good overall but perhaps a tad oversimplified.  I may have been fighting the most basic enemies, but after playing Assassin’s Creed and the Batman games this felt far too easy.  And while I would rather have that than an unfairly difficult game, it did make me wonder whether this game’s story would make it interesting enough to venture on foot through enemy territory.

I will definitely get this game, but exactly when remains to be determined.  A lot of it will ride on how smooth the launch of the game is, and whether this company can produce a viable PC launch.  I would definitely consider playing this game on a console, but it would delay when I get the game.

I was partially right.  The games that are Gen4 / PC exclusives were definitely the most interesting titles at E3.  That being said, there were a lot of games that looked awesome.  Ubisoft alone had some seriously amazing titles.  Assassin’s Creed: Unity looks like a huge improvement over the previous games.  It may not have the ship combat, but at least it’s making strides on the seriously stale land combat.  Far Cry 4 has rideable elephants, which basically sells the game by itself (not to mention it looks beautiful).  The Division has a ton of potential and, as I have stated numerous times already, the best tablet functionality of any game to date.  And Rainbow Six… well, I’ll save that for a separate discussion.

And that was just at a single company.  Everywhere I went there was some game that was at least worth trying.  But there were definitely some games that rose above the pack.  So here are my top 5 games of E3 2014:

Bioware has made huge strides since Dragon Age II.  I don’t want to say I was disappointed by DA2, since there were some improvements (specifically in combat), but fortunately Inquisition goes a lot way to righting a lot of the wrongs of DA2.  A huge, beautiful worldspace, more interesting combat and spells, more party members, more playable species, support for both genders, full voice acting for all species and genders, etc. etc.  Without sitting down and playing through a couple of hours of this game, I can’t tell for sure that it’ll be exciting, but it would be impossible for me to say that I wasn’t looking forward to making some tough decisions in this game.

After playing 2 Borderlands games on 2 different platforms (PC and X360), I would have expected to be tired of the game.  But from the brief chance I got to play through B:TPS, I’m extremely excited.  The low gravity and oxygen deprived atmosphere slow this game down a bit, which is something it desperately needed to keep it from turning into a quake-style twitch shooter.  I expect this game to be even funnier than its predecessors.

The gameplay showed Shadow of Mordor’s combat as a mix between Assassin’s Creed and Batman.  Everything seemed smooth, so that alone would make this a mediocre/good game at worst (assuming everything works the way that they showed at E3).  What makes this game great is its military hierarchy system.  Each of the enemies fits into a chain of command.  If you manage to grab someone, you can use them in a variety of ways.  They can inform on other enemies, they can try to sabotage something, or they can try to assassinate someone else.  It’s an extremely powerful system that is evidently completely randomized, which makes it so that you won’t see the same enemies in the same spot twice.  On paper, this is an amazing idea with serious potential.

This ranked highly on my list last year and remains high this year.  The combination of open world RPG elements, cooperative gameplay, third person cover shooting, looting / customization, and powerful story make this game a recipe for an excellent gaming experience.  Not to mention this still has the best second-screen tablet functionality I have seen in any video game to date.  After Watch_Dogs I am aware that this could be a potential disappointment, but for now this is still one of my most anticipated games of the year.

I have to admit I am a bit biased with this one.  I am a huge fan of the Far Cry series, so Far Cry 4 didn’t really have to do much to make it to the top of my list.  However, that being said, the developers took everything that I loved about Far Cry 3 and made significant improvements.  Driving mechanics felt smoother, the gyrocopter was a very different way to approach movement and combat, the player can now shoot while driving (I’m not sure how that will work during a high-speed chase), the world had a much greater variety in areas, there were random non-combat NPCs, and there was a greater emphasis on distinguishing the different playstyles.  I am hoping that the story has improved since Far Cry 3 (which had an awesome first-half and a surprisingly dull second-half), but I won’t know for sure until it gets released.  Either way, this game is at the top of my list to play.

Unfortuantely, since I still feel very misled about Watch_Dogs, I still have to be weary about any of the games I saw at E3.  Fortunately, a few of these games I actually got to try out myself, so I can be much more confident about those (Far Cry 4 and Borderlands specifically).  I really hope that the rest turn out to be as great as I hope they are.  But, as with everything, only time will tell.

For Gamers:

Borderlands in space.  Seriously, do I need to say more?  Okay fine, Claptrap is a playable character.  If that doesn’t sell you, nothing I can say will.  The entire game takes place on the moon.  You play as the vault hunters hired by Handsome Jack to find a vault.  The low gravity and oxygen-deprived environments lead to an experience that is slightly slower than Borderlands 2, but personally I liked that.  It keeps the game from turning into a quake-style twitch shooter.  I loved both of the characters that I got to try, so I expect to get this game soon after it comes out.

For Parents:

Borderlands is known for fast paced, ridiculous action with significant amounts of blood and gore that often gets lost in the flashy explosions and elemental damage.  Based on my demo and my experience with previous Borderlands games, I expect this game to be appropriate for 16 year olds.

For Gamers:

Take Civilization 5, slap in a healthy dose of Starcraft, and that’s Beyond Earth in a nutshell.  The core gameplay structure remains exactly the same, but there are a lot of new and improved elements that all fit in the theme of the “post-Earth space colonization”.  While I don’t think the game is different enough from Civ5 to merit $60, it was definitely interesting enough to warrant a future purchase.

For Parents:

The Civilization games have always been about methodical city building with equal parts warfare, culture, politics, economics, and history.  It is an excellent tool for demonstrating the basic concepts behind international relations and how certain conflicts can be resolved without resulting to force of arms.  This game will almost certainly be appropriate for all ages.

For Gamers:

So here’s the thing, I saw the gameplay demo for The Order at the Sony press conference and went into E3 wanting to know more about the story, because the demo explained very little about who I was, who “The Order” was, who was fighting and why, etc. etc.  Unfortunately, the E3 event only included the exact same gameplay demo I saw before.  Granted, this time I actually got to try the game which is cool.  The thermite rifle is an awesome idea, but without any sort of story or context I get concerned that the lack of story at E3 means that there is an overall lack of story.  There are too many shooters with an interesting mechanic or two but completely devoid of deep stories.  I don’t need one more on my list.

For Parents:

Blood was present in the game but seemed to vary depending on which weapons the player was using.  There was some sort of arc lightning rifle that cause enemies to explode into blood and bits, but I only saw this used once briefly.  My primary weapon was a “thermite rifle”.  I could fire a flare out and then open fire with the rifle.  My rounds would then ignite and light any enemies on fire.  Based on this content I expect the game to be appropriate for 16 year olds, but that could go up depending on the rest of the content.

For Gamers:

I am a huge fan of arcade-style racing games where damage and physics matter less than big explosions and sometimes ridiculous speeds.  Driveclub pushes the territory of realism without going too far into it to lose my interest.  I didn’t get a chance to try out the customization (something this game is evidently known for), but my race felt fairly smooth and easy to pick up and try.  Considering I was simultaneously testing the “PS4 to Vita streaming” function, and thus playing with the PS Vita instead of the normal PS4 controller, this is pretty impressive.

For Parents:

This is a very simple racing game with no out-of-car functionality.  From the parts that I played, it should be appropriate for all ages.

For Gamers:

I played Little Big Planet for the first time a few years ago and was surprised at how much fun the simplicity of the game was.  It’s a fairly simple platformer with some excellent coop gameplay.  LBP3 takes this one step further by having different characters, each with a unique special ability that can help with certain challenges and puzzles.  My brief time playing this game was just as awesome as I expected.  Find a friend or three, get this game, and be prepared to have a great time.

For Parents:

This game is designed to be appropriate for all ages.  It’s also a ton of fun for all ages.

For Gamers:

There are a few things I loved about this game.  First, the ability to not only choose which rifle, secondary, and sidearm I wanted but also to fully customize my rifle was awesome.  I loved being able to outfit my rifle with whatever parts I wanted.  The sniping sections were a lot of fun.  Unfortunately, the “stealth” sections outside of combat were much less fun and much more tedious.  After alerting the enemies and then slipping away, the enemies never returned to their previous actions.  I killed myself by throwing a grenade and having the blast kill me while I was behind a set of sandbags.  This game made me want to give Sniper Elite V2 a second try, but I’m not going to rush out and get this game just yet.

For Parents:

Normal combat involves blood and some knife takedowns, but what really makes this game brutal is the sniper shots.  Since this is a sniper game, the sniping sections are emphasized.  If the player manages to score a killing blow, the camera will sometimes focus in on the round and view the target in x-ray vision.  The player watches in graphic detail as the round penetrates the enemy, breaks bones, and decimates internal organs.  It’s a very brutal process.  I expect this game to, at minimum, be appropriate for 16 year olds.

For Gamers:

Dragon Age: Inquisition is about as far from Dragon Age 2 as possible.  The worldspace is massive, the story is interesting, there are a ton of different party members, and the customization options are back in full force.  There are four playable races, each race has the option to be male or female, and each type of character is fully voice acted.  This game is either going to be an awesome experience or a total flop.  Personally, I’m expecting it to lean much more towards the former.

For Parents:

Dragon Age games are known for including violence, sexuality, and substance use.  Usually all are put into an appropriate context, but their presence is still a major factor.  Based on the history of the game franchise, I expect this game to be appropriate for 16 to 18 year olds.

For Gamers:

I have been burned far too much with Fable games to recommend this regardless of how I feel after playing the game.  The portion I played was an asynchronous multiplayer.  I played as a villain, directing small numbers of troops around a battlefield while I tried to kill a few players on the ground.  The mode felt fairly confusing and I had very little time to set up.  It was entertaining to take advantage of my opponents’ weaknesses, but I don’t think it was enough fun to keep me coming back for more.

For Parents:

The multiplayer portion in which I participated may not be representative of the majority of the gameplay.  Violence in Fable has always been fairly mild, but sexuality and substance use have both been fairly high.  Without seeing the other modes of this game in greater detail, I won’t know for sure what age this is appropriate for.  As of this point, I can’t even provide an accurate estimate.

For Gamers:

I didn’t really enjoy this game at all.  The developers and previews made the grinding jumping action seem smooth and seamless but it was surprisingly difficult to control.  Here’s the thing, I was stuck in a horde mode where enemies would come in waves and attack these tanks of energy drinks.  That means the enemies tend to localize in one point.  This game forces the player to keep track of where they’re moving, where they’re shooting, where the enemies are, where the traps are, how much ammunition they have, and where their friends are all at the same time.  It’s a ridiculous amount of information to process during a very short, frantic time.  On top of that, I could never tell if my shots were doing any damage.  I would use weapon after weapon and, unless the weapon lead to a huge explosion, I couldn’t tell if I was even hurting my enemy in any significant way.

This game is far too easy to compare to Borderlands.  And personally, between the two, I had a lot more fun trying out the Borderlands Pre-Sequel than I did with this game.

For Parents:

This game has so many colorful explosions and fast action that it was difficult to tell if there was any blood or gore.  I’m almost positive there is, but I couldn’t see it from my time playing the game.

For Gamers:

Battlefield: Hardline is a bit of a mixed bag for me.  The multiplayer is pretty awesome but overall I’m not sure the content differs enough from Battlefield 4 to justify buying a whole new game.  I have yet to get deeply into the new modes, though, so those might be able to do the trick.  Some of the vehicles are pretty awesome though (like the turret SUV), and I certainly can’t complain about driving police vehicles with flashing lights.

I’m mostly a fan of the single-player and co-op sections of games.  And while Visceral has a track record of some well-written single player games (like Dead Space), let’s not forget that they also have a track record of some poorly written games (like Army of Two: The Devil’s Cartel).  Without more information on the single player and its story, I won’t know for sure if I could recommend this game.

For Parents:

Hardline’s single player is still a complete mystery to me.  I know that parts of it will involve police finding illicit narcotics, but whether or not there is any narcotics use is completely up in the air.  The multiplayer, though, is pretty straightforward.  Hits might result in some blood but it will be difficult to see given the distances between players, smoke effects, muzzle flash, and a variety of other factors.

If you want to gauge what this will end up looking like, take a look at the multiplayer for Battlefield 4.  They should be extremely similar in terms of overall mature content.  As a result, I expect this game to be appropriate for 12 to 14 year olds, but that may change depending on what content is included in the single player.

For Gamers:

There are two things that almost certainly make this game a preorder for me.  First, the ability to team up with friends and go questing in a modern day post-apocalyptic setting is pretty amazing.  It looks and feels a bit like Fallout, minus the nuclear bombs and radiation and stuff.  Second, this game has the best tablet functionality of any game I have ever seen.  Tablet players are active support characters, helping their team on the ground and actually seeing everything that’s going on in real time.

Definitely find the video of the gameplay demo so you know exactly what I mean.  This has all of the hallmarks of being a great franchise.

For Parents:

There was definite violence in this game, but if there was blood I never noticed it.  Some player abilities and enemy types used flamethrowers, and some enemies did catch on fire and react to the fire.  However, overall the gameplay felt relatively mild.  Just from what I saw, I would say this game is appropriate for 14 year olds, but that might increase depending on what additional content is present in the game.

For Gamers:

I’m not a huge fan of horror games.  I loved the REmake of Resident Evil, loved the first Dead Space, and clawed my way through the first Amnesia.  But I don’t see the “jumper” style of horror as particularly difficult or creative, it just preys on biological instincts.  I would much rather have something like the first Alien movie, where it’s really the suspense that makes you afraid.  That being said, my playthrough of The Evil Within was more boring and frustrating than scary.  I was never damaged by any enemies (until the very end boss that killed me through a closed door).

I actually almost killed myself a couple of times by some traps in the level.  The game was extremely slow and the “scary” sequences were obvious from a mile away.  If you have to go away from your ally, you’re going to be separated from him.  If you’re stuck in a hallway and the only way to go is through a door with no visible exit on the other side, there’s going to be a boss or some other major enemy waiting for you when you get into that room.  I liked the shifting levels (the level shifted a lot), but it was a cool mechanic.  Overall this isn’t going to be high on my list at all.

For Parents:

This is a horror game with excessive amounts of blood, gore, violence, and scary images.  Even though I didn’t find it very intimidating, it’s the kind of thing that can definitely give someone nightmares.  This will almost certainly only be appropriate for 18 year olds.

For Gamers:

I was initially heavily biased against this game.  As soon as the presenter mentioned “free-to-play”, I basically checked out.  I am not a fan of free-to-play.  But, since I was in a theater and a captive audience, and because I believe that the guys at Bethesda actually know what they’re doing from time to time, I listened to his pitch.  I’m very glad that I did.  First, the “free-to-play” elements only come in cosmetic.  All equipment upgrades can only be unlocked by playing the game.  Everything a player can buy is purely cosmetic, so there’s no need to worry about “pay-to-win”.

This is basically like Team Fortress 2 without guns.  There are a few ranged character classes, but the game focuses primarily on melee combat.  I loved it.  It was simple and easy to figure out but mastering the classes and abilities can take time.  It’s still very early in development, but I’m going to keep track of it for when the beta gets released.

Then again, it probably helps that I went 23 and 0 with 16 assists.  In a match that requires your team earn 100 points to win, knowing that I contributed almost 1/4th of the total kills is pretty awesome.

For Parents:

This game includes somewhat liberal amounts of blood and regularly includes gore.  However, the cartoonish visual style and the fast-paced nature of the combat blend together well enough that this becomes more of a blur after a very short time.  For now I expect this game to be appropriate for 16 year olds, but that could go down once the game gets released.

For Gamers:

If you mixed the multiplayer and visual styles of Halo with the RPG and unlocks of Borderlands, would you be excited?  I went into Destiny extremely skeptical, since the reviews that I read and the video that I saw didn’t show me anything that was truly unique.  Overall, Destiny isn’t particularly unique.  That being said, the mechanics are great and the visuals are awesome.  I definitely came out feeling more positive about Destiny than I felt going in.

The only unfortunate part is that the story is extremely unremarkable.  Everything revolves around the last safe human city and your quest to protect it from some unspecified darkness.  There are no memorable characters from the trailers, and even the Guilty Spark equivalent isn’t interesting.  Don’t go into this game expecting some deep, compelling narrative.  Instead, go in for the great Halo-like gameplay with some interesting RPG elements and upgrades.

For Parents:

This game is all about fast-paced space combat.  Blood was very minimal and there was never any gore.  While a game of this size may have more content hidden deep within its missions, I expect this game to be appropriate for 12 year olds.

For Gamers:

At the beginning of my preview the heads of Sledgehammer games talked about how they spent months and months planning an immersive story with compelling, memorable characters and unique situations.  Yet the gameplay footage showed nothing but shooting and action sequences.  I expect Call of Duty to have interesting gadgets and visually impactful action sequences.  What I want is something that separates this Call of Duty from every other CoD since Modern Warfare 2.  Give me a guarantee that the single player is going to be more than 6 hours, that Kevin Spacey’s character is more than just a random throwaway for a few cutscenes and a quicktime event at the end of the game when you kill him.  I want to feel like the narrative is gripping and compelling.  Don’t tell me that it’s awesome, show me the content and let me come to that conclusion on my own.

This game isn’t necessarily a let-down because it’s exactly what I expect from Call of Duty now.  There are much better multiplayer experiences on the market right now.

For Parents:

Call of Duty has a history of either being brutally violent or overall fairly appropriate.  That being said, the gameplay footage that I saw did include some visible blood and there is a section where the main character loses his arm.  As a result, I expect this game to be appropriate for 16 year olds, but that may change depending on what else is included in the overall campaign.

For Gamers:

My nephew loves Disney Infinity, so I took some time to give this a shot.  I’ve played a very limited amount of Infinity, but from what I can tell this seems like just an expansion pack of sorts.  It unlocks a bunch of the Marvel characters and fixes a number of mechanics-related issues so that the game is more user-friendly, but overall the content didn’t seem to be too much different.  I could have seen all of this as a $10-$20 DLC package, but that wouldn’t be very Disney.  If you know someone who really loves Infinity, this would probably make sense for them.

That being said, the level / game editor seemed pretty powerful and could be an excellent way to teach a young aspiring game designer how to place objects and a challenging yet fun environment.

For Parents:

This game is designed for kids.  It features simple, cartoonish combat with no blood at all.  It’s definitely appropriate for all ages.

