Nintendo in Disarray Says Industry "Expert"

Can we all stop listening to Michael Pachter?

For those who don’t know, Pachter is a (in)famous analyst for securities firm Wedbush Morgan who has made a career out of making bold predictions about the video game market, many of them dead wrong. His most recent comments were directed at Nintendo’s upcoming eighth generation console, the Wii U:

"Nintendo is in disarray because they waited too long to launch the Wii U. I know that this sounds like (and is) sour grapes because they didn't launch the Wii HD in 2009 or 2010 as I 'predicted.' They should have, and because they didn't, the decline in Wii and DS hardware and software sales drove them into generating LOSSES. For those of you who aren't financial analysts, losses mean that the company is worth less than it was before. Nintendo stock has dropped by over 80% in the last few years, and the market has appreciated over the same period. I'm paid to advise investors, and none have made a profit owning Nintendo stock. I don't think that many will make a profit over the next few years, because I don't think Nintendo's strategy will return them to profitability."

This is rough stuff. But before you panic, sell your Nintendo stock, and detonate your Wii with homemade explosives in the backyard, please keep in mind that this prediction is the not the work of Nostradamus. It is the product of Michael Pachter, who famously said in 2007 that:

"We expect the dominant console at the end of the next cycle to be Sony PlayStation 3, primarily due to our assessment that Sony will win the high definition DVD format war. Ultimately, we see Sony winning the console war with 36% of the market, with Nintendo capturing second place at 34% and Microsoft finishing third at 30%."

Wrong. As of today, Nintendo is winning with 42.9% of the market, Microsoft is in second with 29.3%, and Sony is close behind at 27.8%. But that’s not nearly as bad a prediction as the one made by Pachter in September 2005 which, if followed, could have cost investors dearly:

"I don't think there are four million people in the world who really want to play online games every month. World of Warcraft is such an exception. I frankly think it's the buzz factor, and eventually it will come back to the mean, maybe a million subscribers."

"It may continue to grow in China, but not in Europe or the U.S. We don't need the imaginary outlet to feel a sense of accomplishment here. It just doesn't work in the U.S. It just doesn't make any sense."

As of December 2011, World of Warcraft had 10.2 million subscribers. It is the most-subscribed MMORPG (massively multiplayer online role-playing game) in the world.

So please let’s all stop listening to doomsday warnings from Michael Pachter. There is still very little information about the Wii U after all. No one outside of Nintendo knows the launch line-up, initial price tag, or the complete technical specifications for the console and its tablet controller.

Nintendo has been around for 40 years and will be around for many more. They are innovative; they have some of the best IPs on the planet; and, most importantly, they learn from their mistakes. This is the company that revitalized the video game industry in the late 1980s, and revolutionized it in 2006 with its motion control peripherals. This is the company that created Super Mario, The Legend of Zelda, Metroid, and Donkey Kong. This is the company that should never be underestimated, undervalued, or overlooked.

The Last Story Comes to North America

The Last Story has been available in Japan for over a year, and was just made available in Europe last week. When will North American Wii owners get to experience this celebrated action role-playing game? This summer, apparently.

Thanks in part to Operation Rainfall, a fan campaign organized to persuade Nintendo to localize three Japanese-exclusive RPGs, The Last Story will release in North America sometime this summer. Xenoblade Chronicles, which launched in June 2010 in Japan and was another game targeted by Operation Rainfall, will arrive in North America on April 6. The Last Story was directed and designed by Hironobu Sakaguchi, creator of the Final Fantasy series and CEO of Mistwalker.

2012 was looking to be a rather pathetic year for the Nintendo Wii, but the arrival of two critically-acclaimed Japanese RPGs within months of the other gives Wii owners reason to rejoice. XSEED games will publish The Last Story for American audiences.

From the press release:

"I am very happy to be able to confirm that The Last Story will be released in North America," stated Hironobu Sakaguchi, CEO of MISTWALKER. "XSEED Games has a reputation for bringing high-quality JRPGs to America, and I'm sure they will do a great job with this release too."

Jun Iwasaki, President of XSEED Games, shared Mr. Sakaguchi's sentiments. "I am excited to have the opportunity to work on such a unique and ground-breaking RPG. I'm sure that North American gamers will love this title."

3DS Passes 5 Million Mark in Japan

Move over Game Boy Advance. See you later, DS and Wii. Nintendo now has a new record holder in terms of units sold in its home country in its first year: the 3DS. The Nintendo 3DS took less than one year (its birthday in Japan is February 26) to reach 5 million units sold in Japan. To put this in context: it took the original DS 56 weeks to cross the 5 million threshold; it took the Game Boy Advance 58 weeks. Worldwide, the 3DS has sold approximately 15 million units.

This is great news for Nintendo, which recently announced a huge annual operating loss of 45 billion yen ($575 million), the first ever for the Kyoto-based company. It's also evidence that contradicts the doomsayers who predicted dedicated gaming handhelds couldn't survive among smart phones and tablets.

25 Years of Zelda at Nintendo World

Nintendo recently celebrated 25 years of The Legend of Zelda, and the party is still going at Nintendo World in Rockefeller Center, although not for long. I stumbled upon this exhibit, which can be found on the second floor of Nintendo World, on February 11 and was glad I did. It displays the evolution of Zelda from its humble beginnings on the NES to the most recent and critically-acclaimed installment of the famed franchise, Skyward Sword. If you are unable to visit Nintendo World before the exhibit closes (at the end of February, I believe), please enjoy these photographs instead.

Nintendo World in Rockefeller Center.

A legend is born.

Zelda arrives on the Game Boy.

An entire shelf dedicated to Ocarina of Time.

The Gamecube years.

Phantom Hourglass for the Nintendo DS.

