Sega and Nintendo Are Getting Cozy

If you've been paying attention to Wii U news at all in the last day or so, then you've seen the above screenshot.  You know what it is.  You know -why- it is.  So you know why I'm using it - not only because it's like the only damn screenshot flying around (I believe), but because it's already created a little bit of a buzz on its own merits.  For those in the dark, the above is a screenshot or concept shot of Sonic:  Lost World, the newly announced Sonic game that will launch exclusively for the Wii U and 3DS at some point in the near-to-far future.  However, what it represents is something far bigger than just one game, no matter how good or not the game itself will be.  Personally, based on Generations, I'm hedging towards "really good", but we'll just have to see on that one.

Sonic:  Lost World is the first of a three-game exclusivity deal titled as a "Worldwide Partnership" that Sega and Nintendo have decided on with regards to the Sonic franchise.  This was announced during the Nintendo Direct from the other day and, as mentioned, made something of a splash considering Lost World -seems- like it's going to be a big-deal Sonic game.  Of course, Sonic games coming out exclusively on Nintendo consoles isn't anything new - look at Sonic and the Secret Rings, Sonic and the Black Knight and Sonic Colors, all exclusive to the Wii, with at least Colors being fairly well-regarded.  So to find out that they're running with that (ha!) still isn't much of a surprise, even after Generations skipped the Wii (and I believe the 3DS version wasn't quite full-featured).

The second game of the three-game deal, you might be wondering?  Mario & Sonic at the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games for the Wii U.  It's the fourth installment of that particular franchise that I really don't see how it has seen four iterations.  It's...probably going to release sometime around Winter.  Moving on...

Switching gears for -just- a moment, and offering a nice little segue in the process, another part of the Nintendo Direct was the announcement that the 3DS' Virtual Console is getting more classic Game Gear games.  And classic in this case actually means classic, and not 'classic'.  With just about every Sonic game that came out for the device announced - Sonic Blast, Sonic Drift 2, Sonic Labyrinth, Sonic the Hedgehog, Sonic the Hedgehog 2 and the tangentially related Tails Adventure - and a few other things to write home about surely - Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine, Shining Force II:  The Sword of Hajya and Vampire:  Master of Darkness - it's more than a little bit of a welcome development.  Announced all at the same time, it sort of elevates it by that much more, and makes me wonder how Sega can manage to get that many games up at once (or at least lined up at once), given how....difficult it seems to be to actually populate the Virtual Console.

Getting back to that third game that was mentioned as part of the deal, you're probably wondering what it is.  Truth is, we -all- are, since it's yet-to-be-announced and is likely going to be an E3 hold-over (even though Nintendo still isn't going to have an official E3 presser, just an obvious presence).  But simple knowing that it's going to be -something-, and that it's going to involve Sonic in some fashion leaves the door wide open to a whole network of possibilities.

From my little bit of investigating and a little bit of my own thought, one prominent theory seems to be a Mario Kart/Sonic All-Stars Racing Cross-over.  Which, I personally think is rather brilliant.  For some reason, to me it's felt like the Mario Kart series has been going a little downhill, though I'm not quite sure if I base that on my own personal opinion or opinions I've gleaned from portions of the internet.  Still, regardless of quality or lack thereof, the Wii U has not yet seen a Mario Kart game and with Nintendo's pro-crossover stance (as evidenced by Pokemon X Nobunaga's Ambition, Fire Emblem X Shin Megami Tensei, etc.) combining what are, in fact, two actual popular franchises into one with the added effect of that extra impact seems like a no-brainer.  Who -wouldn't- want to hop into a vehicle as Knuckles and Dash past Bowser, for instance?  Or, maybe even drive Luigi right past Sonic to pick up a last-moment first place?  It's definitely the thing I would expect from the last game of the deal, but we won't hear anything about it til about E3.

Now, my own personal hope would be for something a little more....inspired.  Which is a funny thing to say since my idea is basically Sonic Generations, but with Sonic -and- Mario, but, hey, Generations was pretty damn inspired, really.  Both franchises have seen shining installments in side-scrolling and fully 3D games and doing a mash-up of their various levels and styles would be something to see, especially since you have to find a happy middle ground for their clashing design philosophies.  Since Sonic is 'Gotta Go Fast', meaning he's got to have a longer track to go on than most of the classic Mario levels could offer, perhaps they could do a sort of system where all levels of a zone are connected end-to-end (as they are in the game, really) so Sonic speeds through an entire zone in a go rather than just 1-1 or 3-2.  Alternatively, having Mario bounced around by bumpers in a 3D, brightly-lit Casino-themed level from one of the Sonic installments with badass music in the background just brings some sort of sensation of joy to my brain and I'm not sure why.