For Gamers:

I was extremely skeptical about this game when I first found out it was being revealed.  I felt somewhat burned by Arkham Origins.  After all, how much new stuff could they put into a Batman game to make it interesting?  Arkham Knight absolutely floored me.  The brief demonstration I saw included new gadgets, new environments, new enemy types, and the batmobile.  The batmobile alone practically sells the game.  If you haven’t had a chance to see some gameplay footage, try to find some because you’ll know exactly what I mean.  This has the makings of being even better than Arkham Asylum and Arkham City.

For Parents:

Batman is a superhero constantly leashed by his system of morality.  Batman not only can’t kill anyone, he has to make sure that no one (even the worst villains) ever dies.  Violence in the previous Batman games was almost entirely hand-to-hand and was always non-lethal.  I expect this game to be appropriate for 12 year olds.

For Gamers:

I am definitely going to spend more time talking about this later because I got a chance to actually play this game.  It was amazing.  I talked to Angry Joe (yes, the Angry Joe) after the show and he expressed skepticism, saying that he didn’t think anyone would actually play the game as tactically as they did in the trailer.  I said that when we went through, it was almost exactly like that.  It was definitely a little more haphazard, since it was four complete newbies and one veteran all trying to work together, but a good team can coordinate enough together to stay alive and complete the objective.

The developers are clearly focusing almost entirely on the multiplayer though, which is fine.  So far it plays very well and I’m looking forward to seeing more in the near future!

For Parents:

This game is still very early in development, but the game does include combat between terrorists and counter-terrorists.  If there was any blood present, I never saw it anywhere.  I expect this game to be appropriate for 12 year olds.

For Gamers:

I have played the first Killzone and am slowly working my way through the series.  As a result, I have yet to play Killzone: Shadow Fall.  However, picking up this game and participating with three other gamers in a horde-like domination mode was a lot of fun.  I used a light machine gun and unfortunately found that I ran out of ammunition extremely quickly, but it was a lot of fun.  It’s definitely the kind of thing that I could get lost in playing for hours and hours.  If you miss Modern Warfare 3’s horde mode, you’re going to love this.

For Parents:

Killzone is an action shooter.  From what I have seen about Shadow Fall, the only mature content in this game involves violence.  I didn’t notice any blood, since almost all of the enemies were heavily armored.  I expect Killzone: Shadow Fall and this Intercept expansion pack to be appropriate for anyone 12 and up.

For Gamers:

Evolve is a ton of fun if you have a team of players who know what they’re doing.  If you’re the monster, you don’t have to rely on anyone, so the objective is pretty simple.  If you’re the humans, though, you need to rely on each other at all times.  The monster moves quickly so you’re going to have to anticipate his movements and cut him off.  The game was fun even though my team lost, but I question the replay value of the game.  Leveling up and unlocking new equipment and abilities only goes so far.  I expect there will be more than a single mode, but so far we’ve only seen the monster vs humans mode.

For Parents:

Blood was definitely present but overall it was pretty mild.  There is some gore when the monster eats random creatures, but I didn’t notice any gore caused in combat.  There may be some extremely mild substance use with health items, but overall the game was straightforward.  I would expect this to be appropriate for ages 12 to 14.

For Gamers:

Comparing this game to Dead Island is very appropriate.  The core gameplay elements are almost exactly the same.  Melee combat and crafting is key to survival.  The differences between the two games are subtle, but someone who played a lot of Dead Island will be able to pick up on it.  Combat is much more difficult, which means tearing through enemies like paper (which seems common in Dead Island) doesn’t happen in Dying Light.  I desperately needed a good tutorial in order to figure out things like the crafting system, but overall Dying Light seems like a much cleaner, more fun version of Dead Island.  It’s higher up on my list than Dead Island 2 right now.

For Parents:

Without any sort of story, I couldn’t be able to tell exactly how much sexuality or substance use was in this game, but this game includes constant violence with substantial amounts of blood and gore.  If you take a look at my Dead Island review, the content is very similar.  I expect this game to be appropriate for someone 18 years old.

For Gamers:

Initially I saw this game and thought, “Wait, no more ships?”  But after seeing the gameplay demos, I can see why there weren’t any more ships.  The single player of this game includes full 4 person coop, which makes a huge difference in the gameplay.  Stick with 1 to 3 reliable partners and the different challenges become much more engaging.  Add the new “crowd” system in the game (all of the civilians are individuals and can react in sometimes unpredictable ways) and the revamps of the old blending and hunting mechanics and this game seems to improve significantly on all of the problems its predecessors left for years.  This gives me hope for a positive overall direction to the Assassin’s Creed franchise.

For Parents:

While sexuality and substance use maybe a relatively insignificant factor, violence is going to be huge in Assassin’s Creed: Unity.  There was a ton of fairly brutal blood and gore in the gameplay.  At the end, the player watches in first person as a character is decapitated and has his head placed on a spike and hoisted into the air.  It’s pretty gross.  I expect this game to be appropriate for 16 to 18 year olds.

For Gamers:

I really wish that the developers had given us the first chapter or something to play instead of a “challenge level”, but unfortunately that’s the way they decided to go.  This made the game seem extremely difficult, which kind of ruined the fun.  You’re thrown into the gamespace without knowing how to craft, so using a flamethrower is pretty much your only chance at survival.  I can see the potential for this game being fun though.  It’s not much of a jumper since you can use the motion tracker, but it’s still very suspenseful.  You can never kill the alien no matter what, so it’s just a matter of conserving the equipment you have until you desperately need it.

For Parents:

Blood and gore were present in the level but this game is purely about survival, not combat.  As a result, the violence was basically nonexistent.  I would expect this game’s content to be appropriate for 12 to 14 year olds, but the scary images might play a factor.

For Gamers:

This is extremely high up on my “Best of E3” list.  Take the climbing and semi-stealth elements from Assassin’s Creed, mix them up with the combat from the Batman Arkham games, and throw them into Middle Earth and you have a small taste of what this game is like.  All of the enemies are “procedurally generated”, which means you aren’t fighting the same enemies twice.  If you’ve played Borderlands, you know how you never get the same loot every time you open a crate. This game takes that same basic idea and uses it for its enemies.  It’s an awesome system that I’m extremely excited for.  Barring some horrible bug issues or some random mechanic that isn’t being demonstrated this year, this game is definitely a preorder for me.

For Parents:

Blood is a pretty significant factor and gore was present in the form of decaptiations, but substance use and sexuality seem to be completely absent.  Unless there’s something hidden deep within the story that isn’t being unveiled yet, I expect this game to be appropriate for 16 year olds.

For Gamers:

This game has been out for a little while now, so seeing it again on the floor surprised me.  I gave it another try because I wanted to see what the differences were between this year and my demo last year.  Unfortunately, not much has changed.  They tasked us with a very challenging boss battle, which was made more challenging because we didn’t really get to pick what team members we were placed with.  Some team members knew their role fairly well, others seemed less than reliable.  Talking with some of the other people in line revealed that the game was fun for the hardcore fans but lacked the content to keep players interested for more than a month or two.

In my experience, it looked like fun, but if I’m going to start playing an MMO it’ll probably be The Secret World or The Old Republic, not this game.

For Parents:

MMOs are tough to review, since there is literally hundreds of hours of content.  However, from my very brief gameplay experience the violence and substance use seemed very low.  I would expect this game to be appropriate for 10 to 12 year olds.

For Gamers:

The multiplayer FPS scene is an extremely crowded genre.  Adding another free-to-play game seems ill-advised right now.  Nosgoth shows a lot of potential, and being the vampires was definitely fun, but the “free-to-play” scares me away from this game.  Unfortunately, I don’t see many ways that this game can keep from becoming a “pay-to-win” system.  I am going to keep track of it via the beta, but right now the content just doesn’t support the idea of putting any money into this game.

For Parents:

This game definitely had blood but I didn’t notice any gore.  That doesn’t mean there wasn’t any, I just didn’t see it when I was playing.  It’s pretty fast paced and after you kill a player you’re not sticking around to see if he’s in one piece, you’re turning around to see if someone is right behind you.  I would expect this game to be appropriate for ages 12 to 14.

For Gamers:

I have to admit, the intro chapter for the first Witcher game lost my interest and I have yet to pick it back up again.  That being said, Wild Hunt’s demo reminded me that I need to give it another chance.  The vast open-world combat and the emphasis on quests and character interaction make this game very interesting.  It might not be as much fun for me as Skyrim, but it is definitely worth a shot.  And boy does it look gorgeous.

For Parents:

The Witcher games have a history of intense violence, sexuality, and substance use.  From just the trailer I can already tell that these elements will all be back in force.  I expect this game to get a solid 18 years old.

For Gamers:

Last year my demo for this game was in an empty, singleplayer world and the game suffered significantly for it.  This year I played with other gamers and it definitely helped.  Unfortunately, the fun in this game was standing next to a friend and cheering each other on, an experience that is much more difficult to replicate online.  The core elements of the game are solid, but I think the execution is going to feel flawed.  This game needs some good AI to act as placeholders for crew members.  Without it, I’m not sure I could recommend it to a person that doesn’t have a “crew” already lined up in the real world.

For Parents:

This is a racing game, pure and simple.  There wasn’t any blood anywhere in the game.  I expect this game to be appropriate for 8 to 10 year olds.

For Gamers:

My time with Far Cry 4 was very brief, and I may give this game another try since there were technically three demos.  I decided to storm a fortress, because I love the idea of running and gunning more than stealth.  The game performed very smoothly compared to Far Cry 3, which sometimes felt clunky in open combat, but the overall feel was extremely similar to Far Cry 3.  That being said, there are rideable elephants.  And you can make the elephants charge into enemies and vehicles.  If you hit an enemy, it’s an instant kill.  If you hit a vehicle, it goes flying and everyone inside it gets wrecked.  It’s awesome!  Best vehicle I have ever used in a video game hands down.

For Parents:

The Far Cry games have become a lot more twisted.  If I judge this game based purely on the gameplay, it’s a pretty simple game.  There is never any gore, and blood is sometimes present in minimal amounts.  The melee executions get a bit bloodly and gruesome, but nothing too over-the-top.  However, the trick is in the story-based content.  Far Cry 3 really pushed the envelope in a lot of departments, and while I’m hoping that Far Cry 4 tones it down a bit I’m not sure that will be the case.  If Far Cry 4 is anything like its predecessor, it will be appropriate for 18 year olds.

I'm hoping to see even more tomorrow.  Be on the watch for reviews of three Bethesda games as well as at least one more Ubisoft title.  Other than that, it's anyone's game!

Before I explain how what happened to Watch_Dogs affects the entire gaming industry, please allow me to take a moment to rant about the game.  The developers had a great opportunity here and never really delivered.  Watch_Dogs is a good game, definitely worth playing, but that’s all it ever really is.  It’s unfair to compare this game to the Grand Theft Autos since Rockstar has had years to develop and perfect the art of creating a gritty yet funny open world third person shooter experience.  It’s like comparing the movie Gladiator to another director’s first film.  The first film can be absolutely amazing, but it’ll never shine a candle to the greatness of Gladiator.

That being said, I really expected more from this game.  I keep comparing Watch_Dogs to Split/Second.  Split/Second is this ridiculously arcadey racing game where you fill an energy meter by doing stuff like drifting, drafting, and getting huge air.  You can then use that energy to activate stuff in the level in the hopes of wrecking your opponents.  There’s a ton of small stuff that blows up, like buses and cars.  Random debris falls from the sky and it’s all based in the level that you’re racing.  If you save up your energy, though, that’s when the real magic happens.  There are certain sections on every course where you can cause a massive change that has the potential of wrecking everyone.  You can bring down a huge space needle tower that creates an alternate, faster route.  You can cause an entire dam to collapse.  Or you can call in a C130 that crashlands on the runway you’re racing down.

Split/Second is a game that is, as a whole, just good.  It isn’t a great racing game, it has some pretty simple exploits, and some of its alternate game modes were pretty frustrating.  That being said, its explosions and levolution events were unparalleled.  It takes one thing that it does well and cranks it up to eleven.  I will always remember Split/Second because of the visual impact of the player-triggered events and how those events could change the track in dramatic ways.

Watch_Dogs never has that moment.  The hacking was supposed to be like that, but you never feel all-powerful.  I wanted it to be like Prototype.  In Prototype, you’d be given a task to go and annihilate an enemy base.  When you got that assignment, you were never concerned with whether or not you’d be able to kill the enemies, you always could.  You’re just that freakin powerful.  The only thing I thought when I was given a task was “How do I want to kill everyone this time?”  You are a one-man killing machine, you will make everyone in the Red Zone fear you and with good reason.

But this wasn’t entirely the Watch_Dogs’ developers fault.  There were a ton of forces working against them, forces that leash almost every current triple-A development studio in existence.  First, let’s start with the obvious, the marketing.

There have been a number of reviews that talk about how Watch_Dogs’ marketing was too good.  They compare it to Dead Island.  After all, the job of a marketing team is to sell copies, and Watch_Dogs’ marketing did exactly that.  So this is an excellent marketing team that did exactly what they were supposed to do.

Except that isn’t the case.  A good game manager knows that marketing isn’t just about selling copies.  The primary job of video game marketing and public relations is to control consumer expectations.  You want consumers to get excited about the product you’re selling, but they have to be getting excited about the product that you’re actually selling.  It’s an extremely fine line that few companies manage to tread correctly.  I’m not saying the marketing team has to be 100% honest, they just have to make sure not to completely mislead the consumer.

Aliens: Colonial Marines is a perfect example of this.  At E3 2011, Gearbox showed off amazing single player gameplay footage with awesome dialog and character interactions, great visuals and visual effects, and very intelligent alien AI.  What got released two years later was a steaming pile of crap that wasn’t even close to what was shown by the marketing teams.  This was a case that was almost blatantly deceptive.  It’s the most extreme example I can come up with.

But if Gearbox announces at this E3 that they’re coming out with a sequel for Aliens: Colonial Marines, would I preorder it?  Hell no!  Gearbox had their shot to prove to me that they could pull off a good Aliens game and they missed it by a mile.  And there are plenty of other examples where this is the case.  Watch_Dogs is, unfortunately, another game that fits into that same category.  The marketing team had one job to do, get me excited about Watch_Dogs.  They got me excited, but not for Watch_Dogs.  They failed.

Fortunately, that situation is fairly unique for Watch_Dogs.  There are plenty of other games with flashy, pre-rendered cutscenes that will show up at E3, selling an experience that isn’t actually mirrored in the game, but most of the time these videos are forgotten after the game is released.

The problems with this game were compounded by the fact that the developers made a brand new engine for this game.  Any game engine is problematic.  Improvements and updates are constantly being generated, but that means that the stability of the engine can sometimes be questionable.  When an individual game is unstable, it stops consumers from playing it.  When a game engine is unstable, it stops the entire development team from working.  New game engines are especially prone to these types of issues, which can bring even the simplest tasks to a grinding halt.

This new game engine has its benefits, otherwise the developers wouldn’t have worked with it.  However, it is almost certain that most of the major bug and performance related issues in Watch_Dogs are a direct result of the new engine.  When I first installed the game on my work computer, which runs an AMD graphics card, it blue screened on launch.  It then continued to blue screen until I downloaded beta graphics card drivers.  It took me nearly a full day to get the game running at all.

My NVidia card at home wasn’t much better.  While it didn’t have a problem with blue screening, the performance on the game was absolutely horrendous.  The stuttering shown in almost all of my video clips from the game was something that happened every time I drove around the city.  I ran the game at a mix of high and low settings, far below what my computer can handle with other open world games.  Yet despite the fact that the game wasn’t nearly as graphically impressive as titles like GTA4 and Skyrim, the game was still giving me framerate drops every few seconds.

Most of these issues are solved over time.  Performance tweaks and engine upgrades can dramatically improve the visual quality and framerate.  But these types of issues are solved after years of development with the engine.  Even engines like the Unreal Engine or Frostbite have quirks that the developers have to work around in order to get the best performing, most stable game possible.

But the real problem with Watch_Dogs is that it was developed for six different platforms.  SIX!  You might be arguing right now, “But Carmine, it’s not actually that bad!  The PS3 and PS4 are relatively similar since they’re both made by Sony!  Same with the Xbox 360 and the X1!”

Sit down and let me explain to you exactly what goes on in game development.  Consoles are currently divided up between “Gen3” and “Gen4”.  Gen3 is the PS3 and Xbox 360, Gen4 is the PS4 and X1.  PC is in its own separate category since the hardware can vary drastically from computer to computer, and the Wii U is some sort of horrible hybrid between Gen3 and Gen4.  I’ll get to that Frankenstein of a console in a bit.

First, just because two consoles are made by the same company doesn’t mean they’re even remotely similar.  For Gen3, the PS3 has less memory than the Xbox 360, which means that a game being developed for Gen3 has to be tested extensively on the PS3.  Even if the Xbox 360 can handle a few more polygons or a few more animations, developers aren’t going to make that happen because the PS3 would crash out.  Every time your console freezes, that’s a crash, and most of the time it’s because of a lack of memory.  If a PC starts running out of free memory, the PC starts lagging.  It’s designed to deal with situations where it’s running low on memory since it’s built to multitask.  The consoles don’t.  They’re either going all in with a game or they’re dead in the water.  Yes, you can make a console lag, but it’s a lot more difficult than making a PC lag.

For the Gen4 consoles, the X1 has slightly less memory.  It isn’t much, and I have a feeling that most of it has to do with the Kinect, but the X1 is more likely to have issues with performance than the PS4.  So when developers are testing their game on Gen4, they have to test fairly extensively on the X1.

But right now developers are in a bit of a conundrum.  They’re developing games with huge budgets.  They want to make new titles for the Gen4 consoles, since those consoles have far more memory and are far more powerful.  Unfortunately, most of their user base is still on Gen3 consoles.  So developers have to create two entirely separate experiences.

Now, a decent developer would look at a game like Watch_Dogs and say “We could probably run this game without any problems if we cut out these buildings, removed this island, and removed the ability to use grenade launchers.  Unfortunately, the internet would light them ablaze so quickly the devs would be burnt to a crisp before anyone knew what was going on.  So the devs spend months doing performance tests and manipulating memory levels for different categories.  It’s a slow, painful process that can be thrown off by the smallest issue.  Seriously, the smallest thing can cause an out-of-memory crash.  One too many polygons, one texture that’s slightly too high of resolution, too many objects being visible on the screen at any one time.  It turns game development into a sort of development hell that isn’t fun for anyone.