A tribute to Zelda games for Nintendo Wii.

The Master Sword.

_____________________

Photographs by Elizabeth Frazier

Left 4 Dead 2

Editor's Note: for those of you who don't know, Left 4 Dead and its sequel Left 4 Dead 2 are best played with friends. Below is an interview conducted with four friends who survived the zombie apocalypse together...twice!

The gang.

1) How does Left 4 Dead 2 compare to the original Left 4 Dead?

Evan (Coach): It's noticeably better. The original Left 4 Dead was a blast to play with friends, but there was only so much you could do. Left 4 Dead 2 adds a fifth campaign, a new fast-paced multiplayer mode called "Scavenge," and, most importantly, diversity within the campaigns. In Left 4 Dead, the campaigns were set in different locales, but featured largely the same structure: run from safehouse to safehouse, avoiding zombies, and then defend a stronghold until help arrived. In Left 4 Dead 2, however, survivors are asked to fetch items, move forward and backward through levels, and, in one case, run for their lives across a bridge to safety instead of hunkering down and waiting for help.

Kevin (Rochelle): L4D2 feels like the plucky comic relief friend who attends your family dinner every night. With that respect, I feel it’s more of a spin-off than a sequel – still, the additions are fantastic. I certainly enjoy the melee weapons as opposed to the previous elbow or a push in the first game. They did keep the original melee attack in the game for those who have fine-tuned their coordinated zombie kills. As for the additional health items (adrenaline shot and defibrillator) I rarely use them. The only time I would pick up a shot would be if I knew the level called for it. First time players would not have a heads up of where they would need an increase of speed. The characters do a better job identifying items and giving hints where to go in the level, yet Ellis tends to chatter if you stay put. The additional special infected and the new uncommon infected zombies are a great challenge. This is definitely a harder game than the first.

Nick (Nick): Left 4 Dead 2 is an improvement over the original. The overall feel is still the same but the second game is more complex. It’s nice how the different chapters actually feel like a complete story. The first game did not seem to flow as well. It’s also nice to have some objective built in, such as getting gas for the car or running across the bridge. The new scavenge mode is a nice touch and I particularly like the 4 on 4 versus.

Rob (Ellis): Left 4 Dead 2 is impressive in the way that it takes all that is good about the first Left 4 Dead and actually improves upon it. To be frank a four person cooperative game can be a bit unruly, especially if you’re not playing with actual friends but associates you meet on Xbox Live. The original game rewarded cooperation and its focused gameplay (running from safe room to safe room) forced the team to act as a unit, for the most part. The original Left 4 Dead however could be repetitive. Each campaign followed the same outline: four chapters of progress to a new safe room followed by a final chapter of mainly defense until help would arrive. Left 4 Dead 2 tweaks the formula enough that while it’s still familiar, it’s different enough to avoid feeling like the exact same game. There are more weapons, greater enemy types, and the game itself it more challenging. For one example, no longer are you attacked by just one special infected at a given time. There are times when it’s almost a coordinated effort on behalf of the mindless zombies to disrupt the team and prevent survivors from being saved. The final chapters are also all different enough that they’re all worth playing more than once as opposed to the original game where each finale pretty much was the same.


2) What is your favorite new projectile/melee weapon?

Evan: The combat rifle, hands down. I'm a huge fan of accuracy over firepower when it comes to video game weapons, and the combat rifle delivers the best accuracy of any assault rifle in the game. With a laser sight attached, it's even more accurate. It has a slow reload time, but with it I can pick off special infected from a distance.

Kevin: Hard to say. It has changed many times. It was the chainsaw first, and then the katana, and more recently the cricket bat. Something about the sound and the zombies head exploding. I also started the game reaching for my original standby, a Molotov cocktail. Now I go for the Boomer bile. It renders the Tank somewhat blind as normal infected zombies do all the work for you. This gives you a chance to reload, heal, or get to a more opportunistic location.

Nick: My favorite new weapon would have to be the chainsaw. I mean how did it take so long to add a chainsaw to a zombie game? How can you have a zombie apocalypse without a chainsaw? It’s also fun to get yourself surrounded by zombies and pull the 360° chainsaw spin.

Rob: The combat rifle, especially outfitted with laser sight was always my go-to weapon of choice. I prefer a hail of bullets, especially when dealing with a horde, to a shotgun where you’re only popping off one round at a time. It’s not always the best weapon of choice, but the damage it inflicts allows easier cleanup of infected even if you spray your teammates a little. For melee weapon, the katana beats out the rest. I suppose you could be lazy and let the chainsaw do all the work however you get enormous satisfaction out of slicing and dicing your way through a horde. Unleash your inner Bride and go to town on any zombies that are foolish enough to enter your sphere of destruction. One of my proudest moments was slashing three zombies across the chest at the same time and watching them fly backwards. It just looked so cool.

A Spitter. Brrrr, is she ugly!

3) Least favorite new special infected?

Evan: This is easy. It's the Jockey. This special infected runs low along the ground, then hops onto a survivor and "rides" him or her around, often into other hazards. He's also a pain to dislodge from a teammate. He's a small, moving target attached to a friend's head – not an easy thing to shoot off.

Kevin: Spitter. You will be minding your own business when all of a sudden you find yourself surrounded by acid. You try to find a way out of the goo as quickly as possible but it can incapacitate you fast. I will admit that it is difficult to kill a moving Jockey. If you fall behind, a Jockey will pull you farther away from the group. A Jockey is my least favorite when playing in realism mode. In this mode, you cannot see your teammates’ outline through walls and buildings. If you are incapacitated by a special infected and you are away from the group, be prepared to lose a bit of health before you are found.