If nothing else, that just goes to show just how open speculation can be on this sort of thing since details are very very sparse and we're just given a few things that are, likely just meant to inspire certain avenues of thought.  I know people are already thinking Lost World might be in the vein of a Mario Galaxy-type game because of the look of that single screenshot and Nintendo's involvement, and hell, that might actually be a good idea.  And even if the third game is 'just' a Mario Kart/Sonic All-Stars Racing Cross-Over, well, that's not a bad deal at all.  Of course, the game doesn't -have- to involve Mario at all, but it would seem a bit silly to announce two Sonic games...roughly at the same time, which is what they'd do, so unless he's partnering up with a different character (which isn't a bad thought), then look for -some- sort of Mario involvement.  Just one more reason to eagerly await E3, I suppose.

Sega also announced Yakuza 1&2 HD for the Wii U in Japan only and I couldn't think of a way to integrate that since it means nothing for North America, goddamnit Sega

Wii U Scores Bayonetta 2 As An Exclusive

Ridin' off to new platforms....or just the one, really.

So, arguably the most talked about piece of news from the entire Wii U media blitz dust-up and such is the fact that, at some point in the future, which is undetermined currently, Bayonetta 2 will debut on the console exclusively.  As in, the direct sequel to Bayonetta, the game on PS3/360 which is touted as one of the best action games ever, will only be available to anyone who goes out and buys a Wii U when it comes out.  Or, you know, at some point between when it comes out and when the actual game itself comes out, which is probably going to be a good half a year at least.  Probably more, seeing as Platinum has a lot on their collective plates as is, which is a bit of good news, at least.  This is probably the busiest they've ever been, and it's most likely going to make some good bank for them.  And good - it couldn't happen to a better studio, I should think.

That said, I still have yet to play Bayonetta.  I know, I know, I'm a filthy heretic and such, but as you all might know, I haven't had a whole lot of PS3 time in these summer months and it's only now that the temperatures are falling....sometimes....that I have been able to really turn the system on and have some fun with it.  And that said, my first task is to finish Sleeping Dogs since I absolutely adore the game and not being able to play it has been torture for me because of that.  After that, I'm not sure - it depends on what strikes my fancy.  But I can't definitely say it will be Bayonetta and it's for now two very, very clear reasons.  The original, which was the one that gave me pause to start with was that I -know- that it is a technically inferior version of the game, and that sort of thing eats at me and just really kills my enjoyment.  Even with the patch, I've seen accounts that say the 360 version is like playing a whole other game and that is not something I like to hear.  The second reason is now that I know if I actually enjoy Bayonetta and want a sequel, I'll have to shell out $400-ish to get to it in about half a year or better, provided the Wii U hasn't price-dropped by then.  (It probably won't.)

But it could always get ported, right?  I mean, that would be the sensible thing, right?  Sensible or not, it is not a game that is going to get ported and that's just simple fact right there.  There's two basic reasons floating around out there with the people discussing the game, and they have a bit of the truth in them, but neither of the reasons is -the- reason, and one of them is actually just kind of poorly thought-out.  The first, biggest reason that people don't expect a Bayonetta 2 port is because Nintendo themselves is publishing the game on Wii U.  It's actually being suggested that Nintendo is putting a little more money than just that into it, but it's hard to say if that's for sure or if Nintendo is just sort of 'guiding' the game as it's being built.  Regardless, the case generally is that if a company publishes the game, they're fronting some dough and just having that game out there to generate revenue isn't going to cut it in terms of their own benefits for doing so, so generally some exclusivity is guaranteed to make it so that you're the only place someone can go for this particular game.  Everybody does it and there are very well-documented cases of it out there, but there are also many, many cases showing that Publishing a game doesn't mean it can't stray elsewhere.

Publishing contracts are just sort of a nebulous thing that generally infers -some- expectation of exclusivity, but really, just how much of that is never assured.  XBLA exclusivity with promotions like Summer of Arcade and the like, where Microsoft -does- publish the game seems to last something like a year, after which the developer is free to take their game to whatever else platform they desire using whatever the hell means they want, basically.  And even on-disk publishing isn't an exact guaranteed 100% exclusive thing, as Ninja Gaiden 2 showed us all, releasing on PS3 a year (again) after the 360 release as a self-published game from Tecmo KOEI (then Tecmo).  So for anyone saying "Nintendo's publishing it, which means end of story", that really is not completely true, as history has proven.  It solely depends on just what sort of contract they have with Platinum Studios (and Sega by proxy) regarding the exclusivity, which is likely determined by just how much Nintendo is doing to help fund it and/or what additional resources they're putting into the game (actual development time or even just marketing).