And while the engineers and developers are spending hour after hour, week after week slaving away to keep the game from crashing every two seconds on the PS3, other platforms are getting much less love.  Gen3 gets the highest priority, since that’s where the most consumers are.  Gen4 gets the next highest priority, since that’s where consumers are going to go next.  So who does that leave?

Well, first, it leaves the PC gamers.  Hey PC gamers, ever wonder why you guys always get the shaft when it comes to buggy releases?  There’s a few great reasons why this happens.  First, there’s no certification process for PC.  Console games have to get checked by a quality assurance team at either Microsoft or Sony.  Publishers submit a game to the console manufacturers, and the manufacturers run that game through its paces.  If Sony or Microsoft get any game-breaking issues, they kick that sucker back to the publishers and force it to get fixed.  It’s not a perfect system, but it catches almost all of the major issues before they go out the door.

PC doesn’t have a single manufacturer.  There’s no gatekeeper right now.  So the game that gets propped on Steam or Origin or Uplay only takes a few days to prepare and only requires an internal QA approval.  Watch_Dogs was an obvious victim of this problem.  This game blue screened my work PC four times before I managed to fix the issue myself.  It’s absolutely ridiculous, but that’s the unfortunate plight of PC gamers.

You want to know the only platform that is ignored more than the PC?  That’s right, it’s the Wii U.  The Wii U is more powerful than its Gen3 counterparts but doesn’t have the sheer power that a PS4 or X1 packs.  It’s in its own sort of middle territory.  I really don’t understand why Ubisoft wanted to release Watch_Dogs on the Wii U.  It requires developers using special tools to port the game over, a dedicated QA team to recheck the entire game for bugs, and then a boatload of engineers to make sure the game is stable enough for launch.  I believe that the one reason why the Wii U version of Watch_Dogs won’t come out for a few more months is because the development process for that console is so ridiculously complicated compared to the Sony or Microsoft platforms that the game code has to get rechecked line by line.

And, unfortunately, these problems aren’t unique for Watch_Dogs.  All of the time that developers spend stabilizing their Gen3 versions is time they’re not spending working on the Gen4 and PC versions.  Just watch this year at E3, the games that come out on Gen4 are not only going to look better, but they’re going to be more stable and have better features than the games that come out on both Gen3 and Gen4.  If you want a benchmark, compare Halo 4 to Halo 5.  I’m sure we’ll get some gameplay footage of Halo 5, and I’m sure it’ll feature something that we haven’t seen at all in a previous Halo game.  Maybe bigger worlds with more enemy and friendly AI battling it out together or levolution or something huge like that.

I’m getting excited for E3 this year.  It’s only a few days away now.  So stick with me and we’ll see what looks awesome.  I’m going back again this year, so if there’s anything in particular you want me to report on let me know.

I am specifically talking about this article posted on The Blaze, which highlights a few excerpts from the recent Santa Barbara shooter’s manifesto.  In it he discusses how women are inherently evil, they think like beasts and, in fact, are beasts, and how he should be the divine ruler.  No seriously, he should be the divine ruler.  And his main goal as divine ruler?  To round up all of the women into a huge camp and starve them to death.

This guy was a narcissistic, psychotic bastard.  It was only a matter of time before he snapped.  His writings show someone who not only doesn’t think about people as people, but someone who thinks of himself as far superior to everyone else.  Everyone gets delusions of grandeur occasionally, but once we are placed into situations where we are leading a group of people, we realize how difficult leadership can be at times.  This kid didn’t care about leading, he cared about dictating.

And let us not overlook, not for one second, the fact that this kid was in therapy since he was eight years old.  EIGHT!  Even in an age where every other kid is diagnosed with ADD and ADHD, the idea of a kid being in therapy starting at age eight is ridiculous.  He had serious mental issues, just like every other mass murdering kid ever.

But no, that isn’t enough.  The Blaze decided to test the waters and throw out the fact that this kid mentions playing “violent video games” (The Blaze’s words, not mine).  What were these games?  What could possibly be so horrible that they’d drive a poor, helpless teenager to mass murder?

Halo and World of Warcraft.  No, seriously.  In case you have no idea what I’m talking about, take a look at every Halo review I have ever done.  I rate these games extremely low on the age rating for a reason.  Yes, these games do involve violence, but they’re lightweight science fiction shooters.  Watch my Halo 4 review and then go watch The Red Wedding episode of Game of Thrones.  Cortana never gets stabbed in the baby.  Master Chief never gets beheaded and paraded around with a wolf’s head sewn onto his neck.

Oh, and this is World of Warcraft.

If this kid was playing Jericho or Dead Space or something else seriously graphically violent I would understand where the argument stemmed from (even though it would still be ridiculous).  But Halo and WoW aren’t the source of this kid’s problems.  We should focus on this kid’s real mental issues, the ones he had since he was a child, and not what he used as a mental crutch in his teenage years.

But The Blaze got my attention with its story, so I suppose in that way the trick worked.  I focused on the “video games” specifically and less on the mental issues the kid was going through.  For now this story hasn’t gained much traction, but this highlights that some media outlets find it more important to post ridiculous content just to generate buzz.

I got a Playstation 3 about a year ago, so I have been making my way very slowly through 7 years of the best exclusive titles.  I’ve played through Heavy Rain, the first two Uncharted games, the first Infamous, the first God of War, the first Killzone and, much to my frustration, the first Resistance.  I hated Resistance: Fall of Man.  The story wasn’t horrible for a first person shooter and the campaign was a decent length.  Considering this game was a launch title for the PS3, I can definitely forgive the poor graphics and outdated gameplay design and mechanics.

What I found unforgivable was the stupidly smart AI.  That might sound like a contradiction, but trust me it’s not.  AI can be broken down along a simple graph.

Alright, even I have to admit this is a gross oversimplification of the extremely complex concepts that go into programming video game AI, but for this exercise it will have to do.  Here are the four basic categories:

1.       Simple and Easy

There are plenty of examples of AI that isn’t very difficult and isn’t very complex.  These are the kinds of games where the enemy stands out in the open and waits for you to shoot him.  They fire shots back at you, but you’re almost never in any sort of real danger.  It’s like playing a 90’s shooter on the easiest difficulty level.

2.       Complex but Easy

Pick up any Halo game and load into the campaign on the easiest difficulty setting.  Notice how the enemies take cover and shoot at you, but almost always miss their shots?  Notice how the grunts go running in terror when you kill one of their friends?  That isn’t the most complex AI in the world, but it’s smart enough to react to the things going on around it.  But because it’s on the easy difficulty level, you know you’ll be able to breeze through without much trouble.

3.       Simple and Difficult

I’ll get into this in a moment, since my entire story hinges upon this idea.

4.       Complex and Difficult

Load in any of the Uncharted games and play on the hardest difficulty level.  These games are tough, but the intelligence of the enemies definitely contributes to the difficulty.  Not only do the enemies take cover, but they also have a nasty habit of trying to flank you or throwing grenades on your position.  It can get very overwhelming very quickly if you don’t know how to strategize on the fly.

As I mentioned, a little while back I played through Resistance: Fall of Man.  Unfortunately for me, the enemies fell into the third “Simple and Difficult” category.  They would use different weapons and take cover, but for the most part they were all pretty dumb and easy to kill.  Unfortunately, until recently game developers haven’t tried to develop any really complex AI.  However, they knew that they had to make the game slightly more challenging to keep their players interested (it’s very difficult for a player to feel invested in a cakewalk).

This results in a horrible practice.  Instead of trying to make the AI more complex and unpredictable, game developers made the AI more accurate.  A developer can easily increase the difficulty level of a game by increasing the number of hits on target that an enemy gets and increasing the number of hits on target that each enemy requires in order to be killed.  If you play Gears of War, you can tell the difference very easily between the easiest difficulty level and the hardest difficulty level.  On easy, players become a bullet sponge, able to absorb a ton of punishment before going down (assuming the enemy even hits the player, which isn’t very often).  On insane, the player is quickly downed and it takes nearly a full magazine of lancer ammo to down an enemy.

Resistance took the cheap route and made their enemies very accurate.  On top of this, games sometimes have a difficult time keeping their enemies from being “psychic”.  There was a huge problem with this in The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion.  If you stole something in someone’s house, even if no one was around you, occasionally the guards would run into your house demanding that you pay your debt to society even though no one ever saw you commit a crime.  That’s because the AI isn’t programmed to see walls, doors, or any other obstacles unless it impedes their movement.  So while you’re unable to see the number and position of enemies in the next room, they have no problem “seeing” where you are, since the computer that controls them can see where you are.  (Again, an oversimplification, but you get the idea)

There was a problem with Resistance though.  One of the weapons, one that a certain class of enemies uses frequently, was able to shoot through walls and other obstacles.  This was designed so that if you knew an enemy was behind cover, you could shoot that cover and the round would penetrate and hit the enemy.  It was a pretty awesome weapon when the player used it.

Unfortunately, this wasn’t so awesome when the enemies used it.  They could track your every movement regardless of if anyone could actually see you.  They would fire shot after shot that I would have to dodge carefully in order to remain alive.  It was a nightmareish scenario that happened time and time again and significantly contributed to my contempt for the game.

But I’m not the kind of gamer to give up easily, and eventually I saw that this was a simple math problem.  If I could figure out the angles of each shot, I could use their trajectory to calculate the origin of the shot.  With a single shot this was relatively impossible, since I could get a straight line to the shooter but wouldn’t be able to get the exact point at which the shooter should be along that line.  However, with two shots I could narrow down the potential range significantly.  The more shots the enemy took, the more certain I could be of the enemy’s exact position.

Then I quickly had to mentally eliminate the wall in front of me and calculate the relative position of the enemy.  Not an easy task while you’re also trying to not get killed.  Then, after figuring out a possible location of the enemy, I had to return fire through the wall and hope that my shots hit.

The only way that I could tell if my shots hit or not, though, is if the enemy stopped firing.  If there was a good 30 seconds of silence, I could assume that my enemy was dead.  Unfortunately, this wasn’t always the case.  Sometimes they would just hide for a while and pop out when I least expected it.

tl;dr: Pay attention in school, sometimes it can make video games a lot less frustrating.

To those who are about to write comments questioning my masculinity for wanting games to remove brothels and strip clubs or accusing me of wanting to control the content that game developers include, please give me a moment to explain my logic.  If I haven’t come up with a convincing argument, let me know where I fell short and I’ll do my best to explain myself or amend my response.  Also, the ideas that I am presenting here do not include all games or all inclusions of sex workers.  There are some games where prostitutes and strippers are an almost integral part of the story or environment and some where the inclusion of sex workers is included in such a way that my solution simply wouldn’t apply (I will elaborate more towards the end of this comment).

Most games that include brothels, prostitutes, or strip clubs suffer from poor writing.  That may seem a bit obvious in some cases, but there are plenty of well-designed and popular games that include sex workers because of poorly writing or poorly thought-out sections.  For example, Fable 3 gives the player an option to spend money in order to save an orphanage or gain money by turning it into a brothel.  This is a fairly effective way to show which act is good and which act is evil, but the game didn’t necessarily need to be as black and white about the entire thing.  Each of these choices the player must make are presented as good vs evil in order to keep up with the morality system within the game, but these would have been just as simple to have the player choose whether to perform a good, charitable deed or to do something out of profitability for the kingdom.

But if the act had to be something evil, after all the game was trying to convey a dilemma where the player had to choose to permit a short-term evil in order to have a long-term good, the act could have instead been something more appropriately designed.  For example, why should a brothel be placed into that orphanage specifically?  Were the orphans simply going to be displaced?  It would have made more sense to turn it into a work camp for the orphans or into dormitory-style housing so that even more orphans could be put to work in the nearby industries.

The issues with writing were present in both obvious and subtle ways all throughout Fable 3, but it isn’t the only game with this problem.  Hitman: Absolution is another great example.  In one mission the player has to infiltrate a strip club in order to find the assassination target.  But the problem with Absolution was that each character and location were irrelevant.  If you stripped the game down to bare bones, turning each character into a blank slate, the game still functioned.  Imagine that same strip club scene as a nightclub where male waiters serve drinks.  The target, originally a horny masochist, could have been slightly modified to be a rich, overbearing narcissist and nothing would have changed.  The location and characters were irrelevant because Agent 47 never treated them as people.  Everyone in the environment was simply a means to an end, shadows in a crowded room.

Internally I argue that this was simply Agent 47.  He is the ultimate no-nonsense assassin.  He gets in, gets the job done, and gets away cleanly without ever being seen.  But the problem wasn’t simply isolated to the strip club mission.  Many of the main antagonists are unnecessarily presented as sexually deviant or cruel.  The nature of their business clearly indicates that they are not going to be good people, and the way they treat their subordinates reinforces this notion.  They are cold-hearted, evil people who revel in the suffering of others.  Extending their cruelty and sadism to a sexual degree was cheap and showed no real imagination.

But these types of issues aren’t only relegated to games that suffer from poor writing in general.  The Darkness II includes a brothel that acts as a front for the main antagonist.  The article that sparked this conversation says that these are ways for writers to present antagonists as evil with little effort, but again I don’t see this done out of laziness but out of an inability to properly consider better alternatives.  In The Darkness II, the brothel needs to be a location that acts as an effective front for illegal activities without attracting too much attention.  It is for this reason that the brothel doesn’t make sense and should be excluded, because a brothel doesn’t fulfill that requirement at all.  Brothels attract far too much attention from the local population and from the local authorities.  It would have made more sense to set up a legitimate business with constant traffic, such as the now stereotypical “import / export” business.  Furthermore, the ultra-radical religious nature of the evil organization contrasted greatly with the immoral acts going on in the brothel.

I really liked The Darkness II.  It had some sections that made me empathize with Jackie and Jenny’s plight.  I could understand the longing that Jackie felt to be with Jenny.  But the great writing in these sections contrasted greatly with the end of the game, where suddenly Jenny becomes some sort of evil, vengeful angel.  The brothel scene in this game was only a symptom of the fact that the writers didn’t know how to effectively present certain ideas or forward the plotline in a way that fit with everything they had set up (or were planning on setting up).

There are a number of games where this simply doesn’t apply.  Games like Grand Theft Auto, Duke Nukem, and Saints Row have to be treated differently because the sexual elements are so ingrained in the setting, characters, and story that they have become an integral part of the game.  Duke Nukem without sex is just a horrible 80s action movie (granted, Duke Nukem Forever was a horrible game, so maybe a horrible 80s action movie would have been more appealing).  Removing the prostitutes and strip clubs from Grand Theft Auto would force the game to exclude some of the social commentary it was at one point attempting to make.

There are also some games where the sexuality was such an anomaly that its inclusion can’t simply be explained as poor writing.  Metro: Last Light is a perfect example.  The game was generally very well written and each section of each level served a very specific purpose.  And yet the game still threw in the incredibly awkward brothel strip tease scene.  This section contrasted greatly with the rest of the game, casting a massive dark shadow on what was otherwise an amazing concept.

My point is that games can potentially benefit from prostitutes, brothels, and strip clubs if they are used properly in order to forward the plot in a way where such a location or character is, without question, the best possible avenue.  There are very, very few games where this is the case.  The only partial example that I can think of is Vampire: The Masquerade – Bloodlines.

In Bloodlines, the character can visit a strip club called Vesuvius.  The owner of the club, VV, is a fascinating example of the life of the vampire that Bloodlines presents.  Vampires are beautiful on the surface, but underneath they are twisted, pained, and cursed.  Daniel Ash, a male character in the game, communicates this as well (albeit with most of his clothes on), but the clear contrast between VV’s external sexuality and her internal sensuality is as interesting to me as any work of art.

But here’s the kicker, the elements that VV conveyed weren’t effectively communicated because she moonlit as a stripper, but instead the contrast was enhanced by it.  Her nature as a stripper meant that she had to outwardly present her sexuality but without being able to actively participate in anything sexual.  That is the curse of the vampire; being able to watch everything you desire for eternity without actually being able to participate.

I will admit that I might have been projecting, an admission I make mostly because I don’t believe any video game writer could ever be that deep.  There simply isn’t enough precedent for it.  Those games that make me think more deeply about what I am playing or, better yet, who I am and the decisions that I make, are extremely few and far between.

Writing a video game is an extremely difficult task that requires the writer to completely understand the game, the expectation of the developers, and the target audience.  But including strip clubs and sex workers in games almost always serves to cheapen the experience and makes it more difficult for us to show that games are an excellent means for storytelling.  Unfortunately, the presence of strip clubs is only a tiny portion of the current overall problem with many games.  There are plenty of well-written games that don’t include strip clubs.  But when we analyze games it’s important that we look to the root cause of the issues rather than simply the issue itself.  Inappropriate inclusions of strip clubs, explosions, cheesy dialog, stereotypical characters, or any other major story and character based issue is symptomatic of poor or underdeveloped writing.  While it can be useful to call out specific examples, it is more important that we work to identify and address the larger issues.

Three years ago I was floundering.  I was out of university for almost a year and had nothing to show for it.  I wasn’t accepted into an MBA program, I didn’t have any job prospects lined up, and I was barely making enough money via side jobs to keep my head above water.  I sat down with one of my girlfriend’s work acquaintances and, over the course of a long discussion, he suggested trying to start a blog about a subject that I had a passion for.

It was obvious to me that my blog should be about video games.  The gaming world had been a form of entertainment since I was a small kid (my dad built my first computer when I was 3), but over the course of my university career it developed into so much more.  My “capstone” project was about the financial viability of Electronic Arts in 2010 and 2011, and I led my group to accurately predict the stock growth of the company.  I used an independent study course to write an extensive thesis discussing the creation of virtual reality ecosystems and even created a formula that could be used to apply the ecosystem to an actual game.  I made the prototype using the Warcraft 3 editor and the project is still my pride and joy to this day.

But there were so many game review sites already, most with far more extensive budgets than I could ever compete with.  I wasn’t ever going to be an IGN if I tried to play their game.  So I decided to try and help a different audience.  I had met so many parents who had no clue what their children were playing in games, so I wanted to bridge the gap between parents and children in this small way.  Part of it may have been an inner desire to share this subject that I cared so much about with my parents, but the form that it eventually took was something that is now irrelevant to them.