Nick: My least favorite special infection would be the Spitter. The Spitter is very annoying, the way it corners you and gets that green stuff all over the place. It takes so much life away so quickly. It can be really hard to get out of the spit puddle and there is nothing your teammates can do it to protect you from it. At least when you get jockeyed or charged someone can shoot them off.

Rob: This question could be taken in two different ways: what’s your least favorite infected to come across or what’s your least favorite infected to play as in Versus mode. For both answers, it’s the Spitter. Not only is she ugly (and that’s saying something in a zombie apocalypse) there’s no way to tell exactly where that acid spit is going to fall. It just slowly spreads out once a small patch has landed on the ground. Playing as the Spitter is just as bad for the same reason. Try as you might you can never tell where your spit is going to land. I probably overshoot 75% of the time when I play as a Spitter. It’s awful.

The bridge to nowhere.

4) Favorite part of the game?

Evan: There's a lot to love in Left 4 Dead 2, but the part of the game that stands out in my mind is the fifth and final campaign, "The Parish," specifically its final chapter. It's a mad dash across a crumbling bridge piled high with abandoned cars and hundreds of infected zombies. At the far end is a military helicopter waiting to fly the survivors to safety. It's easily the most fun I've ever had in a Left 4 Dead game.

Kevin: Again, it is hard to say. Every level is made very well. I have found it fun to play the bridge in the finale of “The Parish” campaign. In the level, there is no place to go but forward. Occasionally you would find a truck or spot to recover or reload, but the stampede behind you will not let you stop for long. The “Dark Carnival” campaign looked very well made, complete with bumper cars, tunnel of love, roller coasters, whack-a-mole, shooting alley, strong man game, and clowns. I only wish I could ride a Ferris wheel and snipe out the infected ahead of the level.

Nick: My favorite part of the game is the bridge at the end of “The Parish.” It’s a nice change of pace for a final chapter to have an objective to move towards rather than just have to hunker down and fight. It is also nice that it forces everyone else to move fast, which is my strategy all the time.

Rob: Not to be repetitive, but I absolutely love the bridge run in “The Parish”. You really get the adrenaline feel of being in a zombie apocalypse, shooting and hacking your way through wave after wave of infected. Any kind of mad dash at the finish is always exciting and Left 4 Dead 2 caps off its final campaign with the players truly wanting more. Pop that adrenaline shot and just keep moving.

Back to back!

5) Which friend would you most want in a real zombie apocalypse, and why?

Evan: Have to go with Rob on this one. First, he and I tend to have the most similar playing style in the Left 4 Dead games. We stay in the middle of the group, we favor balanced weapons, and we have a good sense of space, something that is vitally important in these games. Plus, Rob tends to be more altruistic in Left 4 Dead 2, which nicely balances my sometimes selfish behavior. Also, his knowledge of The Walking Dead would no doubt come in handy.

Kevin: In a real zombie apocalypse I would want Nick. He is more likely to have fired an actual firearm. If real life had the rules of L4D2 I would want Rob. He is a good balance of accuracy and he'd come back for me if I were down.

Nick: I would choose myself; everyone else moves too slowly. Who wants to screw around and go slow during the zombie apocalypse? It only serves to let the zombie hoards catch up to you. Also, taking out a zombie’s brain can’t be that different from taking out a tooth.

Rob: Well it’s pretty obvious I’d have to go with Evan. Our strategies are so in sync that cooperation is always guaranteed. In a zombie apocalypse you can’t waste valuable time debating, or worse arguing, on the best route to take. It always seems we both end up going the same route without the need for discussion. Plus, since Evan and I share a brain, if I didn’t pick him, I’d be handicapping myself from the start. However if I were tempted to use a sacrifice as a diversion, I’d go with Nick since he readily offers himself up to the infected.


6) How much is your character like you, if at all?

Evan: I played as Coach, a retired football player with a sweet tooth. See any red flags? Although I don't have his physical strength or predilection for chocolate, I like Coach a lot. He's a natural leader with a no-nonsense attitude. He's a survivor. I'm glad I chose him.

Kevin: I'm nothing like my character. I didn't want to choose the girl in the first place. You guys are jerks! I’m going home!

Nick: Obviously my character is just like me. Besides sharing the same name, we are both well-dressed professional gamblers. He and I share the same biting sarcasm.

Rob: I guess you could say I’m a little like Ellis. While Ellis likes to rattle on about God knows what (you’re not in a safe room if Ellis isn’t spinning a yarn no one cares about), I also like to chat whilst fighting for survival. Apparently he’s also an expert in his field (cars need gas to go!) like I am in mine with my expert-level photocopying.

Will that be cash or charge?

7) Favorite memory of the game?

Evan: My favorite moment of the game came in a four-on-four versus match. It was the first chapter of the first campaign, and Kevin, Nick, Rob, and I were playing the infected. We were hunting a team of players navigating their way through a burning hotel. At one point in the map, the survivors are forced to walk outside on the ledge of the hotel. I was playing as the charger, a bulky special infected whose special attack is to (surprise!) charge at the survivors. I hid in an empty hotel room waiting for one of the survivors to walk along the ledge past an open window. As soon as Coach walked in front of the window, I lowered my shoulder and charged. We both went flying off the ledge and onto the street below. We both died, but as a special infected I was able to respawn. It was a beautiful thing.

Kevin: Probably getting grabbed by a charger right before I entered the safe house. The others tell the story better than I do. Moments like that usually don’t happen again. I’ve since forgiven the charger…with my chainsaw!

Nick: My favorite memory is definitely when we were all running for the safe room and Rob, Evan, and I all made it to the room. Kevin was badly injured and was very slowly hobbling to the room. He kept saying, “I’m good, I’m good, I’m good.” Then out of nowhere a charger grabs Kevin and repeatedly slams him against the ground. All we could do was watch as Kevin met his untimely demise.