The other reason that I've seen for why the game simply 'cannot' be ported to PS3/360 is because, and I am probably directly quoting someone with this, "it just won't work because the Wii U is just so much more powerful" which is...well I won't say patently ridiculous as I wanted to, but it's not an accurate comparison.  Firstly because we don't -really- know what kind of power the Wii U is pushing, as in the CPU/GPU, and we probably will not learn this for some time, but it's not going to be -miles ahead- or anything.  All we do know is that the Wii U apparently has an entire gig of (console) RAM (which is different than Computer RAM) dedicated to the games, where the other gig that it has is dedicated to running the OS and such.  This is not an uncommon practice.  None of it is indicative of the Wii U being 'so much more powerful' than the PS3 or 360 that you can't put Wii U games on those consoles, and made much more a silly notion when you consider just how many friggin' PS3/360 ports are scheduled to release on the Wii U.

Despite all that, the core of the matter is that, while it's not going to be a launch window title, Bayonetta 2 is slated to release fairly early into the console's lifespan and unless Nintendo are stepping in to show Platinum just how to make the game sparkle and shine with technical wizardry, it -likely- won't be making full use of whatever power the console has to offer.  Which means that power is honestly not much of a variable to bet on in this whole situation.  Nor how little 'power' actually means in down-porting which is, as we know, still a fairly common practice and if you're really looking to make some extra sales, you're going to do it right.  In such a case, I'm sure Platinum -would- do it right, but I'm not quite sure who would publish it which is, honestly the issue here.  This is precisely the reason why Bayonetta 2 is likely going to stay exclusive to the Wii U, if there is any.

As we all know, Sega, not Platinum Games, is the owner/holder of the Bayonetta 2 IP which means any game in the series has to be done with their blessing.  Platinum Studios was the developer of that game as per a four-game deal they signed with Sega (the other three games in the deal being MadWorld, Vanquish and Infinite Space) but that and the fact that they're working on Bayonetta 2 doesn't mean they hold reign over the Bayonetta series.  Being the IP holder, Sega could arrange for just about any other studio out there to make a Bayonetta game, and that's where the problem is.  Sega has themselves convinced that they just can't afford to pay attention to games beyond their basic top-selling series and has basically pulled the plug on any sort of Western releases of anything beyond those series.  (Which, unfortunately leaves Yakuza up in the air for now, but that's another issue entirely)  It could likely be inferred that Bayonetta 2 is only a thing that exists because Nintendo fronted the cash they did, which means for the game to show up on any other platform, in theory, Sony and/or Microsoft would probably have to front the same amount of cash to make it happen.

Worldwide, between the two platforms Bayonetta released on, the game sold somewhere in the neighborhood of 1.3 million copies.  Again, worldwide.  It didn't set the world on fire with sales, is basically what I'm saying, as generally a good-selling game could break or come close to a million in a single region.  So it's already a hard sell to Sega because of that, and then you have to consider just what you're looking at in costs otherwise.  Nintendo's already fronted for Bayonetta 2 so Sega has that money and they likely don't care anymore beyond that.  But to convince them that they need to work out a publishing deal with -somebody else- to take Bayonetta 2 to PS3/360 would require that they can prove there's reason to.  And this is where it gets tricky because this is where splitting your fanbase really, -really- comes around to bite you in the ass in the end.  Or, at least it should in theory.

What I mean by that is that even if we're not all heavy in somebody's corner, we're likely going to follow series rather than platforms.  Platforms grow by featuring certain series to them exclusively or at least in a way that makes it the place you want to get it on so that when the next iteration of the platform comes along, you can bring along those people by continuing the series.  It's pretty simple really and to use something as an example, we'll go with Yakuza.  The first two were on the PS2 and the second two on the PS3.  This is just a basic progression, as it's not that much of a stretch to think if you bought a PS2, you might buy a PS3.  It's linear logic in a vacuum, basically as it doesn't account for anything beyond that, but you'll be hard-pressed to tell me how it doesn't make sense on some level.  You lose that when you try to say "Because you bought a PS3, you'll buy a Wii U" or "Because you bought a DS, you'll buy a Vita".  The actual words to quantify what I'm getting at escape me at the moment, but using 'something like linear logic' as a vague indicator will probably work, as I'm sure you're all understanding where I'm coming from.

What -that- all means is that those 1.3 million copies sold on PS3/360 for Bayonetta does not, in any way, shape or form, guarantee 1.3 million copies sold on Wii U.  Generally speaking, even if the majority of games are bought as a series by the same people (meaning people who buy game 1 buy game 2 and 3 when they come out), not all of them are, as you have to account for people who didn't care for the first and thus don't buy the second as well as people who buy the second without caring about the first existing.  So, by that logic, Bayonetta 2 could really out-sell its predecessor if a lot of people who didn't play the first buy it, but if you're trying to market the game -to- the people who bought the first, and counting on them jumping ship as it were, you are definitely not going to get all of those people.  Even in a straight console progression, you don't get all those people, so that much less for abstract console progression.