The first review I wrote was Assassin’s Creed.  It was a great game to start with.  On the surface it seemed like something intimidating.  After all the idea of “assassins” clearly indicates that murder and violence is going to follow.  But the reality is that the game is an excellent way to introduce historical elements to teens that are otherwise extremely difficult to understand.  It’s not a 100% accurate history lesson, but it helps to introduce names, places, and concepts that enveloped the Middle East during the Crusades.  Simply slapping an M label on the box doesn’t do the writing any sort of justice.

Unfortunately this is an area where I still struggle.  I want to find a way to effectively communicate the greatness of certain games, the stories they tell, and how they impact the player.  Games like Battlefield and Call of Duty are a lot of fun, but there’s something much deeper to games like Mass Effect, Oblivion, and Heavy Rain.  There’s something in the writing that can reach out and touch a person’s soul.  These games are a way to transport people into places of wonder where they can do awesome things.  They can save galaxies, conquer dragons, command armies, and do in a matter of hours what few people get to do in a lifetime.

Every once in a while I’ll get a youtube comment that questions why my reviews exist.  While the question may be directed at the subject matter, since the questioner often sees no utility in the content I provide, it is a question I still continue to ask myself.  Why do you keep writing?  Is it because you have subscribers who expect your content?  Is it because you enjoy writing these reviews?  Is it because of the benefits that come with maintaining the site?

I write because I want to help people.  I want to help kids access powerful, amazing games that can teach them something about humanity while they are entertained.  I want parents to understand why I love this medium so much even if they don’t know how to use a wii-mote to play Mario Kart.  I want help myself better understand what is appropriate and what is inappropriate in games so that I am able to positively influence the gaming industry.  I want to create something that shines a light on the dark and murky subject matter that games often wade through on the quest for entertainment.

Whether or not I believe that I have accomplished anything over the past three years is irrelevant because there is still so much left to do.  Having twice as many hours in each day still wouldn’t be enough to do everything I want to with this site.  Side Story Games may never be a household name, but I promise to work diligently to keep it going.  I want to make sure that my content can benefit anyone who needs it.

I started this site around three years ago with the goal of providing a service to any parent looking for more information about what their kids play.  Along that journey I have had a chance to step into the realm of video game media and, on rare occasions, actually rub shoulders with the professional reporters.  I get to see what they do, how they act, what questions they ask, and how interested they are in their subject matter.  This has mostly been at the E3 events I attended, but occasionally I catch glimpses of it on TV, written in reviews, and in other news outlets.

There is a significant difference between Geoff Keighley and Angry Joe.  Geoff Keighley comes off as a guy who talks about games because he’s paid to talk about games.  You hardly see his type at E3 because they come in for their appointments, sit through the shows, jot a few notes down, then go home to grab the preset media assets to write their story.  What little passion existed when they first started has been sucked dry.  It probably isn’t their fault, the gaming industry is a vampire constantly feeding at the neck of every employee who works within and around it.

I have found this is most obvious when sitting in on the Bethesda events at E3.  I managed to get a spot with the Bethesda team for all three years at E3 and each time they were media-only events.  The room was always packed with reporters, some with notebooks out, others just watching.  After each game was showcased, the reporters got up and left.  One or two stayed to ask a question, and some stayed to try out the demos, but most just packed up and left.

Bethesda doesn’t always do things perfectly, but each of their development teams works to the bone to create an awesome experience.  You might not be looking forward to The Elder Scrolls Online or the new Wolfenstein game, but they are still the product of years of intense work.  Anyone who can honestly say that they appreciate and love video games should give these games at least ten minutes of their time before they pass judgment.

Yet so many of these reporters just left without picking up a controller or touching a mouse and keyboard.  Those who did stay almost completely ignored Wolfenstein, instead only focusing on TES Online for a few minutes.  I was internally confused.  Maybe these guys aren’t serious gamers, but then how can they speak with a voice of authority about the subject?

And that’s where the real dilemma began.  When I saw Fable: The Journey, I recognized that the game would have significant hurdles to overcome before it saw the light of day and that it would certainly fail to overcome every issue, but that the developers were attempting to deliver a Kinect-driven experience that appealed to all levels of gamers.  The other media personnel in the room couldn’t be bothered to ask a few simple questions like “How are you guys planning on overcoming the Kinect’s inherent lag issues?”

I had the honor and the pleasure to meet Angry Joe at last year’s E3.  It was the very end of the day and Joe was clearly on his way out, but he took the time to humor me.  I like Joe’s reviews because he is always honest (at times brutally so).  But it’s more important to me that Joe cares about the subject matter.  When he discusses games, especially the ones that failed, he gives detailed, constructive criticism.  If I ever made a game, I would send a review copy to Joe in a heartbeat and take everything he said to heart.

I would like to believe that the guys at IGN and GameSpot are serious gamers who care about their subject matter as much as they care about their profession, but every time Call of Duty scores above an 80 metacritic and is praised for sticking to the “tried-and-true formula”, I question the reviewer’s integrity.

I am grateful that guys like TotalBiscuit and Angry Joe exist.  They have restored my faith in game reviews.  I know that game designers listen to their comments and I believe that the gaming community is a better place for it.  But I will be much happier when places like E3 are filled with gamers like Angry Joe than the “journalists” that currently haunt the halls and booths.

Technically, this is a children’s game.  But for those of you above the age of 8, don’t let the initial simplicity deter you from giving this a try.  After you’ve had your fill of Battlefield and Call of Duty, I would highly recommend giving this game a try.  In stacking, players take control of the smallest size of Russian egg doll and use other larger sized dolls to solve puzzles.  It’s a very unique and surprisingly fun game that is appropriate for all ages.

Honorable Mentions:

Back to the Future: The Game

Back to the Future is a simple, funny point-and-click adventure game.  While it lacks the emotional depth and the decision-based consequences of The Walking Dead, it makes up for it in familiar characters and comedic situations.  The story follows a completely new adventure for Marty McFly and Doc Brown, so franchise veterans will love it just as much as amateur time-travellers.

Part real-time strategy, part decision-based role playing game, the meat of Divinity: Dragon Commander is in the multitude of decisions the player will have to make outside of combat.  Do you want to legalize narcotics?  Do you want to abolish freedom of the press?  Do you want to allow gay marriage?  All of these decisions and many more will be addressed over the course of the campaign.

Honorable Mentions:

XCOM: Enemy Unknown

It’s been a while since a turn-based strategy game hit the market and really made an impact, but XCOM: Enemy Unknown pulled that off spectacularly.  While sometimes extremely difficult, this game is the kind of thing that engrosses the player in the events of the game.  Every battle is vital, every decision can make or break your overall efforts.  I loved this game and have been dying to get ahold of the expansion pack.

Driver: San Francisco

Some genres have a very difficult time innovating.  The racing genre is first and foremost on this list.  How do you innovate on “get from point a to point b as fast as possible”?  Driver: San Francisco does an excellent job of trying something new by allowing the player to jump between any vehicle in the world at will.  It makes for some crazy chases, interesting mission variety, and a surprisingly tolerable storyline.

It was particularly difficult to make a decision about this age group.  There were definitely some close calls, but in the end I had to go with Battlefield 4.  The scope of the multiplayer, especially the 64-player battles and the levolution events, made this game much more fun than its other competitors.  This is the kind of game that can, and does, easily suck me in for hours at a time.  If there has to be only one multiplayer game to get this holiday, it should be Battlefield 4.

Honorable Mentions:

Call of Duty: Ghosts

Call of Duty: Ghosts had its rough edges.  Its single player wasn’t perfect, but it was a lot better than what Battlefield 4 had to offer.  Where it really stumbled is answering the question “why should I play this instead of modern warfare 3 or black ops 2?”  The multiplayer has some different elements, but when the real fun of the game comes from the somewhat underdeveloped Extinction mode and the short single player campaign, that isn’t enough to make me get excited.  That being said, hardcore fans will swear by this game, so this should be on the short list for holiday gifts.

Dishonored

If you haven’t played this game yet, you’re seriously missing out.  This is one of my favorite games of all time and for good reason.  This is one of the few games I have played where the stealth elements were not only passable, they were actually enjoyable.  This may have been because, while the player had to remain hidden and quiet, the powers allowed the player to move quickly throughout the level.  If I didn’t already have this game, it would be close to the top of the list this year.

Heavy Rain is, without a doubt, one of the greatest games ever made.  If it weren’t for my inability to pick a “favorite game” this would be my favorite game of all time.  This game is like playing an interactive movie, but your choices have dire consequences.  If one of the characters dies, the story continues without them.  It’s tense at times, but only when it wants to be.  I cannot express how amazing this game is.

Honorable Mentions:

Metro: Last Light

Where Battlefield and Call of Duty crank shooters up to 11, Metro: Last Light prefers a much slower, more reserved pace.  But while the game discourages the player from killing opponents, it is never boring.  It is more of a survival horror than the recent Resident Evils, so players must conserve ammunition if they want to get through the metro alive.  Those that don’t mind a shooter that isn’t just about running and gunning will definitely enjoy this game.

Far Cry 3

Far Cry 3 took all of the potential that Far Cry 2 squandered, cleaned up the edges, and released a product that was nearly flawless.  Aside from a campaign that killed off the best character too quickly, this game is absolutely amazing.  It looked and ran perfectly on my PC, included a lush environment with tons of different creatures, and made the open world elements into a real adventure.  I wish more first person shooters were like this game.

While it may be the bane of parents everywhere, this game is undeniably fun.  The writers of GTA V did an excellent job going above and beyond typical social commentary and turning each mission into a unique and memorable adventure.  While the game isn’t perfect, and is definitely for a mature audience, it is definitely worth playing.

Honorable Mentions:

The Last of Us

The Last of Us had a great story that kept me playing for hours nonstop.  The game features well-designed characters, perfect script writing, and a unique take on the standard zombie-like post apocalyptic world.  If it weren’t for a few somewhat unfairly difficult situations, this game would have almost certainly beaten GTA V out for this age slot.

Bioshock: Infinite

I am a sucker for a first person shooter with a great single-player campaign.  Bioshock: Infinite was a lot of fun to play.  It was smooth, the powers were interesting, and Elizabeth was a compelling female character.  In fact, her character is a perfect example of what I wish friendly AI would be more like.  If any gamers liked the previous Bioshocks, this game should be extremely high on their list.

Even I ask for games from my friends and family.  While some on this list are better than others, they are all games that I want to play (and will likely be reviewing soon after the holidays).

My opinions on the Grand Theft Auto games are fairly clear, so why an 8-year-old was playing GTA 4 is a bit beyond me.  But I feel the need to make something abundantly clear:  None of the Grand Theft Auto games have ever given instruction as to how to use a firearm nor where to obtain one in real life.  Characters in the GTA games either pick up random guns in back alleys, buy them off a back alley dealer, or go to a legitimate gun shop and purchase a virtual arsenal which becomes readily available to them that very instance (with all the ammunition they can carry in their clearly oversized pockets).  Two of the previously mentioned things are 100% impossible in real life, and the third involves finding a back alley gun dealer (something that most 8-year-olds are not able to do).

The real issue with this story is the one that isn’t even mentioned until the 6th paragraph.  The story states that it is still unclear how the boy got the handgun.

Who keeps a loaded handgun in their house with the safety off?  No, seriously, 8-year-old aside, who keeps a handgun fully loaded and ready to fire and doesn’t even bother to engage the safety?  Anyone who has been around kids for more than two minutes knows that those rugrats get into everything.  EVERYTHING.  My parents put child safety locks on the medicine cabinets so that I couldn’t get into pills.  And the medicine cabinet was well over five feet off the ground!

What happened with this story is tragic, but this is the reason I would always keep firearms well out of reach of children.  They have seen guns used before, whether in real life, in television, in movies, or in video games.  They know you pull the trigger, there’s a loud bang, and someone falls over.  But 8-year-olds don’t understand the permanence of death.  They don’t understand that you only ever point the gun at something you want removed from existence forever.  The fact that the kid played a video game right before he did this is irrelevant.  He could have watched a movie or taken a bath or had dinner and the result would have still been the same.  The fact is that there was a firearm with ammunition nearby that the child could grab and use.

But I’m not worried about this story affecting video games.  Aside from the fact that Grand Theft Auto has survived unscathed from much worse publicity than this, even the writers of this story knew that whatever loose correlation might exist was absurd.  If there was any real correlation, they would have printed it in bold text and cited it every three sentences.  But the only thing mentioned in this story is that the kid played GTA right before using the gun.  There isn’t a link there and they know it.

Anyone who keeps a gun in their homes should have everyone in that home memorize these rules.

Before I get into the consoles, let me talk about some of the games first.  There were a ton of unbelievable games being showcased this year.  Last year’s E3 event might have included excellent games like Dishonored and X-COM: Enemy Unknown, but it will be better remembered for Black Ops 2 and the near fraudulent demo for Aliens: Colonial Marines.  This year is a completely different story.  Watch Dogs, The Division, Battlefield 4, Titanfall, and so many others were all extremely impressive.  This really did feel like the next generation of gaming.

But there were a few games that clearly stood out on top to me.  Here’s what they were.

1.       Battlefield 4

While overall Battlefield 4 looks very similar to Battlefield 3, that moment when the skyscraper came down was the same type of jaw-dropping awesomeness that I had when I first saw the reveal of Watch Dogs.  This really is what I expected in next-generation games.  Amazing destructibility, huge map sizes, and 64 players should be the new minimum for games of this type.  I hope that this isn’t an isolated incident, because if similar elements are in every one of Battlefield 4’s maps this will be an awesome sight to behold.

2.       TitanFall

Call of Duty is the king of close quarters, fast-paced first person shooter combat.  But Titanfall has blown all of that out of the water.  It’s fast-paced vehiclular and infantry combat, but that wasn’t what made it so awesome.  The best part is the fact that each multiplayer match begins with a brief introductory scene all done in first person.  You don’t spawn on the map, you’re inserted onto the map.  And then, at the end, instead of just showing the scores, the player has to extract out of the map with a corresponding scene in first person.  This is the kind of thing that more multiplayer games need to have.  Multiplayer should be less of a tournament and more of a true battle.  Integrating story with multiplayer capabilities is definitely the right thing to do.

3.       The Division

Despite my disappointment at the presentation within Ubisoft’s booth at E3 and my internal collapse upon finding out that this isn’t slated for a PC release, this game made a huge impression on me.  The idea of a third-person shooter Tom Clancy game with cooperative MMO stylings and the capabilities for friends to actively participate in the gameplay via a tablet is awesome.  If this game were coming to the PC, it would almost certainly be a preorder for me.

4.       The Crew

This game is designed to be a multiplayer experience.  So if you can get a crew together and take on the challenges as a group, this is an awesome game.  As much as I like Need for Speed: Rivals, it isn’t delivering anything groundbreaking.  The multiplayer is good, but The Crew is on an entirely different level.  Open-world style vehicle challenges can definitely keep a group of friends excited about this game for a while.

5.       Murdered: Soul Suspect

E3 was full of shooters and hack and slash games, so having something completely different come along was a breath of fresh air.  Murdered: Soul Suspect may have a play-on-words name and some rather simple gameplay, but seeing something that focuses less on combat and more on investigations was unbelievably welcome.  I may not be preordering it, but it’s definitely on my list of things to try within the coming year.

And now, after performing intense calculations, I have come to a conclusion as to which platform is the clear winner this year.  And it is….

The PC!

Yeah, alright, I will admit that I am a bit biased.  But I actually did do calculations.  Out of the 30 games that I saw, 24 had PC versions.  That’s even greater than the 21 games scheduled to be released on the PS3 and Xbox 360, and that’s a lot more than those for the next gen consoles.  On top of that, all of the confusion for console gamers over “always online” connectivity and used games issues aren’t a problem for PC gamers because our platform isn’t changing.  The PC gamers haven’t sold games used for nearly a decade because of the issues with keycodes and DRM.  As a result, every PC gamer has turned to Steam, which has given them the insane advantage of extreme sales.  Console gamers are lucky to get 50% off when buying a game used, but if a PC gamer times things right they can get AAA titles for less than $10 each.  My games are almost all backwards compatible with enough tweaking, and those that aren’t either have community patches created by hardcore fans or are re-released on sites like Good Old Games.

But despite my love for the PC, it isn’t for everyone.  It’s a high maintenance device, so unless you’re willing to put in the time and dedication necessary for proper use and maintenance, a console will definitely be preferred.  And if that’s the case, my recommendation is…

The Playstation 4!

This shouldn’t be much of a surprise, but there were some very strong objections from the people that I’m close to.  If you look at both consoles objectively, the Xbox One has a good number of great properties.  Microsoft’s Kinect, while initially seriously flawed, is lightyears ahead of Sony’s Move.  And while Playstation’s Camera might be able to do similar things with some firmware updates, so far that doesn’t seem to be happening.

The specifics on the pricing models might change, especially when hard drive sizes are finalized, but the lower price point of the Playstation 4 and the relatively clear stance on used games and always online connectivity makes it an obvious choice for most gamers.  Even though both of those will not affect me directly since I never resell my games and always have internet, it sends a clear message that Sony is listening to what its gamers want right now.  Sony has time to try and sort out some new technologies and innovative features, but the most important thing is telling players that the things we like right now are not going away.

Microsoft still has time to turn this around.  All they have to do is reverse their confusing policies on used games and always online requirements and they’ll convince me to pick up an Xbox One.  I know there will be more Halo games and more Gears of War games, which I am going to want to play.  But it’s hard to justify paying $500 for a small handful of games.  And this goes for both consoles.  As I mentioned, around 80% of the games I saw are coming out on the PC.  So it makes more sense for me to wait for a price drop than to buy a new console for less than 10 titles.

If you are a current console user, I would highly recommend waiting a few months before buying a next gen console.  But when that time comes and you can upgrade, I would definitely recommend the Playstation 4.

1.       TitanFall

I spent three days trying to get into this demonstration.  Each time I was deflected until I decided to make this the first thing I saw today.  I wasn’t going to leave until I had a chance to check this out.  After the amazing demonstration at E3 I had to see this game for myself.  To my utter amazement, this wasn’t a pre-recorded video with some extra scripted commentary.  The team was demonstrating a full runthrough of the game in real time.  The players we were watching on the screens died occasionally (they didn’t during the conference presentation), got a ton of kills, and really showed off everything that this game was about.