Rob: Kevin (Rochelle) getting pounded by the Charger while the rest of us are secure in the safe room is classic Left 4 Dead for our group, however I’m going to go with Nick and I versus Evan in a scavenge match. With three bots on his side, you would thing Nick and I wouldn’t stand a chance even getting close to him, however Left 4 Dead 2 apparently made the bots stupider and I was able to take Evan for a “qualified ride” as a jockey. Not only is the jockey riding someone (else) hilarious, but just directing Evan further and further away from his group while the bots just stood around and shrugged their shoulders was truly a fun moment.


8) What score would you give Left 4 Dead 2?

Evan: Left 4 Dead 2 gets a 9/10. It's a blast to play with three friends, cooperatively or competitively. The campaigns are memorable and varied, the versus modes are frantic and often hilarious, and the addition of melee weapons makes the whole experience insanely fun. It's a bigger, better, and more complete game than its predecessor.

Kevin: I would give the game 8.5/10. The game is a clear improvement to the first one, but I feel like they could have been one game. If they truly were one title, then it would make more sense to gain more fighting experience, abilities weapons, and items, i.e., melee weapons, health items, more special infected. L4D2 almost seems like it could have been an add-on or downloadable content. I guess Valve cares about putting out the titles in a timely fashion, rather than waiting until they have another epic like the Half-Life franchise. I’ve yet to play Portal 2. I hope it hasn’t fallen victim to the same fate as L4D2.

Nick: I would give it an 8.5/10 because while I really enjoyed the game, and it has great replay value, it still doesn't feel like a complete game to me.

Rob: As I stated earlier, Left 4 Dead 2 improves upon the original while still providing a good time with your friends on Xbox Live. For that, I will give Left 4 Dead 2 a 9/10. It’s not a perfect game, but it is one you can keep going back to again and again and experience something new each time.

Steel Diver

A seven-year-old tech demo gets its sea legs.


I wasn’t expecting very much from Steel Diver, which launched with the Nintendo 3DS alongside Pilotwings Resort and Nintendogs + Cats. It certainly seemed like the weakest of the three first-party launch titles: its box art was underwhelming; the reviews were mediocre at best; and then there was the inescapable fact that Steel Diver started out as a tech demo for Nintendo’s previous handheld device, the DS. That’s right: it premiered at the 2004 Electronic Entertainment Expo.

But after playing thought its campaign mode, and sampling its other modes, I can say safely this is a fine game. It won’t win much positive press for Nintendo, nor does it represent the best the 3Ds has to offer, but it’s still an enjoyable, challenging sub simulator.

Steel Diver has a bare-bones, forgettable story about an aggressive rogue nation and an elite fleet of submarines organized to stop it, but this mostly serves as a clothesline from which to hang its submarine missions, which are varied and challenging enough to maintain interest and momentum. There are eight total missions (including a training mission), each of which asks players to navigate one of three submarines through underwater caves, open ocean, and through many hazards, both natural and man-made. At the end of each mission is a Periscope Strike mini-game in which players fire torpedoes at battleships and enemy subs from a first-person point of view. Decals won during these mini-games can be attached to submarines in Mission Mode to boost health, torpedo damage, etc.


Steel Diver is a clever combination of submarine simulation with side-scrolling action. Players control two main sliders – a speed slider and a depth slider – almost simultaneously to steer their subs through each environment and around enemy subs, falling rocks, and depth charges. Two of the subs also provide tilt controls, so that players can angle their vehicles to attack targets above or beneath, or simply glide past angled terrain. Leaks appear on the bottom touch screen, and can be patched up by touching to stylus to the damaged area. Overall, the control interface is very well suited to demonstrating the capabilities of touch screen gaming, which explains why Steel Diver was used as a tech demo so many years ago. Be prepared, however, to move the stylus quickly and thoughtfully back and forth along the touch screen, as you evade danger, fire torpedoes, and maneuver around enemy bosses.


Graphics are where Steel Diver is at its weakest. Submarines and environments are bare and lackluster; they look last generation. Nintendo certainly attempted to make levels look unique from one another, e.g. jungle, volcano, iceberg, but the same blocky, boring textures shine through. Moreover, the 3D effect is wasted on Steel Diver. There is very little to see in 3D that can’t be fully comprehended and appreciated in 2D.


Apart from its main Mission Mode and Periscope Strike, Steel Diver features a turn-based strategy mode called “Steel Commander” that can be played against computer-controlled players or human players via Wi-Fi. Players control a submarine plus several escort ships and supply ships, all of which move across a hexagonal map. Whoever destroys the opposing player’s sub or supply ships wins the game. Steel Commander relies a little too much on luck, but it’s a welcome addition to Steel Diver’s other modes.

Score: 7.0

Top 10 Video Game Couples

In honor of Valentine's Day, please enjoy this list of video game couples throughout the years. Romantic (and platonic) relationships can be found in video games old and new, but they factor more prominently in modern video games, in which storytelling has become more important. The ten relationships below are either overtly romantic, subtly flirtatious, or strictly platonic. Some are limited to a single game; others have developed over decades.

10. Banjo/Kazooie

This bird and bear duo have accomplished quite a bit together. They've defended Spiral Mountain, taken the fight to evil witch Gruntilda, and, most recently, played amateur mechanics in Banjo-Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts. In all games (with the exception of Banjo Pilot) Banjo and Kazooie have worked in tandem to accomplish their goals, solve puzzles, and defeat enemies.