So -basically- what I've danced around saying without just getting to it is that the real reason Bayonetta 2 won't see a PS3/360 port is that the game probably just isn't going to sell well enough to justify it to any one party.  For a Bayonetta 2 port you're going to have to A) Make it worth it to Sega (which will be hard enough) and then B) Hope Platinum can port it.  Point A pretty much entirely depends on Bayonetta 2 selling well on the Wii U which is an entire gamble in itself as for that to happen you have to assume that everyone who bought the first buys this, as well as many, many more people, which would entice Sony and/or Microsoft to approach Sega to do it.  I say it's this way simply because of Nintendo's involvement as Sega was clearly ready to step away from the series entirely for the time being before Nintendo threw some money at them.  And in all reality, Bayonetta 2 selling really well on Wii U would signify that your potential buyers elsewhere have already bought it.  It's a vicious circle, really.

A lot of people, including myself, don't really like it, but that's pretty much how it is.  For my part, I only dislike it because I just don't like abstract console progression since I like following series...es, and when I cannot without throwing down cash beyond the game itself, I lose interest rapidly.  That's why I never bought into Dead Rising 2, as the first is never going to come to the console I want to play 2 on, so I simply wouldn't enjoy it.  Dead Rising isn't the best example, of course, as it's not particularly story heavy, but it doesn't really -matter- to me; if I have to cross platform lines to play a whole series that is linear, then it has to be damn well worth it, and I'm not convinced a whole lot of games are.  Of course it becomes a lot more palatable if I have both consoles that the series is on, but not entirely so because I am picky like that.  Again, this is just with the sort of crazy jumps across platforms and not the natural progressions.  And I suspect I'm not alone in this, but I do like to think that I'm at least a bit more rational about it.  I really don't hold any ill-will to Platinum, Sega or Nintendo over this whole Bayonetta ordeal, but I suspect it might be because I don't have an attachment to the series yet.  Still, if it tickles my fancy enough, I suppose I'll have to weigh it against the other prospects of owning a Wii U, since I don't expect Bayonetta 2 to stray anywhere else from there.

Eeeee The Last Of Us Eeeee

Ohmygodohmygodohmygodeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

...

*Ahem.*

So, Sony decided to close their E3-Presser with The Last Of Us, as seen above, which I think was probably the smartest thing for anyone to do ever, because goddamn, how do you top that?  You don't.  I don't care if you announce God of Star Wars after that in which Kratos goes and kills everyone in the Star Wars Empire brutally and single-handedly, or Grand Theft Auto:  Mushroom Kingdom, in which you drive Karts around a fully realized Mushroom Kingdom styled after the piecemeal bits of actual 'city' and 'buildings' that we've seen in games (mostly the RPGs) doing whatever the hell you want.  Those just won't top that friggin' video, though I very strongly urge the game industry as a whole to make me eat those words.  No really, I would love to see you try because goddamn, that is a slick friggin' video for what amounts to seven minutes of gameplay.

That is the key point here, as well, that this is gameplay, and whereas most companies, you would go "Pshyeah, right", this is Naughty Dog we're talking about and I have complete and utter faith that the game will look exactly like that if not better by the time it releases.  Which is currently unknown, unfortunately, but at the same time -awesome-, I don't have to really worry about that right now.  That's not the point, though, so let's just move on from that quickly and quietly.  The point is that "Holy shit" cannot be said enough times about that friggin' video, not only from exactly what's shown, but the implications of what's shown.  As you know, I am particularly good at taking trailers and such and picking them apart piece by piece to say just what it means on its own right.  And boy, is there a lot of that to be done with this game, what with the AI and the environment and this and that.

To this end, let's just skip how gorgeous the game is which is shown off in the first couple minutes of the video (as well as showing Ellie take interest in a movie poster which is awesome, and kind of makes me want a Naughty Dog Werewolf game) and get right to the 3:16 point in the video where we see the HUD pop up or rather, materialize.  Now, I'm not going to harp on it, nor am I going to say "Boo" to it, but I will say that it seems kind of strange for a blatant HUD like that (with a life bar no less) in a game that looks -this- realistic, where a more minimalistic approach seems the better way to go about it.  I imagine there'll be an option to turn it off, however, so it's a non-issue and it -is- rather important for a demo.  That said, I will also say that I like that the game has a lifebar, meaning medical supplies will be necessary rather than relying on mysteriously regenerating health which has unfortunately permeated entirely too much of the industry with about half the games that feature it even bothering to give an explanation.