It was awesome.  I really can’t describe it in any other way.  Infantry are just as powerful as the Titans, but having a Titan can be a huge advantage.  Infantry and Titans are both extremely fast.  The multiplayer matches are designed to be real missions.  You’ll spawn into a dropship as it enters the area, you’re given commands by a commander, and then you’re dropped into the battlefield to try and complete the objectives.  The missions end with some sort of summary to the event’s actions.  It was extremely well designed and a welcome change to the standard “your name as you wait for match, spawn in, go kill, end match with scores”.

This game decimates Call of Duty.  It’s just as awesome with better close quarters combat and much greater level of variety.  The missions make each multiplayer match a real experience rather than just an arena battle.  It’s the kind of thing that I hope to see from more multiplayer modes in the near future.

2.       Splinter Cell: Blacklist

While last year I was shown a demonstration for this game, this year I actually got to test it out for myself.  It was a very brief demo, but overall it felt very much like Splinter Cell: Conviction.  The game definitely emphasizes stealth combat, but the player can go through killing everyone as well.  The game will reward stealthier, non-lethal takedowns by giving the player greater amounts of experience points for these attacks, but it was a bit difficult to make them happen every time.  For example, in one section a guard dog started barking at me, so I had to shoot him to keep from getting caught.

The story is that some sort of very well organized terrorist group wants the United States to withdraw its military presence in every other nation around the world.  I’m not sure why they want the US out of these countries, but I’m sure there is some sort of overall driving motivation involving a terrorist plot to take over the world or something to that effect (it is a Tom Clancy game after all).  Fortunately, Sam is back with a new team to try and stop the terrorists from killing… people.  Again, I’m not entirely sure who, but I’m sure they’re vitally important to the United States government.

The game is designed to feel like a blend of the Splinter Cell games Chaos Theory and Conviction.  Certain elements from Conviction were brought back (like the “mark and assassinate” ability), but otherwise it is evidently much more like Chaos Theory.  Having only ever played the first Splinter Cell and Conviction, I can’t say how accurate this is.

Stealth games aren’t really my thing (with the exception of Dishonored), but those who are into the kind of slow, sneaking gameplay present in almost every Splinter Cell game ever will definitely enjoy this game.

3.       The Evil Within

The Evil Within is a survival horror game developed by the man who created Resident Evil 4.  As a Resident Evil fan, the look and feel of this game was very familiar.  Players take control of a detective who is called to some sort of serious crime taking place at an asylum.  The situation quickly tumbles out of control and the player is forced to fight for his life against some seriously messed up enemies.

This game is definitely survival horror.  Unlike Resident Evil 5 and 6 (and even 4 really), the player will have to carefully manage resources and figure out when it is best to run instead of fight.  This is the kind of thing that made the remake of the first Resident Evil game so downright terrifying.  It was suspenseful, but the fact that the player had to carefully try to avoid more enemies than he killed made every action have serious weight.

The problem is that all of that suspense is mired in the incredible amounts of blood and gore visible in the early chapters.  One of the most common pitfalls that horror movies fall into is that they mistake peoples discomfort with brutality and pain for fear.  Seeing someone chopped into pieces with a chainsaw isn’t scary, it’s loud and gross.  Then, to compensate for the overall lack of fear, these writers will throw in random “jumper” segments where things pop out at the player with a corresponding loud noise.  It’s a really cheap, easy way of making the player jump when that isn’t what makes a great horror game.

The original Resident Evil had some bloody parts, but the true horror elements came in with the combined claustrophobia, loneliness, and lack of any resources for self-sufficiency.  While this game definitely includes all three of those, they aren’t emphasized in a way that is effective for the tensions necessary in truly scary games.  This may have been because it was a demo or because it was being guided by someone who I knew was going to know what to do, but I couldn’t really get into the game.

It may be something to try out in the future (for a review if nothing else), but I wouldn’t recommend this game to my friends based on what I saw.

4.       Wolfenstein: The New Order

I knew very little about this game going into its presentation.  Obviously being a Wolfenstein game I knew that the player would be fighting Nazis, but other than this I was pretty much in the dark.  Three things became quickly apparent during the presentation.  First, the developers (who also worked on The Darkness 2) did an excellent job making the characters have personality.  The player met a German female military commander and, after she had a brief conversation with him, was pretty much instantly identifiable as evil.  That isn’t to say that the game is shallow, but her personality and her mannerisms made her a seriously vile person.

Second, it was very obvious that the developers cared about the origin of the Wolfenstein games and wanted to keep true to as many details as they could.  While they wanted to make an original story, the subtle elements they added into the game made a huge difference.  For example, all of the Germans only speak German.  No need to worry about horrible German accents, you’ll need subtitles for many of the conversations with enemy characters.  This is the kind of thing that most games seem to avoid or forget in the pursuit of making the game more accessible for their audience.

Third, I am getting shooter fatigue.  After the cutscenes and conversations were over and the gunplay began, my E3 exhaustion and general overexposure to shooter titles caused me to become extremely bored.  This looked like just another Call of Duty clone with a slightly different paint job.

Then I left the presentation, picked up a controller, and tried it out for myself.  And I had fun.  As disappointed as I was in the presentation, the actual play itself was addictive.  It was fast paced, but with certain puzzle-based elements that made me actually look around the level to try and see how to move forward.  It wasn’t extremely complex, but it was interesting enough to keep me entertained as I moved from cutscene to cutscene.

This certainly wasn’t the best game I saw at E3, but it definitely wasn’t the worst either.  I’d recommend it to fans of shooters once they’re done with Battlefield, Titanfall, Call of Duty, and pretty much every other shooter that will dominate the market over the next year.

5.       The Elder Scrolls Online

The presentation of The Elder Scrolls Online left me hopeful but my common MMO concern was not addressed.  How was this game going to make itself blatantly different than World of Warcraft?  Fortunately, I have my answer now.  I managed to test out the beta version of this game, which was very enlightening.

The game felt a lot like Oblivion and Skyrim.  The way that it is set up, the different races and classes, the inventory system, the items, the abilities, etc. all reminded me greatly of my hundreds of hours within the lands of Tamriel.  The worldspace is gigantic, allegedly covering every nation in Tamriel.  I played around in Daggerfall, which should be familiar to hardcore fans of the series.  In addition, while my play was in third person, the developers showed video that proved that the game would work in First Person as well.

And that’s the biggest difference between this and World of Warcraft.  The first person element made this game feel less like Neverwinter and every other World of Warcraft clone and much more like an Elder Scrolls game.  Even though the graphics aren’t nearly as good as Skyrim, they’re definitely good enough to make this game playable.

I have two major concerns.  First, combat was a serious emphasis of the missions and conversations that I saw.  This didn’t fit well with Oblivion and Skyrim, which had a plethora of adventures that didn’t always involve heavy amounts of combat.  To add to this, skills like “persuade” and “mercantile” seemed suspiciously absent, replaced with numerous combat-based powers and abilities.  Conversations were extremely linear.  All of this made me seriously question this game’s true depth.  It is extremely likely that this game will fall into the same “quantity over quality” trap that Kingdoms of Amalur fell into.

6.       Beyond: Two Souls

This was one of the games that was highest on my list of things to try.  I was fortunate enough to get a chance to test it out for myself.  Instead of testing the tutorial level like everyone else, I jumped in with the veteran level to see the real meat of the game.  Possibly a mistake, considering I’ve only ever played the demo for Heavy Rain, but I thought it was fairly enlightening.

Most of the level I tried felt a lot like Heavy Rain.  Most of the gameplay is basically an extended cutscene with various quicktime events.  This means the player will have to hit the right button or direction stick at the right time in order to progress properly.  This could be extremely difficult though.  While the button prompts were pretty easy to follow, the directional “prompts” didn’t have an actual cue, so it was up to me to guess what direction the game wanted me to push.  Sometimes it was relatively simple (if Ellen was leaning in for a punch, press in the direction of the punch), but other times it was much more confusing (if Ellen and her opponent are leaning in for a punch, what direction do I push?).

But the nice thing is that the game takes into account what happens if the player fails.  Or, it seemed to, I couldn’t really tell for sure.  Heavy Rain had a similar system, so that’s what I assume happened here.  Unless I was supposed to fail a section and get captured.  But that’s part of the genius of the design.  Despite the fact that I failed directional prompts repeatedly and ended up getting captured as a result, I’m not sure if that was as designed or another option in my path.

I’ll need to play Heavy Rain before I attempt this game, but it is definitely on my list of exclusive titles to play.

7.       The Division

This was my most anticipated game of E3 and was the last new game that I saw.  Unfortuantely, a combination of factors made the demonstration rather disappointing.  The demo showed very little “new” content that wasn’t already shown in the Ubisoft conference on Monday, and what little new content they did show was to demonstrate the tablet capabilities with the game.  Second, I found out that (to my utter amazement) this game wasn’t yet slated for a PC version.  This is basically an open world MMO-ish third person shooter that isn’t scheduled to come out on PC.  That isn’t to say it will never happen, but to have a game like this skip one of the most hardcore shooter markets seems a bit short sighted.  But then again, I’m a PC gamer, so I’m biased.

But the tablet content they showed was actually the best demonstration of the use of a tablet in any game I have seen so far.  Unlike Watch Dogs, which made tablet use so pointless that it might as well not exist at all, The Division’s tablet user is basically a full user in the game.  Tablet users appear in the main players’ game in the form of a flying drone.  It’s basically a support character in this weird shooter MMO.  The drone can identify enemy targets for players, heal allies, make enemies take increased damage, and even attack enemies with missiles and other weapons.  Instead of seeing some weird map, the tablet user watches the entire game in a lower resolution but in real time.  If the player is seeing a helicopter land nearby, the tablet user sees it too.  Enemies move on the tablet in real time just as they move in the actual game.  It was beautifully executed and actually made me want to get a tablet specifically for this feature.

Other than this, I’m still really skeptical about how this game will turn out.  I don’t know how much of this game will require cooperative gameplay.  I don’t know how overcrowded the worldspace will get if the player has to fight against other groups.  I don’t know if the player will be matched against enemy groups of similar skill.  If that doesn’t happen, some groups are going to be repeatedly massacred.  These are all concern that the developers will have to address well before the game is released.

8.       Oculus Rift

I have a friend who is helping to develop the Oculus Rift, but I have never actually gotten the chance to test one out for myself.  The Oculus Rift is a virtual reality headset that uses motion sensors to turn the camera in the direction that you face.  It’s an interesting idea that hasn’t been accomplished successfully ever.  There were devices that tried to create virtual reality environments back in the 90s, but it was a poorly designed fad that quickly faded away.

Oculus Rift is different though.  I’m not about to hop out of my chair and buy one, but it was a much better experience than I expected.  The lag is almost completely nonexistent.  The only times when I noticed anything perceptibly wrong were the times when I turned my head too quickly, and even then I only knew something was wrong because I briefly felt motion sickness.

I tested OR out on Counter Strike: GO, which was an interesting choice but was difficult to work around with the device.  I could get a few kills in on enemies that were on the “extremely easy” difficulty level, but even when the enemies stood around for a good 30 seconds looking at me while I tried to shoot at them I knew that I was far less accurate with this device than I would normally be.

It needs to use wireless controllers.  Turning my head in different directions was good, but I was always tethered by my mouse and keyboard.  It would have been an even greater experience if I could have turned around a full 360 degrees.  However, the surprising lack of lag made the experience very interesting to try.

9.       Shield

If you don’t know what this is, don’t be surprised.  Nvidia, one of the biggest manufacturers of video cards in the world, decided to try and create a handheld device that appealed to their core PC audience.  The idea was creating a handheld gaming device that would play any modern video game at any time the player wanted.  On paper, this was a great idea.

The execution has been anything but great.  The device doesn’t come with any 3G or 4G connection, meaning you have to be in a strong Wifi hotspot in order to actually play a PC game.  You have to already own the game on Steam (which is fine for almost every current PC game).  But the problem is that the game has to run simultaneously on your computer and your device.  Supposedly you can start the game via Shield, but if something doesn’t work properly and you’re away from home you’re going to be out of luck.

You also have to have a video card that is compatible with the shield, which means it has to be a relatively recent Nvidia card (not cheap by any means).  You also have to pay for the device, which currently runs somewhere in the neighborhood of $300.  Put those two together and you’ve got an extremely expensive piece of hardware.

And that doesn’t even begin to touch on the actual device.  The Shield is about the size of the original Xbox controller.  It isn’t as thick (fortunately), but the device features a built-in screen and all of the buttons and joysticks that one would find on a standard Xbox controller.  But the device is very heavy.  Surprisingly heavy.  Most of that is because of the insane amounts of hardware that have to be fit in the device to make it function properly, but it’s going to be very difficult holding that around and using it as a true handheld device for any extended period of time.

The other major problem is that the screen is ridiculously small for the games it’s designed to play.  Picture yourself playing Borderlands 2 on a 4 inch screen.  Shooting enemies up close isn’t an issue, but shooting enemies at a distance can be extremely difficult.  And don’t get me started on trying to read text.  I have great eyesight (an advantage when playing games), but even I had trouble reading the tiny text for my inventory in Borderlands 2.  I couldn’t imagine trying to play on this device for any extended period of time.

If you want a mobile device for playing PC games, get a laptop.  It will slightly more expensive, but not much considering the price of high-end graphics cards.  You’ll be able to play whatever you want, use your device for something other than gaming, and have even greater mobility and reliability than the Shield.

Well that’s the end.  Tomorrow I’m going to compile an epilogue to summarize my thoughts and try to draw some conclusions from the overall event.  For now, I’m exhausted.  Time to sleep.

1.       Watch Dogs

This was one of my favorite reveals at E3 last year.  It was really the first game to show what I expected a true “next gen” title to be.  Awesome cityscapes, interactive worlds, and an interesting story with a pretty crazy game mechanic.  Essentially, the player is a super hacker in the middle of Chicago.  He’s trying to track down his sister for some reason (the developers haven’t specified why).  However, he’s being tailed by cops and “fixers”.  I believe fixers are some sort of private mercenaries hired by the Bloom Corporation (the game’s main antagonist force), but again the developers haven’t specifically said.

The demo showed us all of what was showed at Ubisoft’s conference.  That included using the cameras to help your friend get away from the fixers and a second player using the tablet to try and help the main player escape.  This seems like a pretty useless feature, since the tablet user doesn’t actually get to interact with the environment.  He can activate barriers or EMP helicopters, but otherwise his ability to get involved in the story is extremely limited.  Unless the tablet user can help multiple friends at once while they play, I don’t see much reason to use this feature.

The demo also showed us the multiplayer.  If the player chooses, other users can enter his world as he plays.  The player is not told when nor where these players enter.  The other players are tasked with trying to hack the main player and hide stealthily within the environment while the hack proceeds.  After that, the player must try and identify and kill the hacker.  It can get pretty hectic, but it definitely fits better within the gamespace than most multiplayer modes from other similar games.

My one concern is whether or not there will be enough for the player to do in the general environment.  The player will be able to stop crimes in progress and hack into region-based servers to gain access to that region’s tech, but other than that the game didn’t really say what the player could do.  It would be very disappointing to have such a large world and little reason for the player to move around other than to complete main missions and gain region-based morality points.

2.       Kingdom Hearts 1.5 HD

Since Kingdom Hearts 3 is coming out and I have yet to play the original games, this was definitely on my list to try.  Unfortunately, the demo seemed to assume that the player was already familiar with the play style of Kingdom Hearts.  As a result, I was pretty lost.  It wasn’t very frustrating, but I just had no idea what was going on.  The meat of the story wasn’t accurately portrayed in such a short time, so I feel like I missed out on understanding something that I knew would be much more captivating than the demo portrayed.  I will still buy this game, but as a result of the somewhat disappointing demo I will probably wait longer than I would have originally.

3.       Destiny

I have been somewhat skeptical about Destiny.  The environments look amazing, but so far the game lacks serious substance.  The demonstrations at the conference and that I saw today clearly emphasize the cooperative combat, but even with other players the game felt very empty at times.  The demos showed the new weapons the player could find for killing enemies, but other than that there doesn’t seem to be anything else to pick up.  This kills much of my motivation for exploration, which is extremely unfortunate considering the expansive landscapes the developers have been touting.  As with other games that I saw today, I need to know that the developers are filling their vast landscapes with reasons for me to go exploring.

The arkfall events (called something different for Destiny, but it reminded me a lot of Defiance) seem interesting but aren’t nearly as large as other similar MMOs.  I don’t know how many players will be able to take place at once, but if it’s only eight players things will seem relatively empty.  The ratio of enemies to players was surprisingly small.  Again, this is just a demo, so it may get better in the future, but it seemed like I was shown so little substance despite being shown so much creativity.

4.       Murdered: Soul Suspect

I first saw this game advertised via the banners at E3.  It interested me enough to actively search out this title and find out what it was about.  I’m glad that I did.  This game is a detective style adventure game where the player has to put together pieces of evidence in order to try and figure out who killed him and why.  Yes, the player is dead.  In fact, the player is a ghost.  So in addition to solving his own murder, he can go about trying to help other ghosts.

It was actually a very interesting game.  It seems relatively simple overall, but there are good opportunities for exploration and the game is designed to make the player think a bit.  This one rated surprisingly high on my list of games that I saw today.  If you liked LA Noire, I would highly recommend looking into this game.

5.       Mad Max

I have to admit that I have never seen a Mad Max movie.  I know they were rough, tough, classic 80s action movies, but other than that I’m pretty much completely devoid of knowledge on the subject.  Evidently there is going to be a reboot movie coming up within the next few years, but evidently this title is unrelated to that.  This is a completely separate story from any of the movies, which is good because movie-based games are usually terrible.

The demonstration didn’t explain a whole lot about the story, but it did emphasize how much time the developers were putting into vehicular combat.  The game is a gigantic open world that the player will spend countless hours travelling via a fully customizable car.  The developers tried to emphasize that there will not be a “best” customization, and that instead it will push players to try and pick a car based on their own style.  Unfortunately, that seemed a bit shallow because the environment heavily favored cars that could drive offroad and that were outfitted to deal and withstand heavy punishment.  Lighter, faster vehicles seemed to be severely outclassed by the other cars in the wasteland.

As with Watch Dogs, my biggest concern with Mad Max is the tendency for developers to create huge open areas to explore and very little to do.  This is especially true for Mad Max, since it reminds me a lot of Rage (another disappointingly sparse title).  I will be keeping an eye on this game, but I’m still not convinced that this is worth buying any time soon after its release.