Banjo-Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts (2008)

9. Diddy Kong/Dixie Kong

When Donkey Kong is kidnapped by his nemesis Kaptain K. Rool, it's up to Diddy Kong and his girlfriend Dixie to rescue the lumbering ape. Diddy and Dixie made a great pair in Donkey Kong Country 2. Each had unique moves: Diddy could run faster and jump farther; Dixie could use her ponytail to glide over long distances, very useful in certain stages. Dixie would later win the starring role in Donkey Kong Country 3.

Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong Quest (1995)

8. Solid Snake/Meryl Silverburgh

Metal Gear Solid deserves much of the credit for merging video games and movies. And a significant part of the cinematic story told in MGS is the relationship between super-soldier Solid Snake and rookie recruit (and Snake's commanding officer's niece) Meryl Silverburgh. Meryl is no pushover, though; she twice gets the jump on Snake. Theirs is a real relationship, built on trust, attraction, and shared experience.

Metal Gear Solid (1998)

7. Ico/Yorda

In Ico, the relationship between the titular character and the princess Yorda is the game, and the game is the relationship. Players control Ico as he and Yorda attempt to escape an enormous castle. Ico must help the young princess navigate obstacles, cross gaps, and climb buildings. He can communicate with her also, asking her to follow him or stand still. Particularly touching is Ico's ability to hold hands with Yorda, pulling her away from enemies and across the environment.

Ico (2001)

6. The Prince/Farah

Here's a couple for the ages, literally. The Prince of Persia meets his intellectual and physical match in Farah, the daughter of an Indian king. Initially enemies, The Prince and Farah begin to trust each other as they combine forces to take down a common enemy, a traitorous vizier bent on controlling the flow of time. The relationship between Farah and The Prince evolves, backward and forward in time, across two games.

Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (2003)

5. Ms. Pac-Man/Pac-Man

Those who played through the superior Pac-Man game, Ms. Pac-Man, are familiar with the love story that plays out in three parts by way of "intermissions," animated cut-scenes built into the game. In Part I, Ms. Pac-Man and Pac-Man meet and immediately fall madly in love. In Part II, they chase each other playfully across the game screen. And in Part III, Ms. Pac-Man and Pac-Man anxiously await the arrival of a stork, which hovers briefly overhead, then drops a bundle that opens to reveal a baby Pac.

Ms. Pac-Man (1981)

4. Master Chief/Cortana

Surely one of the less traditional relationships in gaming history, the bond between Master Chief and the artificial intelligence construct Cortana is one of the most engaging story elements in the Halo trilogy (soon to be tetralogy). For most of the trilogy, Cortana resides in a neural implant connected to Master Chief's armor. When she goes missing, Master Chief goes to hell and back to rescue her. Theirs is a symbiotic relationship: Master Chief provides the weapons, armor, and brute strength; Cortana supplies vital information. How the relationship will evolve in Halo 4 is a mystery.

Halo 3 (2007)

3. Cloud Strife/Tifa Lockhart

Final Fantasy is a series replete with partnerships, friendships, and romantic relationships, but perhaps none is as famous as the one between Cloud Strife and Tifa Lockhart. Cloud and Tifa are childhood friends who meet again later in life as part of AVALANCHE, a group of freedom fighters. Together with a ragtag group of heroes, they attempt to save the world from a powerful enemy. The relationship is never easy, interrupted as it is by battles, memory loss, and the occasional love triangle, but it represents a bit of normalcy in a world on the brink of destruction. One can't help root for Cloud and Tifa.

Final Fantasy VII (1997)

2. Mario/Peach

"Thank you Mario! But our princess is in another castle!" So it goes for Mario, who seems destined to rescue (or be rescued by) Princess Toadstool, aka Peach, for the rest of eternity. Mario has made quite a living out of rescuing the princess of the Mushroom Kingdom from Bowser, the villainous turtle bent on capturing her. Mario and Peach represent two classic archetypes, knight in shining armor and damsel in distress, better than any other video game twosome. And it is obvious, in everything from Super Princess Peach to Paper Mario, that each keeps a special place in his or her heart for the other.

Super Mario 64 (1996)

1. Link/Zelda

Here is the most transcendent relationship in the history of video games, an unbreakable bond that stretches across time and space. Link, the young hero clad in green, and Zelda, the once and future princess of Hyrule, have lived and relived a generational conflict between good and evil, always relying on the other to vanquish whatever dark force threatens the land. The most recent Zelda title, Skyward Sword, gives players never-before-seen glimpses into the foundational mythology behind Link and Zelda's supernatural relationship.

The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword (2011)

The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword

Nintendo reinvents its most legendary franchise, but is it the best Zelda yet?


Ocarina of Time is safe for now. While The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword is an outstanding game, and worthy of mention among the best Zelda experiences, it rarely reaches the level of sustained brilliance and innovation that made Ocarina of Time such a masterpiece. That being said, it is probably the freshest, most contemporary, most important Zelda game produced in the past 13 years.

Skyward Sword finally lays out the origin story of Hyrule, of Zelda and Link, and of the dozens of traditions that have defined The Legend of Zelda since its inception 25 years ago. Make no mistake: this is the first Zelda game, from a mythological point of view. The game begins in Skyloft, an island community floating high above the clouds. It was torn from the earth ages ago by a benevolent goddess to protect humanity from dark forces deep underground. Those dark forces are slowly returning to the world, and their agents have set their sights on a young girl from Skyloft, Zelda. When she goes missing, a young knight-in-training, Link, is tasked with travelling to the lands beneath the clouds to rescue her. This is only a sliver of a deep, engaging, and surprising story of heroism and sacrifice that ranks among the best video games have to offer. It’s certainly the best story (and storytelling) in any Zelda game so far. It’s so good, in fact, that it sometimes outshines Skyward Sword’s dungeons, which are traditionally the bedrock of a Zelda game. That is not to say that dungeons and boss fights were an afterthought – they are as complex and brilliant as ever – but Skyward Sword takes its storytelling very seriously, especially when it comes to the relationship between Link and Zelda.