The HUD features everything you would want it to - health, your current gun and the amount of ammo in said gun, so that said, it's capable at what it does and doesn't intrude all that much.  Even if it does prove to be a permanent fixture, I daresay it won't be that intrusive, and I think I only bring it up because of the minimalist approach Uncharted has taken, if you take away the menus and weapon icons and such.  We see it again later on after Joel chokes out (in a not-so-stealthy way, a nod to the fact that he's not a trained friggin' assassin) one of the "Hunters" and drops his Revolver.  Specifically, it shows the revolver ammo as a pop-up and has a note that tells you what to push to pick it up.  Because of what I'm assuming is the fact that Joel just kind of stands there for a moment after his kill/knock-out, he is then spotted in a realistic manner (especially after the noise that was made) by one of the other Hunters, sending everything into a shootout of sorts.

I would like to point out something very very vital here - the encounter that follows features only four men, but the way it plays out makes it seem that much more.  And that's purely because it's more visceral, it's more brutal, and it's more personalized, so to speak.  The first guy is taken out in the shoot-out, where the second waits behind cover for backup.  The third guy moves off into an adjoining room to set an ambush that Joel walks right into, yet comes out on the winning end of by taking him as a human shield.  He walks him out into the main room for the second guy, who briefly tries reasoning with Joel before he's gunned down and Joel loses the shield by knocking him out cold with a pistol whip of sorts.  And finally the last guy shows up as Joel takes cover and simply waits.  As the click of Joel's revolver sounds out, indicating that he is out of ammo, the final man feels a sense of confidence that brings him out into the open.  As in, he is literally lured out because he knows Joel has no ammo.  That alone is brilliant, to say nothing of the rest of what I just said.

Equally amazing is how the whole scenario plays out from there.  Earlier in the conflict, Ellie had, completely on her own, picked up a brick to defend herself with, as that is honestly a viable weapon considering the circumstances.  The guy that laid an ambush for Joel went with a lead pipe, even, which both of those -might- just suggest that you can use improvised weapons, which I am certainly hoping for.  Having moved into the room while Joel cleared out the other three men, Ellie hid herself to the side of the room and only after the last man cockily walked out, stalking over to Joel's position did she make herself known.  "Hey Asshole!" rings out from our wonderful heroine who then lobs said brick right into the face of this guy, leaving him wide open to be taken out by Joel who does so by making use of the environment in ways that make me get all weak in the knees.  Choking him against the wall, followed by slamming his head against a nearby desk is more than enough to take this last guy out and after a bit of small-talk between Joel and Ellie, they continue.  Again, this is just the game, it's not a cutscene, I doubt it's heavily scripted out to happen like this, it's just how this played out.

When they move along and hear reinforcements coming (which isn't all that far-fetched considering there -was- gunfire), Joel decides to..er....heat things up a little bit (I'm so sorry) by crafting a molotov cocktail.  I use the word Crafting purposefully, as taking off the backpack brings up a little menu that shows off ammo and just what items Joel has on him.  Selecting the bottle of alcohol he is possession of shows a few recipes to the side of it, showing what items are also necessary and, with said bottle and some medical binding, he has said Molotov Cocktail after a few seconds of putting it together.  It is then used for the exact purpose you imagine and sets one of the three people serving as reinforcements ablaze, much to the chagrin of Ellie who I imagine is a little horrified at the over-the-top solution to the problem.  At least the "Holy Shit, Joel!" that followed said reinforcement becoming the Human Torch would allude to that.

The second man serving as a reinforcement struggles with Joel as Joel tries to disarm him of his shotgun, spending a round in the process, before Joel wrestles it away and smashes him in the head with the butt of it.  He then loads in a new round (a nice touch) before being caught off guard by the last reinforcement who wails on Joel with a length of wood (once again alluding to an improvised weapon system) and trying to strangle him.  Joel struggles out vainly and it's only when Ellie stabs the assailant in the back with her switchblade that he is distracted enough for Joel to muscle out and gain the upper hand.  Picking up the shotgun and smacking him across the face with it, the man pleads with Joel, knowing the end is near.  He cries out "No!" as Joel finishes him off.  And that is when the video ends with a black screen showing the "Last of Us" logo.

I have to point out once more that this is all gameplay.  I don't quite know how it's all controlled, but I would assume that it's Uncharted-esque, so all these instances of melee, smacking with a shotgun, a revolver, struggling for the disarm and the like are tied to Square and react to the context of the situation.  The aiming is very obvious as, in doing so, the standard reticule comes up as the camera is full over-the-shoulder, likely controlled by L1 for aiming and R1 for firing.  I'm going to suggest that you don't control Ellie whatsoever, so I don't think there's a "Call for help" button, but I could see ordering her to stay or follow (which is done a few times in the video, albeit without a prompt meaning it can just be based on, again, the context) with some button, perhaps L2 or R2.  Everything else is fairly obvious in what it's likely tied to button-wise, so I won't mention it.