6.       Thief

The original Thief came out in the late 90’s, so seeing a reboot of the franchise can be either very good or very bad.  Square Enix (the game’s publisher) has a history of releasing good reboots (Tomb Raider, for example), so this game has that going for it.  Unfortunately, while the gameplay looked smooth, this game has one somewhat fatal flaw.  It looked very similar to Dishonored, but lacked a lot of what made Dishonored fun.  While the sneaking part of Thief’s missions is only “recommended”, the number of weapons and offensive abilities available to the player seemed to pale in comparison to those in Dishonored.  While the levels in Thief did give the player the ability to choose how to approach a target, it seemed much more linear than Dishonored.  And while Dishonored gave the player a number of ways to deal with a target, Thief only gives the player one.

I’m not completely writing off this game just yet, but it has a long uphill battle to convince me that it is worth paying full price.  Right now it just seems unnecessarily slow, linear, and boring.

7.       Company of Heroes 2

I have to confess that while I own the previous Company of Heroes game and its expansion packs, I have yet to actually install it and try it.  Fortunately, Company of Heroes 2’s demo was easy to pick up and try.  In the campaign, players will play as the Russians during World War II.  It’s a very different take on the war that has already been played to death by too many games.  The nice thing is that, while this is a real-time strategy game, base management is almost non-existent.  Instead, combat and tactics are given a much greater emphasis.  While massing my troops together and rushing my enemies worked during the demo, I have a feeling that careful combat and more tactical ways of approaching and eliminating enemies will be better when I go through the real campaign.

I didn’t get a chance to play the multiplayer (which is currently beta testing on Steam).  The only thing I hope for the single player is that the game emphasizes the historical content of the battles much more than what it did during the demo.  I like to get a little bit of a history lesson while I play historically accurate games.

8.       Plants vs. Zombies: Garden Warfare

This was a total surprise to me.  I had seen the ads for this game in the days leading up to E3, but I thought this was going to be Plants vs. Zombies 2.  I was completely surprised when it turned out to be a different game entirely.  Fortunately it retains much of the cartoonish humor of the mobile game while adding a very interesting cooperative multiplayer element.  The game seems to merge the third person shooter with the tower defense, but there doesn’t seem to be anything that the players will be actively defending.  And the zombies move fast, so players will have to be much more responsive than they are on the mobile version.

The one thing I’m not sure about yet is whether this will be a full retail title or whether it will be a downloadable title available on the Xbox Live Arcade and the PSN (and Origin, of course).  The developers wouldn’t tell me.  I would probably pay $15 for it (depending on how much content there was), but I definitely wouldn’t pay $60.

9.       Assassin’s Creed 4

If you have seen the gameplay demonstration that was shown at the Ubisoft E3 reveal, you saw exactly what I did.  If you haven’t seen it but have played Assassin’s Creed 3, you’ll know pretty much everything to expect.  The gameplay hasn’t changed very much from the last game.  There were only two obviously new things that the developers showed off.  The first is the increased emphasis on stealth, although from what I saw that didn’t seem any greater than what was done in Assassin’s Creed 3.  The other is the ability to move seamlessly from land to ship without any loading screen.  This was a pretty cool feature, but the demo seemed to be a very scripted event.  How many times the player will actually go from land to ship without any sort of loading screen or transition remains to be seen.

10.       The Crew

The Ubisoft demonstration for this game made me very interested.  The trailer showed off cop chases and cooperative team combat in an open world racing game.  Unfortunately, the game’s network went down just before I got a chance to test it.  This meant that I had to test the solo mode for the game, which was definitely a good thing.  The solo mode for this game is abysmally boring.  The world is huge, but so much of the fun of the game is completely lost when there are no players helping you complete the missions.  It felt like a much less interesting version of Need for Speed: Most Wanted (the most recent one).  If I wanted to play something like this alone, I’d probably go back to that instead of getting The Crew.

But, if you can find a few friends to be in your crew, this game is a lot of fun.  Provided those friends know how to play this game.  Good teamwork is required, so picking up novices and holding their hand as they learn how to effectively race and take down targets will definitely be a pain.  With all of these potential problems, I’ll likely avoid the game unless I can find a good set of friends to play with me.

11.       Dying Light

Dying Light is a first person zombie survival game that looks and feels almost exactly like Dead Island.  The player will attack zombies in a very similar manner and craft new items in almost exactly the same way.  In fact, one of the items used in the demonstration was exactly the same as a craftable item in Dead Island (machete with a battery for electricity damage).

But that isn’t quite the whole story.  The game emphasizes free running and mobility over the typically slow and clumsy controls of Dead Island.  The player is encouraged to cause distractions and run away from groups of zombies instead of trying to tackle them all head-on.  And the game includes a realistic day-night cycle.  You don’t want to be out at night.  There are some insane zombies that will find you and rip you to shreds at night.  But they only come out at night, so as long as you stay in safe houses during that time you should be okay.

This will definitely be interesting enough to pick up.  And considering how similar it is to Dead Island, I know a few friends that will instantly start drooling over this title.

12.       Batman: Arkham Origins

I was a bit skeptical about this game.  Prequels usually have a lot of problems since they’re trying to keep within the continuity of the previous games in the series.  On the plus side, Batman: Arkham Origins is almost exactly the same game as Arkham City, but with a much larger environment.  On the minus side, there was almost a complete lack of any real innovation.  The demo showed off a new weapon type, the new fast travel system, the new story, and some of the new environment.  The story seemed pretty interesting since it gives a great insight into Batman’s early history.  However, I’m not sure if it will be able to stand up against its predecessors.  I know I will get it eventually, but it isn’t high on my list right now.

13.       Final Fantasy XIII: Lightning Returns

I was surprised at how much I liked this game.  It definitely wasn’t the best game at E3, but it was a lot better than I expected.  After I got over the ridiculous dialog, the awkward names, and the fact that Lightning’s outfits left very little to the imagination, I definitely liked how the game merged the modern 3D action game style with the classic 2D encounter style.  Basically, the player can see enemies floating around in the environment.  When the player attacks the enemy (or vice versa), both the player and the enemy (or enemies) will be taken into an area style area to fight.  The player has to use a combination of powers and power sets to take down the enemies in the most efficient and effective way possible.  It takes time to recharge mana and energy, so the player can’t just button mash forever.  If I took more time, I’m sure I’d be able to figure out the best strategy.

This game will probably be much more appreciated by Final Fantasy fans than by me, but I thought it was worth my time to try.

Well, that’s it for day two!  There are still a good number of games left to try.  After that, I’ll soon be making my ultimate decision on a new console!  So exciting!

1.       Battlefield 4

Battlefield 4 is known for two things: huge multiplayer maps and destructible buildings.  I am extremely happy to say that both are back and in a glorious way.  I got to test out the multiplayer map that was demoed in the EA conference on Monday.  It was indescribably fun.  The map was huge, which made getting around on foot somewhat difficult.  However, it was a lot of fun to maneuver around in tanks and helicopters, and this map was definitely big enough for it.

Battlefield 4 is known for two things: huge multiplayer maps and destructible buildings.  I am extremely happy to say that both are back and in a glorious way.  I got to test out the multiplayer map that was demoed in the EA conference on Monday.  It was indescribably fun.  The map was huge, which made getting around on foot somewhat difficult.  However, it was a lot of fun to maneuver around in tanks and helicopters, and this map was definitely big enough for it.

It was a conquest style map, so my team had to capture the 5 capture points and wear down the opponent’s tickets.  It was a very familiar mode and the classes are basically exactly the same.  We’ll see how that ends up turning out (it didn’t really feel like much was that different in terms of game modes and customization options).  One thing that I did notice that was different was the ability to choose my classes support kits.  I played as a Support class, which would normally just be able to drop a bag of ammunition for those around me (which is one of the things I took and used liberally).  However, I could also choose a different type of ammo bag or a different addition entirely.  It was a very interesting feature that could change the player’s style greatly depending on how the player chooses to work with his teammates.

But the best thing was the third objective.  It was placed at the top of a skyscraper, which the player could get to either via elevators or by dropping in via helicopter.  That was pretty cool in and of itself, but even better than that came later.  As the match progressed, one of my teammates decided to shoot out the support columns for the skyscraper.  This caused the entire freakin building to collapse (in real time)!  It was awesome!  It changed around the map considerably, since the third objective had to move to accommodate the collapsed building.

I don’t know how many other maps will feature something like this or if all of the buildings were destructible in the same way (it didn’t look like they were, but I couldn’t be sure).  Either way, this is the kind of stuff that multiplayer should have had for years already.  I’m glad that Battlefield 4 is taking advantage of it.

2.       Need for Speed: Rivals

As I mentioned before in my E3 prologue, I’m always weary about Need for Speed titles.  Sometimes EA gets it right, other times it’s just not as good.  And while Need for Speed: Rivals does have its advantages, it left a bit to be desired.  If you’ve played the more recent Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit, you’ll be extremely familiar with this game.  It’s basically a sequel.  The controls feel exactly the same, the environment feels almost exactly the same, the game looks almost exactly the same, the powers are exactly the same.

The one difference that I saw was that the multiplayer was executed in a persistent online environment.  So the racers would be moving around the open world looking for races in which they could participate.  While they did that, the cops would roam around the world looking for racers to bust.  When a cop found one, he could turn on the lights and sound the horn and the pursuit would begin.  It was a lot of fun to find a racer and start chasing him.

I’m not sure how it will all work out though.  Is the world going to be MMO style?  Do the cops join a world and then events start?  I wasn’t even sure if the racers I was busting were AI or real people.  Hopefully these things will get answered in time.  In the meantime though, if you liked Hot Pursuit you’ll like this game.  If not, stay away.

3.       Diablo 3

I played the first Diablo rather religiously with my dad.  Back when the game featured LAN capabilities, my dad and I would tackle the deepest levels of Hell together.  Diablo 2 was different, but still very fun for the first two acts.  Diablo 3 isn’t the same at all.  I was really disappointed.  The adventuring is still technically the same, but it looks so cartoonish and it feels really shallow.  Go through, kill everything, pick up stuff, sell it.  And yes, I realize that’s exactly the same way that Diablo and Diablo 2 played out, but there is something that just feels so meaningless about it.

But there are already tons of reviews about that online.  If you’re a PC gamer and you haven’t picked up Diablo 3 already, I’d recommend seriously reconsidering before you throw down $50.  I tried out Diablo 3 on the PS3 though, and the inherent design flaws really showed through.  Despite the cartoonish graphics, I did get very visible lag.  If 8 or more enemies were on the screen at once (a common sight) my barbarian would lag during most attacks.  It wasn’t enough to kill me, but it was enough for me to see it regularly.

The auction house was removed for the console version.  I tried to find out the reasoning behind this move (because it can be good or bad depending on how players look at it), but no one seemed to know. I figure it must be something to do with in-game transactions being stiffly regulated / restricted by the consoles, but I don’t know for sure.   The controls have been redesigned so they work fairly well with the controller (not necessarily unexpected for the PC gamers).  But for some reason it was extremely easy to lose track of the health bar.  I died accidentally a few times because I couldn’t figure out how close I was to dying.

The one thing that the console version does have going for it is that it offers 4 player multiplayer on the same console.  So if you and 3 of your friends want to play Diablo 3 together, you can do that.  The screen works in a very similar way to Marvel: Ultimate Alliance (all characters together with no splits), so that will likely get chaotic if all of the characters don’t work together.

This will not be a game that I buy.  It was probably the second most disappointing game I tried today.

4.       Skylanders Swap-Force

Skylanders is extremely popular with young kids.  I know because my nephew is obsessed with them.  He’s getting pretty good at the games too (despite his young age), so I couldn’t miss a chance to test this out.  There’s an entirely new game here with a new campaign, new enemies, and (of course) new skylanders.  The new skylanders this time are “swap force” skylanders.  Basically, the top half of each swap force member can be changed for any other swap force skylander.  So if you have a character with a rocket for legs and drills for arms, you can swap out his torso, head, and arms with someone elses.  This gives that character the rocket legs with an entirely different set of attacks.

It was pretty interesting.  My test was fairly short, but in that time I definitely saw this as the kind of thing that could get kids excited and keep this game fresh for quite some time.  All of the old skylanders work with this current game, so that’s good too!

5.       Saints Row 4

I was slightly disappointed by Saints Row 4.  Keep in mind that with THQ going under and Volition being bought out by Deep Silver, this game is going to be playing with one hand tied behind it’s back from the very beginning.  It was originally designed to be a DLC for Saints Row: The Third, and it definitely feels like it.  The graphics are exactly the same, the cityscape feels almost exactly the same, the weapons (while different) look exactly the same.  Everything is extremely bright and extremely purple.

Part of the fun for me couldn’t be demonstrated in the Demo I tried (I like customizing my cars and my character, which I couldn’t do in this demo).  The demo also didn’t demonstrate any of the campaign missions (a mistake for any demo, I want to see what the story is going to be like).  But I can confirm that it should be just as over-the-top insane and fun as Saints Row: The Third.

Also, there is a dubstep gun.  It was really weird to use, but it fit in perfectly with the overall style of the game.  I definitely enjoyed blasting people away with violent wubbing.

6.       Castle of Illusion

I’m not sure I really understood this game.  It’s based on an old Sega platforming game, but evidently it’s a completely different story.  It stars Mickey, which is great for Disney fans, but for some reason the developers decided to showcase one of the last levels in the game.  Not only does this make for a very confusing story, but it also means that the player has to deal with extremely difficult enemies.  I died a few times, and not for lack of trying.  Without being able to test the earlier levels and seeing the difficulty curve, I couldn’t recommend this game to little kids (which seemed like its target audience).

7.       Call of Duty: Ghosts

Two years ago if you and told me that Call of Duty: Ghosts would be one of the weakest shooters coming to the market I would have laughed at you and shook my head.  I’m not the kind of gamer that’s a total shill for any one game (I’ve played enough games to know that every series has its ups and downs), but Call of Duty has been regularly good for years now.  It hasn’t been everything that I wanted it, but it’s hard to imagine something being better.

But this year we have Battlefield 4, Titanfall, and The Division, all of which are lightyears ahead of Call of Duty.  While the new engine has definitely improved the graphics of the previously outdated CoD series, that just isn’t enough to top what the other games are doing.  Battlefield 4 has destructible skyscrapers (as previously mentioned), Titanfall has fast based infantry action backed up with battlemechs, and The Division is an open world Tom Clancy game with RPG elements.  Next to that, Call of Duty is really showing its age.

I liked that the player could control the team’s dog in sections.  It was pretty cool to see the dog attacking and killing guys in first person.  The dog didn’t feel like the member of the team that the developers seemed to pride themselves on, but that may have been because I didn’t see enough of the game to form any sort of emotional attachment.

I will pick this game up eventually, but it is way down the list compared to the other games I mentioned.

8.       Final Fantasy XIV Online

This was the most disappointing game that I tried today.  I’ve never been a huge fan of the Final Fantasy games, but I wanted to give this one a try.  During the trailer they showed, I wrote down as a note “Who talks like this?”  The dialog was really bad.  I can usually put up with it because, after all, we’re writing games here, not novels.  But Final Fantasy XIV was just absurd.  Someone said something like “The Enterprise is an amazing ship, and I am the greatest captain ever!”  Now try to use that in a normal conversation.  Or say something like “The Elantra is an amazing car, and I am the greatest driver ever!”

But that aside, the game plays like a World of Warcraft clone.  You’ll have your powers which can be used to create combinations that aren’t immediately obvious.  One of the developers helped me, which felt a bit unfair.  If I can’t figure out the good combos relatively quickly, I’m not going to be happy.  That’s not to say that I want the game to hold my hand, but how will I ever learn that the “1 + 2 + 4” combo is the best one?  Does the game tell me that in some way other than text?

Either way, I just don’t see the point in playing this game.  Unless you’re a seriously diehard Final Fantasy fan, there are a good number of better MMOs already out.  Especially with The Elder Scrolls Online…

9.       Total War: Rome 2

I tried the first Rome: Total War game a while back and didn’t really enjoy it.  The economics of the game was difficult to understand, and with a relatively poor tutorial I was quickly overwhelmed.  So I was extremely skeptical about Total War: Rome 2.  Fortunately, even the brief demonstration showed how much farther the series has come and how much easier the developers wanted to make even the smallest of micromanagement areas.

According to the developers, controlling regions is fairly simple.  If the player takes control of a region, he can control that region’s supplies and economy fairly simply.  If the player manages to take multiple regions in an area, those regions form together to create an easily manageable province.  I’m not sure exactly how that works, but it seems very simple on paper.

There were other elements that made things like trade and diplomacy much easier to manage as well, but that wasn’t what I got to test out.  I tested out the combat, which felt a lot like every other Total War game.  Tactics play a big role in the game.  If the player has the high ground, he has a serious advantage over his opponents.  Ranged combat matters, but it’s nothing against the charge of an angry mass of elephants.

I’m not convinced that this game will be as much fun as Civilizations or Sins of a Solar Empire, but it will at least be something worth trying in the future.

10.       Lost Planet 3 (Multiplayer)

Last year I got to test out Lost Planet 3’s single player demo.  It was interesting but nothing to write home about.  Using the mech was pretty cool, but it seemed like a very slow game.  This time there was a testable version of Lost Planet 3’s multiplayer.  While it had some innovative elements, the overall execution felt very bland.  I loved the grappling hook, which players could use to quickly move between levels (both up and down).  And I liked the one-flag CTF mode we were testing out.  The flag starts out as a neutral monster that the players have to kill.  That monster then drops the “flag”, which the players must pick up and bring to the opposing team’s base.  It was just a slight variation on an often overused mode, but I appreciated the attempt to make it different.

But the problem is that otherwise it’s just like every other third person cover shooter on the market.  Gears has already done it, and done it much better.  While I will likely pick this game up eventually, it definitely won’t be for the multiplayer.

Well that’s it for day 1!  I’m hoping that tomorrow I’ll be able to see games like Titanfall and Watch Dogs, but at this point anything goes!

Before I talk about the conferences, I want to take a moment of silence for those games that have slipped quietly into the great beyond.  Those games that could have been destined for greatness but, due to one reason or another, were fated for the gaming kiss of death.