There are some fairly significant departures from the traditional Zelda formula in Skyward Sword. The most noticeable and important change is the lack of any real overworld. It might sound like a trivial change – there are still dungeons, side-quests, and mini-games, after all – but the entire flow of the game is drastically altered by the absence of an open-world environment through which players access the rest of the game. So how does Zelda function without a proper overworld? Quite ingeniously, actually. Players descend from Skyloft, the central hub of Skyward Sword, down to terra firma. In each geographic region – forest, volcano, and desert – there is a large and complex subsection that acts like something of a mini-overworld. Once players conquer the subsection, they enter the region’s dungeon(s). Thus, overworld and dungeon are integrated in never-before-seen ways.


The result is a very large and very long game. Each subsection takes 90-120 minutes to traverse, and then it’s another two hours for each dungeon. With side-quests, mini-games, and general exploration accounted for, Skyward Sword will last an average player between 50 and 60 hours, easily among the longest Zelda experiences. However, because there is no overworld, players must visit and revisit the same territories over and over again. How, then, does Zelda keep from getting stale? Again, quite ingeniously. Series producer Eiji Aonuma and the development team behind Skyward Sword have crafted a Zelda experience quite unlike any other, one that travels forward and backward through time, space, and dimension. Each region of the game world is used, reused, and reused again, but each time reinvented in some small or large way. It could be a version of the region thousands of years in the past, or a version that has endured some cataclysmic event since last visited, or a version that exists on a parallel plane of existence. In this way, Aonuma and company have created a tremendous utility and efficiency of space. It’s really a huge accomplishment, but not quite as impressive as Skyward Sword’s motion control scheme, which is nothing short of revolutionary.


The controls in Skyward Sword are a revelation. If anyone has ever doubted the necessity of motion controls in video games – and thousands upon thousands have – they never should again. Skyward Sword is the experience promised five years ago when Nintendo released the Wii with its unorthodox motion control remotes. It has the best controls of any Wii game. It has the best controls of any Zelda game. It has the best motion controls of any game, ever.

Through the Wii MotionPlus accessory, which is either attached to the base of older Wii remotes or built into newer models, Skyward Sword features full 1:1 motion control. This means that there is a direct and immediate correlation between a player’s movement while holding the remote and the action onscreen. Furthermore, because of the gyroscopic sensors built into the MotionPlus, players can perform more sophisticated and nuanced maneuvers, either with Link’s sword or with other accessories. Sword controls, however, are the main attraction in Skyward Sword. Link is capable of thrusting his sword forward or swinging it vertically, horizontally, and diagonally. There is also complete freedom of direction: Link can slash diagonally from top right to bottom left, or bottom right to top left; he can lower his sword and swing upward, or raise his sword and swing downward; he can pierce a pumpkin with a forward thrust, raise it above his head, and throw it away from him with a flick of the wrist. And all of this is done without buttons. I can say safely that it will be extraordinarily difficult to go back to button presses after using the Wii MotionPlus in Skyward Sword; it is a joy to use, and makes an already immersive experience that much more absorbing. What is even more remarkable, though, is that these superior motion controls are in no way a gimmick; they must be mastered to finish the game. Boss fights, puzzles, and common enemy encounters rely on the player’s mastery of motion controls.


Skyward Sword is the first Zelda game to feature an orchestral soundtrack (instead of midi and all-sampled instrument tracks), and it sounds wonderful. The music in Skyward Sword is among the best of the series, and that is heavy praise. There is just something more alive, more vibrant, and more soulful about orchestral music than even the most perfectly-crafted synthesized electronic music. Standout tracks include the bombastic “Goddess’ Theme,” the melancholic “Fi’s Theme,” and the devastatingly pretty “Romance Theme.” Try to listen to the latter and not smile. I dare you.

The graphics in Skyward Sword are interesting indeed, and most closely resemble living, breathing impressionist art. There is a noticeable lack of detail in dungeon, character, and level models; rather the graphics provide an overall visual effect. Players can tell what is onscreen, but cannot make out many details. In the distance, landmarks appear as blurry, interrupted brush strokes. The result is a graphical style, imprinted on everything from Link to the foliage through which he walks, that is heavy on emotion and feeling but light on intricate design. Overall, the graphics represent a bold and original choice by the development team behind Skyward Sword, but ultimately I think it was a poor decision. The problem is not the graphics per se, but the synthesis of graphics and level design. Many subsections and dungeons fall flat because of incongruities created by the combination of imprecise and unfocused graphics with intricate puzzles and complicated swordplay. Skyward Sword would have done better to take a completely minimalist route, like Ico or Shadow of the Colossus, or embrace fully the complexity of its gameplay.


And in the end, that is what keeps Skyward Sword from being the best Zelda game: it wants to eat its cake and have it too. Playing it, one gets the sense that the development team was unsure which Zelda traditions to uphold and which to discard, which fan favorites to abandon and which to resurrect, which audience to honor and which to disavow. As a result, it stands, somewhat uncomfortably, in a no-man’s land, one foot rooted firmly in the past, one stepping boldly into an unknown future.

Score: 9.0

Nintendo 3DS on Sale at GameStop

Through February 12, GameStop will be selling Nintendo 3DS systems for $149.99 – a $20 price drop. The sale includes the new Pearl Pink version of the 3Ds, which launches on the 10th.