Yet all of that gaming is done with such a simplistic approach and it's mind-boggling.  Ellie's AI seems rather amazing and useful; I doubt she'll be a burden at any point in the game which is certainly saying something.  If anything, she has all the markers to be a real helpful boon as, in all reality, she saved Joel twice in just that seven minutes of gameplay by using herself as a distraction.  If you can really pick up just about anything to use as a weapon (or, hopefully, a distraction, like tossing a brick through a window would draw rather than alert to your presence), that's a whole other layer of complexity that can truly be amazing if implemented as it seems.  And you know how much I enjoy me some Environmental interaction, which the game seems like it will capitalize on in both finishers and context sensitive ideas (Ellie's brick, again), as well as, again, improvised weapons, should that be included.  Regardless, you basically just have to say "Naughty Dog" for me to partition Sixty of my dollars aside, but this video more than vindicates that by a wide margin.  Between this and REVENGEANCE, I'm honestly more excited for gaming than I've been in quite some time.

'Dark' Looks Good, Is 360/PC Exclusive

In yet another one of those moments that make you go "Well -that- figures.", Joystiq ran a post today sort of introducing 'Dark' after a press release from the publisher, Kalypso Media, went out today.  The press release is a fairly good read, since it gives a little insight to the game that I've only known of for just over a week (Nothing really new from then, however), but it also sheds a little light (haha, no I'm not proud of that) on something a little unfortunate for me:  The game is only in development for PC and 360.  As you might see, I was actually pretty hopeful for Dark at first sight and was all-aboard, but this little hurdle means that I can probably comfortably drop it off my radar completely.  I'm interested in its development and how the end product turns out, of course, but not too much so; I won't be able to experience it unless I buy into a 360 at some point in the future which honestly is not in the cards.

Now, this is a bit annoying for me as it was just a couple months ago that I was saying what the industry really needed right now were games just like this.  Or if not what the industry needs, then certainly what I want, because, without rehashing my argument from the linked post, there just aren't enough actual supernatural games right about now.  It's all futury and high-tech or super fantasy with not a whole lot in between, the lot of them shooters or isometric romps.  On top of being a modern day attempt at vampire lore (without trying to put too much of their own 'stamp' on it, in the vein of Twilight sparkle, True Blood's brand of awful, etc. that I can see) trying to take it at least somewhat seriously, it's also a third-person stealth affair which I'm sure we'll all agree there are far too few of.  (Hitman and Thief rank here.)

What also stings is that the game looks really good in that it just has a lot of things that make it sound tantalizing.  Which is the point, clearly, and it requires on the actual execution of it to see just how it works out, but it is set up to succeed currently.  The cel-shaded graphics, as you see above are quite nice if a bit overly green (though it will give it a certain identity at least), but they'll likely have to be seen in motion to appreciate fully.  The RPG elements will likely allow you to give the main character 'your' own spin on him, depending on how you decide to grow him and what you focus on ala Deus Ex or Alpha Protocol.  I imagine as such, we could possibly expect the story to branch a little depending on how you handle matters, but that sort of remains to be seen.

Something I am curious to, as I'm curious with every sort of vampire piece is how they suggest the vampires blend in with society.  The bulk of the time, it's as simple as that; simply slipping into situations where they don't have to be out in the daylight, generally working the underworld and such.  It does seem like that may be the way it goes here in Dark as well, given the scenes shown.  Lots of indoor places, lots of artificial lighting, not a speck of sunlight to be seen around.  From what I can tell, our main character is freshly bitten as well, so that might weigh in on the gameplay some as well, in more ways than being a blank slate and/or at 'level suck' as it were.  Like, perhaps he's sensitive to even regularly lit areas to start with, thus necessitating the stealth in a big way at the start to ease you into making good use of it.

Whether or not the game will ever see a Playstation 3 release is iffy, but I'd be more than willing to imagine that it won't, unfortunately.  Unless it's a smash hit, of course, and the developers only omitted a PS3 version because of lack of funding, considering I imagine making a PC and 360 version of a game are fairly similar processes, where the PS3 is a whole other matter entirely.  So unfortunately, there's a good chance that I'll just be interested in the game without being able to do a whole lot about it.  It wouldn't be the first time, and I can only hope that it won't be the only thing to attempt something full-heartedly supernatural in the coming months, where I'll be able to partake in the others, but we'll just have to see.  If not, well, it's not like I'm hurting for games now or in the future to buy and play.

Is "Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale" "Title Fight"?

Forgive the, uh....terrible image.