Aliens: Colonial Marines, what happened?  I saw your demo two years in a row.  I was skeptical but hopeful that somehow your developers could create an interesting experience.  But when you finally came to market you were so… unpolished.  Maybe with six more months of development and some seriously good QA testers you could have been great, but in your sad, broken state all we’ll remember is that poor, damaged alien hobbling past the player as he clutched his thighs together and searched in vain for a bathroom.

Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, we hardly knew thee.  You had a ragtag team of executives that seemed to have more money than brains, but with RA Salvatore writing your story we expected so much more.  But spending all your development budget coming up with awesome attack moves doesn’t work when you also have to spend some time coming up with unique quests.  Spouting endless lore without giving any tangible reference points just doesn’t work out.  Sadly, you will be remembered more for the epic collapse of your studio rather than for the content that studio released.

Medal of Honor: Warfighter, I knew you too well.  Oh too well.  So many issues in such little time.  And while you and I will take some of our secrets to the grave, I expected so much more.  That picture of you that I hold close to my heart every time I see your name; that is how I know what you could have been.  You could have been so much more.

Brothers in Arms: The Furious Four, where art thou?  No seriously, where are you?  You were at E3 2011 as a playable demo, but we haven’t heard a word about you since.  Nothing at all.  Are you dead?  If not, we’d at least like a phone call.  Or a text.  Just something to let us know you still exist.

And what of our friends, the Wii U and PS Vita?  They were odd little things, but they might have worked.  Sadly they will be pushed aside this year to make room for the new and better, but with a price drop and some good titles they might be worth it!  Maybe!...

But enough about the past, let’s talk about the present.  Here are the games I’m looking forward to most and what I have thought about their reveals:

1.       Titanfall

I am drooling over this game.  I have no idea if it’s going to feature a campaign or not, but the idea of large team-based multiplayers with mechs that can be called in pretty much at any time is absolutely amazing.  It might not be the most innovative shooter we’ll see this year, but it is definitely exciting!  I just really, really hope that there’s a real campaign to this game.  Because otherwise this will end up competing more with Section 8 than with Battlefield 4.  And as interesting as Section 8 was, I believe there is a lot more potential here than that.  This will definitely be a game that I test out at E3.

2.       Battlefield 4

The multiplayer match that EA showed at its conference was pretty amazing, but there was one fairly obvious flaw.  The entire experience was scripted.  I don’t know what that means exactly, but I’d be very surprised if the players could take down every skyscraper with a tank.  Maybe the developers managed to include that, but that would make this a gigantic game.

I love the idea of huge battles though.  I want to be able to insert my team into a battlefield via helicopter.  I’ve always wanted to be the helicopter pilot ever since I was able to fly the Hornet in Halo 3’s big team battles.  Seriously, being able to insert a friend and have him capture the flag, then fly him safely away from the battlefield and back to your base was an adrenaline rush.  I want that to happen again.

If any game can pull it off, Battlefield 4 can do it.  Also, DICE, if it’s not too much trouble, can we have some modding tools?  I want to make some custom levels for BF4.  I know it probably won’t happen, but plees?

3.       Plants vs Zombies: Garden Warfare

This really surprised me.  I was expecting Plants vs Zombies 2, but not like this.  At first I was completely turned off.  Third person shooter PvZ?  Cmon.  We have enough tps games as it is.  And then I started watching it.  And as I became more accustomed to the idea of totally changing around the style of the original game, I began to like Garden Warfare more and more.  It should be a much more friendly version of Left 4 Dead, so I’m definitely looking forward to it!

4.       Dragon Age 3

I am disappointed so far by Dragon Age 3.  I expected it to be coming out this holiday (it’s not, I have to wait until Fall of next year).  I really just wanted more detail about what this game was, what its style would be, who would be back, etc.  Is it still a party-based RPG?  Probably, but we don’t know yet.  And despite the fact that I liked the gameplay of Dragon Age 2, so much of it felt like a letdown.  The trailer showed that Varric and Morrigan would be back, but in what capacity?  Is the gameplay going to feel more like DA:O or DA2?  Bioware, I want to believe…

5.       Star Wars: Battlefront

I nearly fell out of my chair when I saw this.  I knew there was going to be a Star Wars related announcement, but I thought it was going to be an expansion pack for The Old Republic.  When this teaser came on, I was blown away.  I didn’t think it was possible.  But this game could be extremely good, provided EA doesn’t mire it down with stupid extras.  If they make it like a combination between Star Wars: Republic Commando and Battlefield 3, it will be amazing.  Absolutely amazing.

6.       Metal Gear Solid V

It looks like a weird blend between Splinter Cell and Red Dead Redemption, but Metal Gear Solid V looked pretty good.  Interesting stealth mechanics, but it will definitely take some getting used to for me.  I’m hoping there’s a PC version, but if not it’ll be on my list for the PS4 or Xbox One (whichever I get first).

7.       Quantum Break

The teaser trailer for this game was awful.  It didn’t explain anything and definitely didn’t get me excited.  Fortunately, the full trailer that Microsoft showed was much more interesting.  Having just finished playing Singularity, I’m definitely ready for another game that involves time manipulation, especially if that game has an excellent story.

8.       Need for Speed: Rivals

I am a sucker for a good Need for Speed game.  I’ve been pretty dedicated to the series since the original Hot Pursuit, but after NFS: Carbon things just went downhill quickly.  Things have come back over the past 3 or 4 years, but I can’t really get rid of the lingering sense of doubt that Street King and Undercover gave me about the Need for Speed franchise.  So while the more recent Hot Pursuit, Most Wanted, and even The Run games were definitely exciting and fun, I’m always nervous about the series.

Need for Speed: Rivals looked a lot like a combination of those three previous games.  The UI and camera angles looked a lot like The Run, the cop / racer systems and the open world environment looked a lot like Hot Pursuit, and the inclusion of Battlelog and the race setup looked like Most Wanted.  I’m not sure if this will turn out to be the best of all three or some sort of horrible Frankenstein splice of a game, but I’ll reserve that judgment for when I test it out.

9.       The Crew

The one thing that I missed about almost every Need for Speed game since NFS: Carbon is the ability to customize my car.  And I mean more than just cosmetic changes like car color.  I loved having the ability to make my car look as ridiculously stupid as possible.  Want a spoiler that might as well give your Lamborghini the ability to take flight?  Done.  Want to customize the front bumper of your Lancer Evo so that it looks more like a snow plow than a car?  Done!  Want the ability to make your tires so gigantic and your rims so chromed that your Hyundai Tiberon looks almost exactly like Grave Digger?  DONE!

Well in place of that in comes “The Crew”.  This is an interesting racing game that seems to marry a persistent online world with full single player, coop, and multiplayer elements.  The whole idea is that the player can join a four man crew that goes out and does certain missions or races together.  There are plenty of single player matches (all of which you can post times to compete with your friends), but the meat of the game seems to be focused on the cooperative and competitive online modes.  In theory, this could be pretty awesome, especially if you combine different styles of cars to give your team different advantages or disadvantages.  But in practice this could go horribly wrong.  As long as the race mechanics are pretty solid, it should be okay though.

10.       Tom Clancy’s: The Division

I knew a Tom Clancy game from the moment Ubisoft started talking about the collapse of the world economy.  While the novels and storylines may be fairly predictable, the number of games that Ubisoft manages to release with the Tom Clancy name and the variety within those games is pretty astounding.  I was expecting Rainbow Six: Patriots (and am pretty disappointed that it wasn’t discussed at the Ubisoft conference), but I liked what I saw in The Division.  Open world cooperative RPG games can be very interesting.  Tie that together with the look and feel of Ghost Recon: Future Soldier and this could be an amazing game.

Unfortunately, with all of these cooperative games, now I have to find a team that can get all of these games and try them out with me.  I’m used to playing games on my own time whenever I can, so finding a team that can do it on the PC will be… difficult.  We’ll see how it turns out though.  I’m definitely looking forward to finding out more about this game.

11.       Watch Dogs

Watch Dogs was teased last year and was definitely one of the most memorable games of E3 2012.  It’s back this year and looks just as amazing as when it was first unveiled.  This was the first real next-gen game showcased.  It’s like Grand Theft Auto meets Deus Ex… or something.  Open world environment with a host of electronic devices at the player’s fingertips.  So far the story looks good and I’m really glad they’ve turned the main characters into characters with redeeming qualities.

This time though, I want to actually try the game.  I’ve seen enough trailers and watched enough gameplay.  I’m convinced this is going to be a great game.  But I want to actually test it out for myself.  Here’s hoping that actually happens.

12.       Destiny

Out of all of the shooter games showcased at this event (and there were a few), there were only two that disappointed me.  Killzone, because next to The Division and Battlefield 4 it just seemed so predictable, and Destiny.  With Destiny, the game looked great, but I didn’t really get what they were showing.  The cooperative gameplay was pretty cool, but it didn’t tell me anything about the style of game, the story, or any of the real gameplay elements.  Is it an RPG?  Is it a PS4 exclusive?  Is it open world?  How often do the multplayer events occur?  How many people can join a party?  I already knew the game was going to look good, so I was looking for something more solid.

But I will say one thing for Destiny, it completely destroys Defiance.  A game that encourages single-player play with cooperative elements at any time that also includes randomized large multiplayer boss battles?  Defiance and Destiny are exactly the same there, and while Defiance may currently have more gamers and a lower price point, it definitely doesn’t look nearly as good nor play nearly as well as what Bungie showcased with Destiny.  If it came down to picking between the two, I’d definitely pick Destiny.

13.       Infamous: Second Son

I haven’t played the first Infamous games yet.  They’re definitely on my list though, especially after seeing the trailer for Second Son.  I liked Prototype, so I am almost positive that I will love Infamous: Second Son.  But because I haven’t played the previous games, the subtle story elements are going to be a bit lost on me right now.  Hopefully more of it will become clear before the game is released.

Now, obviously I didn’t manage to talk about everything, but that’s part of what each nightly report will be about.  So stay excited guys and I’ll try to get some interesting exclusive information for you!

Recent comments on some of my videos have encouraged me to re-evaluate my site and its content.  What I have realized is that there is a definite stigma attached to parental reviews, and that the majority of gamers are definitely going to initially react negatively to the work that I do.  Their reaction is completely justified because, more often than not, the writers of game content reviews for parents are not passionate gamers.  I had hoped that my level of detail in my written and video reviews would show that I do love these games, but I have come to the unfortunate conclusion that citing specific examples and using visual evidence as a backing for my recommendations isn’t enough.

I want to make it clear that I don’t believe that anyone who takes the time to sit down and read my reviews or watch my videos is going to commit heinous acts of violence.  That idea is absolutely insane.  I know that what little correlation there is between violent games and violent behavior does not equal causation.  I know that playing violent games does not make you a killer just as you don’t have to be a killer to play violent games.

Unfortunately the issue is always more complicated than it seems on the surface.  Every gamer of every age, race, gender, and nationality must understand that there is more at stake here than being able to play any one game.  There are a lot of adults that are scared, concerned, or stressed out because of disturbing television reports they see on the news.  Major news outlets are reporting increased bullying, suicide, and violence amongst preteens and teens.  Everyone is looking for the reasoning behind it all.  Parents want to figure out what is wrong so that they can fix it and protect their kids.  It’s a completely rational:  they love their children and want to keep them safe, so they’re looking to anyone to make that possible.

The media is all too happy to supply them with a scapegoat.  Historically, new forms of entertainment have traditionally been blamed for violence.  When movies first became popular, they were lauded as the downfall of society, so it makes sense that video games are now being targeted the same way. But video games are much more complicated than passive media such as movies or radio mostly because of the inclusion of interactivity.  It’s not some random character that’s committing these acts of violence, it’s you.  You decide who lives and who dies.  You’re the one that pulls the trigger. And as games become more immersive and more realistic, this debate becomes more heated.

Why do you think parents and the media get pissed at some games and some content but not others?  It’s really easy to hate on Grand Theft Auto because the name alone indicates that the game isn’t going to be about herding magical unicorns into a fantasy pen where you can brush them and feed them lovingly the end.  Why did the Hot Coffee Mod get so much attention despite the fact that it’s only accessible on the PC version after the user manually looks for and downloads a mod on an unpatched version of the disc that came out before the mod was discovered?  Why does Mass Effect get the spotlight for a 10 second scene with less sideboob than the beach on a winter’s day when games like Dante’s Inferno can have full frontal nudity and no one says a word?

Two reasons.  One, because the media cherry picks these games and holds them up as the worst of the worst when anyone who has spent more than a year playing games knows that these aren’t that bad at all.  And two because parents usually do not understand the content.  They don’t have time and may not have the chance to explore games like we do.  If they did, they’d be playing the games before (or with) you.  That’s what my dad did.  He let me play Doom when I was a kid because he’d already played it.  He knew it was violent, but he also knew it was a lot of fun and that I’d really enjoy it.  My dad was an extremely informed gamer in the early to mid 90s.

But not every parent can or should do that.  It’s just not realistic.  As much as my dad loved games when I was a kid, he’s outgrown it. Parents are busy and they shouldn’t have to sacrifice their precious free time engaging in a pastime they aren’t passionate about.  My dad was an exception.  I know he still loves games because he’ll talk about them and reminisce about when “freeware” was a real thing and people sent each other demos on floppy discs.  But try giving your parents a controller and having them play a simple racing game.  Most of them will probably end up stuck in a wall, going the wrong way, or finding the one spot on the map that causes the car to morph into a horribly distorted ball of parts begging to be put out of its misery.

But as I said before, there’s more at stake here than your parents letting you play a game.  If we don’t do anything, sooner or later nervous parents and the media will.  They will eventually turn their gaze away from gun control and start looking for something easier to fix.  When it comes to politics it doesn’t matter if doing an action will solve a problem, it’s just a matter if you look like you’re doing something.  Even if the decision made is ultimately detrimental to everyone, it is more important that people believe that you’re trying to make things better.

So here’s what will end up happening.  Eventually something like Columbine or Sandy Hook is going to happen again.  That unfortunate, misguided, mentally ill kid will have played some seriously violent game.  I’m talking about Gears of War, The Punisher, Manhunt, or something else along those lines.  And, as a result, the media will get people to demand that the government takes action.

The good news is that the American government can’t directly censor games.  That isn’t necessarily the same in other countries, but the first amendment of the Constitution prevents the government from telling game developers what they can and can’t put in a game.  The bad news is that the government has an unlimited number of creatively evil ways of indirectly controlling what the game developers create.  Including any number of these (most of which have already been discussed in one form or another):

1.    Tax violent video games

Buying a new game on release day is expensive.  $60 of hard-earned cash is a lot even for adults.  So imagine that going up to $65 or higher.  It sounds absurd, but items that are deemed socially taboo are easily taxed to absurd amounts.  A pack of cigarettes costs around $12.50 in New York, and most of that is because of brutally high taxes.  While a video game is currently more socially acceptable than cigarettes, anything that would increase the current cost of games will end up hurting you.  If games cost more, you and your parents are going to buy fewer games.

If that still hasn’t convinced you, take a moment to consider what exactly is a violent game?  All shooters are violent, obviously, but what else can we think of?  Is Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit violent?  It involves the use of force to take down police or racers (depending on what side you’re playing on).  The dictionary definition of violence is “exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse”, so if we’re using that as a benchmark then Hot Pursuit is definitely violent (you’re using your vehicle and abilities to injure your opponents’ vehicle).

What about Pokemon?  Or Super Smash Brothers?  Or Super Mario Brothers?  All include violence as a tool that the player will have to use frequently in order to progress.  If we narrow down the field to “games that include blood with violence”, then how much blood?  Any blood?  Do we tax Halo in the same way that we tax God of War?  If Grand Theft Auto removed all of its blood, would it get a free pass?

This will almost certainly end in one of two ways.  You either tax games based on their ESRB rating (making Oblivion just as “violent” as Prototype), or you tax all games.  It will almost certainly be the latter, since the government loves to broaden the tax base at any opportunity.

For examples of this being discussed, read this article and this article.

2.    Legally mandate age restrictions

Currently the gaming industry is fairly self-regulating.  If you are 14 and you walk into Gamestop without an adult you can buy any game that the ESRB rates T or below.  You can’t buy M games and Gamestop doesn’t even stock AO games.  I had to have my dad come in with me and buy Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas because the Hot Coffee Mod forced Gamestop to pull all of its copies and keep them under the counter.

In theory, federal mandates would essentially legislate what is already being done.  However, as with any government legislation, there are always extras.  The law would almost certainly be so convoluted that retailers of all sizes would have to spend extra time and money ensuring their compliance with these regulations.  This would potentially increase the price of games, since retailers would have to pay for their compliance checks, and would make retailers much more skittish about putting borderline games on the market.

And even if these regulations are somehow streamlined (unlikely, but possible), consider how poor the ESRB ratings are.  If you’ve read some of my other contents you’ll know that I am no friend of the ESRB, but I have yet to meet any gamer who can say “Halo and Gears of War deserve the same rating” and keep a straight face.  Go watch my video reviews of XCOM: Enemy Unknown and Black Ops 2 and tell me those games both deserve an M rating.  But that’s what we’d be legally required to abide by.

Similar legislation has been ruled unconstitutional, but if a perceived need arises there is always the (currently slim) possibility of a change in that stance.  The European PEGI ratings are legally enforced abroad (more in some countries than others).  For an example of this being discussed, read this story.

3.    FCC Controls on Game Content

The idea that the government can never regulate media such as video games isn’t entirely correct despite what I said earlier.  While the first amendment does provide a measure of protection for content creators, there are still ways that the government regulates what content hits the airwaves.  The government has an agency called the Federal Communications Commission (or FCC) part of whose purpose is to enforce “indecency laws”, which are basically designed to censor and control content that the government sees as against the common interest.  The same reasons why television and radio programs can’t curse could easily keep game developers from including some content.

The biggest problem with this is that game developers would work overtime to ensure compliance.  They would never want even a hint of content that could lead to some hefty fines.  And, as a result, game developers would quickly move away from games that included violence, sexuality, or substance use.  I don’t mean just that games like Gears of War or Duke Nukem Forever would go away.  I mean that more benign games like Left 4 Dead, Halo, and Bioshock would be changed forever.

Now before you blow up into a fit of rage, take a deep breath.  The FCC has only been able to regulate content that is streamed via the “public airwaves”.  This means that television and radio are able to be regulated, but DVDs are not.  Hopefully games will stay out of this particular territory (since it is blatant government censorship), but there is always the chance that the combined efforts of Congress and the Supreme Court will change this.