Clearly Nintendo, which by most accounts initiated the sale, is looking to sell more systems before February 22, when Sony's newest handheld device, the Playstation Vita, launches in North America (Vita sales have so far lagged behind 3DS sales in Japan). Some have prognosticated that the sale is part of a permanent price drop, but there have been no official statements to support that theory. In any event, the 3DS at $149.99 is $100 cheaper than the base model PS Vita Wi-Fi, which retails at $249.99.

The Art of Video Games

Video games are coming to the Smithsonian.

In a major coup for those of us who believe video games qualify as art, the Smithsonian American Art Museum will be hosting a six-month exhibition about the history, evolution, and art of video games right here in Washington, DC.

The display will account for 40 years of video gaming history, with a special focus on artistic evolution across several generations, systems, and genres. Games on display will be ordered chronologically. They include classics like Donkey Kong, The Legend of Zelda, Earthworm Jim, Final Fantasy VII, and Portal. In total, the exhibit will feature 80 games, all of which were chosen by online voting last year. A list of winners can be found here.


Most of the games will be presented through still images and video footage, but luckily for the audience, five games will be available to play in the museum. The playable games are: Pac-Man, Super Mario Bros., The Secret of Monkey Island, Myst, and Flower. Each title represents a particular era of video games, and each highlights "innovative techniques that set the standard for many subsequent games."

But the exhibit is only part of this celebration of video games. From March 16-18, the museum will sponsor a three-day festival to kick off the exhibition. It's called GameFest, and it will feature talks by video game pioneers, panel discussions with designers and artists, movie screenings, etc.

"The Art of Video Games" will show at the Smithsonian from March 16-September 30, 2012. Don't fret, though, if you're not within driving distance of Washington, DC. After September the exhibit goes on the road. Future venues include:

Boca Raton Museum of Art (October 24, 2012–January 20, 2013)
EMP Museum in Seattle (February 16, 2013–May 13, 2013)
Hudson River Museum in Yonkers, NY (February 15, 2014–May 18, 2014)
Toledo Museum of Art in Toledo, Ohio (June 19, 2014–September 28, 2014)
Flint Institute of Arts in Flint, Michigan (October 25, 2014–January 18, 2015)
Memphis Brooks Museum of Art in Memphis, Tennessee (June 6, 2015–September 13, 2015)

Point / Counterpoint: Gears of War 2

Sera needs saving...again.

"Point"
by Lou G.

A note before I get started: this review is part of a point/counterpoint discussion. Overall Gears of War 2 is a good game, however my objective with this article is to really pick it apart and point out some of its glaring flaws which I find unforgivable given the enormous budget.

If you look at our ratings guide it uses Gears of War as an example of an “Outstanding” game. That is the opinion of one DBTC reviewer, though he’s certainly not alone. After all, a game doesn’t become a Platinum Hit through mediocrity. I personally had a very different experience with the game as well as its first sequel. In fact, I was underwhelmed by the first GoW to the point where I would not have played GoW 2 if not to experience the much-hyped multiplayer modes that came so highly recommended. In this review I will strive to be as objective as possible; however, playing a game is a subjective experience. If the ride isn’t completely fun it’s hard to tell people it’s worth waiting in line.



Gears of War 2 is a lot like a roller coaster in that it has some truly thrilling moments strung together by dips, twists, and boring uphill climbs. It’s also similar in the sense that you’re on rails the whole time. I’ve never played a shooter that discouraged freedom of choice with such totalitarian authority with the exception of Sin and Punishment or Rez, if you can truly call those shooters (being on rails is kinda the point in those games so it’s actually quite forgivable). I found it insulting when the game tried to create the illusion of freedom by giving me a choice to press LT to go this way and experience a scripted event, or press RT to go that way and experience the same scripted event from a different angle. Whichever way you go, the odds are severely in favor of you dying a ridiculous, unavoidable death if you’re playing anything other than Normal difficulty; so you’ll probably get to experience both anyway. These are choices that should be and easily could be more organic. I suspect Epic Games programmed the game to present players with these “choices” for the same reason a 5-year old insists you look at his Play-Doh hamburger. He really tried to create something and wants you to be proud of it, even though you know it’s just an illusion of the real thing. In reality, the game actually holds you back from trying to improvise your way through a situation.

I’ll give you an example: during Act 2 Fenix and his Delta Squad are maneuvering through underground tunnels trying to reach the survivors of a downed aircraft. These tunnels have several twists and turns, and your squad travels down several hills. This means at some point you’re at the tops of those same hills. The game also provides you with a sniper rifle occasionally. Forgive me if I’m being too assumptive but you’re probably a gamer if you’re reading this, which means the gears (see what I did there?) in your head are already turning. Sniper Rifle + Vantage Point = ? Well, if you ask Epic Games, it equals your character exploding into several meatchunks if that vantage point isn’t a set-piece for this part of the story. I would let my squad head down the hill to engage the enemy while I stayed on higher ground to try to pick off Locust unseen. On several occasions my character would simply explode for no reason. At first I thought maybe I had triggered a proximity mine, or an enemy outside my field of view had tagged me with a rocket or grenade, so I investigated those possibilities and couldn’t find evidence of either explanation. When I would finally give up this tactic and head down to where my squad was, 9 times out of 10 a scripted event would be triggered, which explains why my sniper position was not allowed. If you don’t see a problem with this, let me put it in clearer terms. Essentially I colored outside the lines, so they took away my crayons. Gears is not an open-world game...I get that. It’s a cinematic experience first and foremost. But it IS a game. A game should let you be creative as long as you play by the rules, especially if they’re going to go to great lengths to add more guns and other fun tools for you to use. It’s like they threw in more toys but made the sandbox smaller.