So, it's certainly been a while since we've heard word of it, but the rumored 'Title Fight' has made a resurgence and how.  For a quick recap in case you forgot (and don't want to read the provided post), 'Title Fight' is a proposed fighting game that features the 'stars' of the Playstation First-Party Line-up, which is quite extensive actually.  When it was initially rumored, there wasn't a whole lot of info beyond "Trust us, this is totes legit, here's a model screen of Sweet Tooth" as well as a list of five characters that were 'definitely' in the game so far when it was, assumedly, early on in development.  Those characters being the above mentioned Sweet Tooth, Nathan Drake, Kratos, Parappa the Rapper, Sly Cooper, Fat Princess, and Colonel Mael Radec.  Aside from that, the only real information on it was that it was being worked on by a studio called SuperBot Entertainment which, as you might notice, still does not have a Wiki-Page, presumably because they haven't released a game yet, which is a thing that is said on their own web page. 

SuperBot is hard at work on our first title, being developed for the PS3. As soon as more information is available, this is where you’ll be able to find it. Screens, videos, interviews, if it’s out there, it’ll be here.

If rumors that I can't source at the moment that are directly in this Joystiq Article that I am too blind to see are to be believed, then perhaps that site will update this coming Thursday with information for this game.  Because apparently there will be another reveal of a PS3-exclusive title that day, which makes planning for my Thursday very easy (or maybe Friday, depending on when it goes up).  Aside from that, the only bit of information is that the domain "playstationallstarsbattleroyal.com" is a thing that was just registered by Sony Computer Entertainment America which would put Title Fight's official name as, uh, "Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale".  Which is...just awful.  I mean, I really don't like to poke fun at names, and I honestly don't care, but come on.  While it is clearly on-point, something a little less long-winded (coming from me, that's a laugh) would have been perfectly acceptable.  'Title Fight' might not have been quite enough, but Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale (PASBR) is just too much.  This is "On the Rain-Slick Precipice of Darkness" levels of too much wordage verbosity territory here.

Really though, as I said, the name doesn't matter and with any luck, that won't be the release name.  What really matters here is what the game is going to be like which, well, is completely friggin' nebulous at this point.  All we can figure on is that it's going to be a 'fighting game' which is about as realistically concise as a newspaper that's been soaking in bleach.  There are quite a lot of sub-genres and 'styles' that have been defined in the Fighting Game genre, so knowing that it's a Fighting Game is just as helpful as knowing it's a PS3 game - which is not very.  I -imagine- we can kind of guess that, being a fighting game in the same vein as Super Smash Bros. that it might take the same approach (I'd hope not a literal copy-paste), which narrows it down a little, but it's really hard to tell.  I'd rather it not be, like a super-hardcore fighter like MvC, SF, etc. because that just ain't my scene and I'd like to grab this if at all possible.

Really, there's not a whole lot else to state here other than this is kind of what the situation is.  The character list is potentially huge (though I imagine it will be small-ish in scope for this first bout(heh)) so the ones in the above image technically aren't that off (some of them are practically guaranteed gets, even), but I can't help but hope that we'll get some cross-overs from characters that aren't first or second party, if even just as a 'cameo' character (thus assuming they might not be available for a potential sequel).  The example I gave last time was Kiryu Kazuma and obviously I'm sticking with that (because of the Exclusivity), but even Ezio, since he's making the fighting game rounds (and Ubisoft is kind of in good with Sony) or like Solid Snake (Since he has also been in a fighting game before) would work.  There is a literal wealth of characters that could be in this thing if it is, indeed, a real thing, and I can only hope that Sony picks some good ones.

The Last of Us - New Game by Naughty Dog

So yesterday (I almost feel terrible linking the last post made before this but oh well) I posed the question that has been on a lot of minds this past week:  "What the hell is The Last of Us?"  And tonight on the Spike VGAs, the answer was revealed to us.  In a trailer that went on for just under two and a half minutes (not counting the time spent on showing Presenting screens and other such non-game-related things) we have got a pretty good introduction into the game but by no means do we know a lot about it.  What can be said is that it is definitely post-apocalypse (more to the I Am Legend style, also possibly Enslaved?  I didn't play that, but I think I'm remembering right) and it is definitely having to do with 'infected' humans that may or may not act like 'zombies'.  But at the same time, it's being made by Naughty Dog, so those put off by the last thing should still have some interest at least.

Unsurprisingly, the game looks absolutely beautiful and the animations are as fluid and just plain good as one would expect from Naughty Dog.  To me, I'm already sold on the concept, but the opinion I'm seeing around the internet is one of dismissal for being 'another zombie game' that we apparently have a glut of.  Which is quite disappointing as it's quite obvious with Naughty Dog at the helm that it'll be quite a bit more than it appears to be at first, but I guess people will see that when it comes out and not a moment before.  Regardless, all I can do is talk with what I've got to work with, which is still very little unfortunately, until more information comes out which won't be soon enough.