The most likely scenario in which this actually pans out is if politicians say “it’s for the good of the children!”  Using children as a motivation for political debate is a seriously underhanded blow, but is extremely effective.  If someone says “This is for the good of children”, how do you debate that?  Everything else seems secondary unless it actually 100% isn’t for the good of children, and then you have the burden of proving that it isn’t.  This argument has resulted in a ton of legislation being passed in California that is completely unrelated to children.

Fortunately, the current chairman of the FCC came out and praised the ESRB system as a model that television should follow, but that doesn't mean the FCC may never try to co-opt the system and try to enforce it (especially if a particular game is deemed to be liable for some sort of violent act).

These may seem impossible right now but they’re really not that farfetched.  The gaming industry is struggling enough as it is.  Increased government regulation of any sort could very easily spell the end of gaming as we know it.

My ultimate goal here isn’t to prevent people from playing games or saying that you should be allowed to play some games and not others.  It is simply to give you and, more importantly, your parents the information to make the decision for yourselves.  Your parents understand you as an individual much better than I do, so if they’re convinced you’d be okay playing Prototype or Gears of War, I’m convinced.

But right now there isn’t really anyone who can honestly say that they are objectively on the side of both the parents and the gamers.  Right now we have game executives out to make a profit, game developers vying to keep their freedom of speech, media out to vilify anyone to keep their ratings high, politicians trying to be popular to keep their jobs, and parents scared of the suffering of their children because of the potential ramifications of violent media.

My content walks an extremely thin line.  On the one hand, I have to convince parents not to be afraid of video games, regardless of whether that game is violent or not.  This is a monumental task, one that involves giving them the ability to see everything that they could perceive as potentially harmful to your social and moral development.  On the other hand, I have to convince the gamers that I am not here to take these games away from you.  I have to convince you that I am your advocate and would be willing to go toe-to-toe with those who would strip away everything that makes video games the most entertaining, complex, detailed, free form of expression this world has ever seen.  I have to convince you that I have the motivation to stand in front of a group of angry parents and explain to them that video games are not the sources of social decline that the media would like them to believe.  That, in fact, these games that we know and love are amazing stories filled with complex characters and situations that, more often than not, encourage the player to do the right thing in the face of insurmountable odds.  That games encourage players to be heroes, paragons, and saviors much more often than pariahs and villains.  And that even when these games paint the player as a renegade or an anti-hero, the stories still convince the player that there is some sort of ultimate good to their actions.

I don’t want gamers to bicker amongst each other about whether one game is appropriate for them or another is not.  As I said before, the real purpose to these reviews is to provide the information to the necessary people so that they can make the decisions for themselves.  The reflexive reactions that  gamers have to the perceived attack of their beloved franchise is completely understandable.  Parental reviews have been designed to make parents afraid of games for far too long.  It is more important that we inform everyone about the content within games so that they are unafraid about the potential social implications of the new Call of Duty, Mass Effect, or Grand Theft Auto rather than let them stew in a constant state of terror over whether their son or daughter will end up being the victim of another poor, misguided soul who inevitably uses games as a bullet shield for their own mental issues.

I don’t expect everyone to agree with my recommendations.  They are, after all, simply recommendations.  However, it is far more important to me that you and your parents understand all of the mature content within these games and can make the ultimate decision for yourselves.  I don’t want anyone, whether it’s the media, the government, activist groups, executives, or myself, to make the decision for you.

First, the PS4 launch was surprisingly uneventful.  While us gamers may spend time railing against Microsoft’s terrible X1 launch, go back and look at how disjointed and awkward the PS4 launch was.  The presentation was smooth enough.  Everyone knew their lines and it all seemed to go off without a hitch.  But think about what Sony decided to bring out on stage to parade around.  Blizzard came out to announce Diablo 3, which for the hardcore Diablo fans should instantly make them want to grow wings and flaming eyes and turn Irvine into the flaming lands of Hell.  Sony doubled down on the Move, which is the worst knock-off motion controller devices in this generation of gaming.  There was that weird rock band-like presentation using the Move, which I couldn’t tell if it was demonstrating a new video or a new game or was just there to show off the tech or what.

The indie games were definitely represented and the new button to instantly record gameplay was there, but that did little to make up for that weird Deep Down presentation or the visually pleasing but otherwise shallow Killzone demo.  As with Microsoft, I expect that most of the great titles will be revealed at E3, but this was designed to be the starting point of the new console generation.  Sony should have started things off with a bang, but the overall execution felt like so much more of a false start.

But at least Sony did a few things right.  Throwing in some games placated the hardcore audience, throwing in some indie devs and talking about the openness of the console placated the casual audience and the indie developers in one swift move, so at least the direction of the console was laid out.  It was acceptable mostly because it was familiar, which can be good or bad depending on how you look at it.  It’s good because I know exactly what I’m going to get, but it’s bad because I know what I’m going to get for the next 7-10 years.

Microsoft had a month or so to learn from Sony’s wins and losses and to tailor their presentation to the wants and needs of their audience.  Somehow, inexplicably, they absolutely blew it.  I understand part of why they did it, and then again I also have no idea what they were thinking.

Cable television is a multi-billion dollar industry.  It’s looking for a way to revitalize its viewership, and a lot of younger, less affluent users are dropping their cable entirely.  I am among that audience.  I used to have a cable subscription, but cancelled it when I realized that I wasn’t watching any television.  Seriously, I didn’t need to change channels.  I’d watch episodes of Psych and Burn Notice when they came on, but there was little reason why I couldn’t watch them online the next day for free.  So I saved an extra $80 a month and dropped my cable bill completely.  Instead, I got a subscription to Netflix, which has been far more useful.  I pay a much lower price and can watch a decent selection at any time.  If I have two hours to burn, I can watch an episode of Sherlock.  Or I can stop in the middle and pick it up the next day.  I have watched more television shows now that I have the freedom to watch what I want when I want than I did in my entire four years at college.

Microsoft saw an opportunity to kill a few birds with a single stone.  It’s worried about the rise of non-cable TV sources.  Things like Apple TV, the Roku, and Google’s eventual TV equivalent are all becoming serious threats to cable television.  And once cable TV goes down the tubes, the remaining players are going to be there to devour the remains like rabid dogs.  It will be a business-style feeding frenzy, and Microsoft wants a piece.  Placing the X1 at the forefront of this future meltdown will position itself perfectly to take in the largest market share of the ala carte television audience.  After all, if people already have the X1 in their homes, why not use it to watch television as well?

Unfortunately, my biggest concern about the entire thing is that they’re losing sight of their original purpose.  Not Microsoft as a company, their original purpose was changed decades ago, but of the Xbox.  The people who are going to wait in line for days on end in the cold during the holiday season for the X1 or the PS4 are not going to be the 40 year old dudes with 3 kids and a mortgage.  They’re going to be those hardcore gamers so dedicated to having the newest and the best that they’re willing to risk life and limb for the privilege of paying hundreds of dollars for a box of circuits that plays Halo 5 and Call of Duty.

Yet Microsoft ignored that group completely at their reveal event.  Reveal events are designed to give vision of the console, its true purpose for the coming years.  Microsofts message informed hardcore gamers that they weren’t even on the radar anymore, that television, Steven Spielberg, and second screen capabilities were the future.  And those elements may actually be the future, but that wasn’t what gamers were looking for.

And before you harp on me and point out that both EA Sports and Call of Duty were there, I was looking for something new in gaming.  Something that would get me excited about the future.  Ghost Dogs was a damn good presentation last year at E3, and that’s the kind of new, awesome demonstrations that I expected to see.  I didn’t want to see everything, after all with E3 just a few weeks away I want to keep some of the goodies for then, but this event wasn’t even a tease for that.  We all know exactly how the EA Sports titles are going to play out because they’re the same every single year.  And the same goes for Call of Duty.  That series hasn’t changed since Call of Duty 4, which is fine, I’ll still end up buying Call of Duty: Ghosts, but I wanted to see something would make me associate the X1 with “new” and “exciting”.  Second screen, cable TV, EA Sports, Call of Duty, and ESPN do not do that.

But gamers weren’t the only one feeling shafted by the presentation.  Indie developers and the international audience were both feeling completely left out after the dust settled.  Seriously, as bad as hardcore gamers had it, rewatch the presentation and think about it if you were someone living in Australia or Korea.  Nobody there cares about the NFL.  The Kinect may work perfectly when the user speaks in a British or American accent, but what about if the user only speaks Korean?  Or Japanese?  Or Greek?  Or Russian?  All of those great voice commands are going to be completely worthless if the Kinect isn’t programmed to understand Swahili or Farsi or Vietnamese.

Those are all things that Microsoft is going to have to sort out over the next few months, and I have full faith that they’ll be able to do so.  What is going to be a bigger problem is how Microsoft is going to convince me that the X1 is going to be a better console than the PS4.  Because without having a cable TV subscription, the rest of it seems completely absent.  I don’t watch sports very often, and when I do I usually end up at a friend’s house for the game.  So without the advantages of ESPN and cable television, it’ll come down to if the second screen capabilities and X1’s exclusive library are more valuable than the PS4 lineup that I already know is going to be great.

So far I haven’t seen that.  The number of PS3 and PS4 exclusive titles that I am excited to try at E3 is far outweighing the number of Xbox 360 or X1 exclusive titles.  In fact, the only big exclusive series I can think of off the top of my head for the Xbox are Halo and Gears of War, both of which have been huge letdowns recently.  And don’t blame the Xbox 360’s hardware, Halo: Combat Evolved and the first Gears of War were both amazing games with the same or lesser technology.  But if it comes down to Halo 5 or Beyond: Two Souls, I know which way I’m going to go.

I am simply concerned that Microsoft is going to forget about its gaming audience in favor of the other audiences it doesn’t have.  I don’t want gamers to be taken for granted, because there is stiff competition from other sources.  The Wii U may currently be a complete failure, but Sony is definitely going to learn from the ups and downs of the PS3.  While Microsoft is busy wooing the families and casual audience with its fun, family-friendly Kinect and cable TV hookups, its core audience is more than willing to jump ship for something else.  Considering how expensive consoles are going to be and how many of the biggest games are going to be available on multiple consoles, this is precisely the time to do it.

And don’t forget that Microsoft already has stiff competition from its PC gaming audience.  The expense of the gaming PC has kept most users away, but when the hardcore gamers start looking for something else they’re going to be surprised by how easy it is and how cost-efficient it is to jump on a gaming PC.  My gaming PC has allowed me to save thousands of dollars via Steam sales, and that doesn’t count the amount of non-gaming work I do on it.  It is just as likely that I will forgo a new console completely for a while and still remain able to complete my work with just the titles that come out for the PC.

There are plenty of options currently on the market.  As I have said before, we should definitely wait to see what comes out at E3.  But unless Microsoft’s exclusive titles are something wondrous that can completely change my mind, I’m leaning heavily towards getting a PS4.

After much controversy the first “Tropes vs. Women in Video Games” video has finally been released.  The first 20 minutes is an interesting history lesson on how the “damsel in distress” has been included in video games for decades.  No one I have talked to has an issue with any of the points Anita brings up in that portion of the video, since all are backed up with a plethora of examples that are easily understandable.

The problem with female characters in video games is similar to the problem with violence in games in that neither are new issues and neither have really been addressed properly.  It is very easy to focus on the sexuality in games, but figuring out the root problem of why female characters in games have such a limited role is much more difficult.  The points that Anita brings up in the history lesson are entirely valid.  There are plenty of female characters that are weak and helpless.

Having played hundreds of games and analyzed dozens of unique female characters, it is my understanding that believable female characters are very difficult to write.  In some games it may be the writer’s method of creating a temporary power trip for the main character to try and rescue the damsel, but even when a game includes a non-damsel female character her role is extremely limited.  Take Anya in Gears of War or Cortana in Halo: Combat Evolved.  Both female characters are well scripted and have excellent roles, but they’re both in non-combat intelligence roles.  They help the player analyze the situation and assess the best possible method for continuing forward progress, but due to physical limitations cannot directly assist in taking down enemies.

The problem is that creating a believable female character who actively engages in physical combat is almost impossible.  There have been a few exceptions in games and movies, but these are extremely rare.  Even Ellen Ripley, hailed by science fiction fans as the pinnacle of the bad-ass female character, was more likely to logically sort out a problem with words rather than resorting to force of action.

This is one of the reasons why female characters who do prefer brute force over words are more closely identifiable to male characters than their female counterparts.  Zelda wasn’t able to actively fight the forces of evil in Ocarina of Time until she became the blatantly masculine Sheik.  Similarly Private Vasquez in Aliens was visually more like her male marine counterparts than Ripley, which made her somewhat brutish role believable.  Even Samus, hailed by gaming nerds as one of the only good feminine action heroes, is not identifiably female until she removes her helmet.  As a kid I was completely surprised to find out that Samus was, in fact, a female character, because her character design has no identifiably female features.

But the personality and looks of the female character is only part of the problem.  The meat of the issue is that writing a believable female character, no matter what the role, is extremely difficult to do.  Male characters are very easy to simplify without losing their believability.  Master Chief, main character from the Halo franchise, is a well-written character despite having fewer lines than his female AI counterpart because his actions do actually say more about his personality and his abilities than anything he could ever say.  Gordon Freeman, the main character from the Half-Life series, never has a single spoken line but is still able to be a mostly believable character in a series hailed for its incredible story.

What Anita failed to mention were those examples where female characters become more badass while still maintaining their overall believability.  This is especially obvious when we compare two female characters that I brought up earlier.  Cortana and Anya started out in very similar roles but have since digressed into completely different characters.  In Halo: Combat Evolved, the first game of the franchise, Cortana is an excellent companion to Master Chief and, while distinctly feminine, maintains the emotional stability necessary for a combat role.  When she shows up and surprises 343 Guilty Spark into nearly fainting, her rage at the sputtering AI guardian is so believable that I would not have been surprised if she’d turned the ring’s sentinel guardians against Guilty Spark.

But as the games progressed, Cortana was portrayed more and more like the “damsel in distress” that Anita rails so heavily against.  While Halo 2 portrayed Cortana as trying to single-handedly hold off both the Covenant and the Flood to prevent the invasion of Earth, Halo 3 made her out to be the woman who needed to be saved by Master Chief.  While her weakness may have been understandable had she been human, the fact that she’s an AI meant that her badass personality was completely wrecked with the simple idea of her becoming “tired”.

This continues on in Halo 4, where she becomes even more distressed by succumbing to technological decay.  Instead of providing valuable assistance to Master Chief like she did in the previous Halo games, she becomes the damsel in distress not through kidnapping but through her decay, and it is because of this that she becomes less of a real character and more a part of a greater objective.  Instead of focusing on fighting an alien force like every other Halo game, Halo 4 makes saving Cortana the primary objective.

Gears of War’s Anya starts out on a similar path but goes in a completely different direction.  In the first two games she is the intelligence officer, providing direct information and instructions to Marcus and Dom in order to help them through pretty much every situation they encounter.  When they need her, she’s there, providing whatever she can to keep them going.

That changed in Gears of War 3.  Instead of continuing to be the “eye in the sky” for the main characters, she puts on the same armor, equips the same weapon, and begins fighting just like everyone else.  I may have missed having Anya providing the intelligence necessary to forward the plot in a believable manner, but it would be a blatant lie to say that she wasn’t great in a firefight.

The great thing is that she’s not alone.  There are a small handful of games with believable female protagonists.  Faith from 2008’s Mirror’s Edge was a wall-running escape artist able to ignore gunfire of all types in order to get from point A to point B.  Lara Croft from the 2013 reboot of Tomb Raider is also an extremely strong female character who maintains a surprising level of believability.  This is a bit ironic since the previous version of Lara Croft painted her as an unbelievably big-breasted “babe” who represented the very pitfall that many writers end up finding themselves in when trying to create an adventurous female.

There are two main problems that come up when writers are creating female characters.  The first is that a lot of time writers seem to have a problem coming up with believable conversations between any of the characters.  Outside of mission-related information, many games fail to have any sort of interaction between the characters.  Cortana talks to Master Chief in cutscenes, but aside from the occasional line of dialog there is very little conversation between them.  Even Half-Life 2’s glorious in-game conversations are just a small part of the overall gameplay.  Most of the time the mute Gordon Freeman is simply shooting his way through enemy after enemy.

This wouldn’t normally be very obvious, but it is unfortunately coupled with the fact that game developers seem set on flaunting female characters’ “assets”.  While this was especially prevalent in older titles, such as the older Tomb Raider games, newer games are still very likely to focus more on the feminine figure than on her personality.  Bayonetta, Rayne from the Bloodrayne series, and pretty much every female character in every Soulcalibur game are all hypersexualized to a borderline pornographic degree.

And before you write off this problem as strictly one with Japanese games, take a look at how Cortana has evolved over the years.  The changes between the first three Halo games might be written off as greater detail, but the trend clearly shows that her breasts are expanding.  In addition, it has become impossible to convince anyone that Cortana is wearing some sort of skin-tight AI suit.

At the beginning of this comment I mentioned that Anita did not present any real solution in her “Tropes vs. Women in Video Games” monologue.  Since it would be hypocritical if I didn’t at least attempt to present one as well, here’s my idea.  There are an abundance of small changes that can be made to make video games seem friendlier to the ever increasing female audience.  Including trophies and achievements like God of War’s Bros before Hoes doesn’t translate well with the female audience to say the least.  Having massive orgies and lesbian sex scenes may be titillating for the male gamers, but is pretty awkward for those girls brave enough to play.  There will always be an audience for Leisure Suit Larry type material, but if we’re trying to be as inclusive as geeks and nerds normally claim to be we should consider whether or not the material actually forwards the storyline or whether it’s simply included for shock value.

There are also things that can be done on a much greater level.  Since it is unrealistic to say that more games should feature female protagonists, I suggest that game developers spend less time focusing on the female body and more time focusing on the female personality.  Take the time to study awesome female characters in video games, movies, books, and other forms of literature and figure out what makes them so great while still maintaining their believability.  Find some examples of real women that made an impact on their fields and figure out who they are.  I know this is making the problem seem much simpler, but we already know that it’s possible to create believably badass female characters.  The trick is using what we already know and applying it to what we’re trying to make.