Speaking of toys, the assortment of weapons in the game is honestly quite impressive. I can’t think of one example of a super-powered weapon with zero disadvantages, nor can I think of a completely useless weapon that you regret picking up every time. From the Snub Pistol to the Scorcher, every item has its own set of strengths and weaknesses that balance it out. It’s a shame that the player is given so much freedom to customize their weapon set to fit their play-style, yet restricted in their ability to truly control the tactical situation. While I’m on this topic I want to give a shout-out to the Lancer. A machine gun with a chainsaw attached to it is the type of thing that can only exist in a video game, and it is every bit as fun as it sounds on paper. I have to give respect to Epic for showing admirable restraint with the design choice. The Lancer is easily the most fun, versatile weapon in this and I daresay any shooter to date, yet it’s not like you can just go around chainsawing everything in your path like a maniac. Melee kills require skilled button timing to pull off, which increases the fun without taking away the challenge.

Gameplay aside, the biggest factor that makes Gears of War 2 falter is its story. Some feel it is too cinematic, with big distracting cut-scenes taking away from the action all too frequently. I don’t think the frequency or even the length of any of these scenes is the problem; rather it’s the content. Throughout the entire campaign I had the sense that I was saving the world...or defending it maybe. I knew I was on the side of the good guys...probably. Humans are living on a planet we colonized in the future and the indigenous species has guns and giant monsters and decides we need to get out. The point isn’t that these motivations aren’t made crystal clear. I’m actually fully aware that there is an expanded universe to Gears of War including books, graphic novels, and all of the minutiae that flesh out the history of everything from the COG to the Locust to the planet Sera. It’s expansive, and there wouldn’t be so much material if people weren’t interested. I’m just saying I don’t get it. At no point in the span of 2 games did I feel “drawn in” to the point where I wanted to explore this universe further. The roid-raging tatted up supermarines you play as are mostly one-dimensional tough-guy caricatures. The only moment of true humanity I found was the conclusion of Dom’s side-story with his wife. Marcus Fenix is a stoic, gruff, anti-authority badass, and that’s pretty much it. There is a lot of potential, given some of the lore hinted at with Marcus’s father and his history with the COG (he begins the first game in a jail cell), but the writers didn’t put enough in the game that I was dying to investigate. I just made my way through until I was engaged in a firefight, killing all the bad guys so I could move on to the next firefight.


The game shines best where the story isn’t even a factor. I’m talking about multiplayer. The online matches are seamless and incredibly fun, offering a variety of options for customization. Horde mode, where you and up to 4 friends face down wave after wave of increasingly difficult Locust forces, is an absolute blast. I can’t really say much more about the online modes, except that if I were to review them separately, I would give the game a 9.5/10.

In conclusion, Gears of War 2 is a game where the sum of its parts ends up greater than the whole. There are some really great elements that give it potential, but it doesn’t all blend together for a spectacular outcome that lives up to the hype. The graphics are beautiful, but no amount of polish can make me say “This is why I’m having fun”. The campaign mode is a 6/10 at best; however it is balanced out by a stellar multiplayer which is arguably the larger part of the game. Overall, I give Gears of War 2 a 7.5/10.

Score: 7.5

"Counterpoint"
by Evan

Now that Gears of War 3 has come and gone, a review of its predecessor Gears of War 2 (GOW2) might seem irrelevant. But the purpose of this blog is to review new and older games, especially older games that stand out among their contemporaries. Although not quite as good as the first Gears of War, GOW2 stands as an extraordinary third-person shooter, a thrilling experience from beginning to end, and one of the best games available on the Xbox 360.

GOW2 continues the epic story of survival and sacrifice introduced in 2006’s Gears of War. The human population of Sera fights a never-ending battle against the Locust, a race of subterranean monsters who have declared war on humanity. The Locust horde suffered a devastating defeat at the end of Gears of War, but has regrouped and is now threatening the last human stronghold, Jacinto. The Coalition of Ordered Governments (COG) decides it has no choice but to take the fight to the Locust, deep underground.


Epic Games pledged to make GOW2 a more expansive and cinematic game, a “blockbuster experience.” Mission accomplished. Peppered with cut-scenes and packed with carefully staged action set-pieces, GOW2 plays very much like a movie. Those looking for more action and less story, however, will be slightly turned off by GOW2’s emphasis on cut-scenes and voice acting.

When GOW2 moves away from Hollywood aspirations and embraces what made the original so great – frantic, bloody action with a brilliant cover system – it truly shines. The action in GOW2 is more varied and larger in scale than its predecessor; traditional run and gun stages are mixed with vehicle stages and episodes in which players can mount Locust creatures. There’s also an unforgettable level that unfolds completely within the body of a massive worm.

In terms of graphics, GOW2 looks absolutely gorgeous. Landscapes, buildings, and characters are all highly-detailed and well-defined. Each region of the game has its own unique appearance and atmosphere, and is filled – sometimes overflowing – with dozens of enemies, items, and whizzing bullets. When the action gets particularly intense, the frame rate will lower noticeably, buts it’s a small price to pay for such spectacular graphics. Textures are sometimes slow to load at the beginning of stages, but again it’s not a deal breaker.


In addition to its stellar single-player experience, GOW2 offers several multiplayer modes along with split-screen and online cooperative play. GOW2 features most of the multiplayer modes from the original Gears of War, along with three new modes: Guardian, Wingman, and Submission. The most pleasant surprise in GOW2, however, is “Horde mode,” an addictive and highly original co-op mode that allows up to five players to fight off wave after wave of Locust enemies. Note: multiplayer action in GOW2 is sometimes interrupted by bugs, glitches, and connectivity problems.

Overall, GOW2 is a must-play for action fans. Featuring a substantial and varied campaign, excellent graphics and sound, and addictive online multiplayer modes, GOW2 is a complete package. It is probably the second-best third-person shooter ever made, after the original Gears of War.

Score: 9.0