I can already tell that that girl is going to be one of the better characters of 2012, even though she'll be up against some rough opposition (The Last Guardian says what), or at least she should be with all things considered, which I'm quite looking forward to.  There's just a quality that Naughty Dog puts into their trailers (well, their characters that comes -through- in their trailers) that elevates whatever or whoever it is, so just the subtle characterization made with "Ellie" in those two and a half minutes (the non-flinching reaction to violence, the fact that she's apparently grown up in this disaster world, thus her perceptions are clearly different, etc.) means that any writer worth their salt will be able to make a complex, yet good and understandable character for us all to enjoy.

I am excited for this, quite a bit, and I look forward to seeing what's going to come of it.  The news we have, however sparse it is,  is setting it up to be great as is, so as far as I'm concerned, we're just looking for more filler to accentuate that.  Well, and information to help shape what we're looking at, really.  Despite the Uncharted games that definitely have Naughty Dog in the public's eyes, I don't expect something similar to them, though I don't know what else to really suggest.  Something more platform/puzzle-reliant?  I certainly wouldn't turn it down.

Update!:  There have been a few trickles of information to come out after what we got that seems worthy of at least a little attention.  More or less both are covered here but there's also this to reference as well.  First and foremost, it should be said that the mains have been named Joel and Ellie (though we knew the latter) and are being played by Troy Baker and Ashley Johnson, who has been in a lot of stuff that I have missed completely.  The game, unsurprisingly, will have survival and action parts to it as the pair make their way across the country for reasons unspecified.  Worthy of note is the fact that The Last of Us has apparently been in development for two years and will very likely (and also unsurprisingly) be a Mature game, which will be a first from Naughty Dog.  And if you were hoping to co-op this game with a buddy across the states, that isn't slated to happen as of now, but could change.  Personally, I have serious doubts about having a multiplayer thing at all for the game, but we'll just have to see.  I would hope that it would stick to just telling a story in the single-player perspective and focus on that, really.

The Last of Us - What the Hell Is It?

The short answer is:  I don't have a damn clue.  The long answer is:  It's a new IP being announced tomorrow at the Spike VGAs alongside a lot of other stuff that is similarly interesting as well as confounding.  There's not a whole lot of information about, so much as a smattering of things here and there, all of them leading to roughly the same conclusion.  It's a good bet that the new IP in question here is going to hop in with the trend set by games such as I Am Alive and possibly even Dead Island, depending on how it all works out, by putting out a facade of the apocalypse at first.  Art pieces and the trailer that's been out for a few days suggest a virus outbreak has caused pandemonium on a grand scale, where other sources indicate it's a sort of fungus that could possibly lead to something far worse.  This is evidenced by the video on the the Official Site that is opposite the trailer that features an ant doing what can only, tastefully be called 'losing its shit'.  The footage is apparently from a documentary about a fungus that takes over a body and kills it to grow out of its corpse, which is just lovely sounding.

Now, if the above hasn't gotten your interest, there are a few other pieces of information out about it, mostly in the form of lack of information, that can get your attention, likely.  Firstly being the fact that the information we have so far is precisely all there is.  To my knowledge, there's no inside info, no leaks, no information being gleamed from the official site using all sorts of technical wizardry or anything of the sort.  For once, a game is going to be announced and people likely won't know about it beforehand.  Unless it's somehow 'Title Fight' which I have to say is very unlikely, barring some real metaphorical shit going down.  There's a chance for a last minute leak, ala 360 slim, but even in that case, it's at least impressive that something that is apparently this big has gone this far without being known to the internet at large.

The above information leads to the obvious conclusion that no developer has been really announced as attached to the project.  Obviously somebody's been working on it, but we don't know who, clearly, though there are a few guesses.  Here's where it really gets interesting however, as the above screenshot, seemingly directly connected to The Last of Us, was taken from Uncharted 3.  That's right.  Go into Uncharted 3 at the bar in the beginning and look around for that newspaper; you will find it most likely.  I haven't confirmed for myself, but it's been documented already if you similarly don't want to go looking for it.  It's hard to tell if that was there in the beginning or if it was added in the aiming patch (if such a thing is even possible), but it's highly suspect that it's completely unrelated.  Of course that doesn't mean Naughty Dog is working on this, whatever it is, nor does it mean any other number of other things, but I would certainly suggest that it's at least likely that this game is being made by a First (or Second) party studio which implies its own set of things on its own.

I know I'm just buying into it exactly as intended but I can't help but be pretty excited for this, if just for the mystique surrounding it.  It could be any number of things and even if it ends up looking like something else out there already, the idea that it could be a First or Second Party effort for Sony leads me to think the level of quality and polish will be enough to make it stand out.  Of course, I could be completely wrong about this, but I'm already impressed as I stated, so I'll have to stay tuned to whatever it ends up being.  Hopefully tomorrow we'll have the information we need and the information we want so we might begin to hype properly, but we won't know til the VGAs have come and gone.  Why is there always a reason to watch that abomination every year?