February 2011

SBG Giveaway: Magicka

February 9, 2011

Time for another Snackbar Games giveaway! This time we’ve snagged some codes for Magicka (PC-Steam), and we’re sharing them with you! Here’s how you enter: 

Comment on this post with an answer to this question:  “What spell, existing or imagined, would you most want to use in a game and why?” Three commenters will win a copy of Magicka!

That’s not all, though. We’re also giving away one code each on our Twitter account and Facebook page. To enter on Twitter, follow @SnackbarGames and retweet this tweet. To enter on Facebook, become a fan of our page and comment on this post telling us about your favorite co-op gaming experience.

The contest closes Monday, February 14 at noon Eastern, and we’ll decide the winners!

The Committee is in session. We’re taking on various issues in gaming, and our word is final. This week, we look at the impact of achievements on the industry.


In support

Mike Clark: Achievements are visual indicators of accomplishment and success. They chronicle certain feats we undertake as we go through the games they exist in. No matter the game, having these as a more substantial indication that we accomplished something helps the games they’re in.

Why? It’s nice to look over your achievements and see what you managed to get during gameplay. Those that are notoroiusly hard to get become badges of pride, and the whole of them serve to be a form of extrinsic motivation to give a gamer a little push when we start to become tired of the game. Just like getting trophies or ribbons in contests, achievements provide extra goals, additional motivation and a source of pride once you’ve obtained them.

In opposition

Gerry Pagan: A game should be able to shine and motivate people to do things on their own, with achievements serving as a drive to explore every nook, cranny and possibility of the game. As an example: Red Dead Redemption has achievements for participating in events that are in no way required to beat the game, but by doing so I might find some alternate source of aid to help me or find an alternate playstyle that suits my liking. The achievements for a huge majority of games simply involve things like “clear X event that you were required to do anyway”. As long as achievements like those exist, it’s a sign that they aren’t always there to make the game better.  

 

In support

Mike Clark: I’m a gamer who enjoys getting achievements. Visual progress, a reflection of my accomplishments, and motivation to do little things I would have passed on, achievements do all of this. Unfortunately, they can use these attributes so well that they become a selling point for games that people would otherwise pass on. Whether or not a game is horrible is one thing, but being able to pad that Gamerscore or Trophy List can sway some to throw their money at games that most would sneer at purchasing.

Achievements pull some of the focus away from a game’s worth. Utterly terrible games, like Operation Darkness, or movie tie-ins will get purchases that, had they not had achievements, would not have occured. Not just games, but DLC as well: throw some superfluous DLC at a game and tie a couple hundred points or a few trophies into it and you’re guaranteed to get sales. With more money thrown at nonsense and trash, this encourages more of the same to be made since people know it will sell, and the industry suffers as a result.

In opposition

Andrew Passafiume: While I’m personally sick of achievements and trophies in games, I don’t see how they could possibly hurt the industry. They allow developers to give players more incentive to play (and replay) games and sections of games. Not everyone is a completionist, so the advent of achievements really helped inspire many games, young or old, to strive to play games more and do more than they might normally otherwise ignore.

Other than that, if you don’t like them? Just ignore them. They don’t hinder the actual gameplay experience at all. While I don’t think they have necessarily helped the industry, they definitely haven’t hurt it either.

 

In support

Justin Last: In-game rewards are always better than numbers that don’t mean anything. Don’t misunderstand me – I love the “ding” that accompanies a new achievement unlocking in a 360 game or a new trophy unlocking in a PS3 game. What I like even more, though, is when a robust in-game system rewards me with multiplayer skins, cheats, or other bonuses for accomplishing things in-game.

I like that when I unlock achievements in Mass Effect that it affects how I build characters for subsequent playthroughs. If I play as an engineer and unlock the “AI Hacking Specialist” achievement I can take the “Reverse Engineering” talent on future characters. “Pistol Expert” nets me increased duration for the “Marksman” skill. There are a few that only impart gamerscore, but most Mass Effect achievements reward you for obtaining them. Burnout Paradise (PS3) offers trophies, in-game achievements, and rewards for completing some of those in-game achievements. I got a toy version of the DeLorean for smashing all of the crash gates on Big Surf Island. Sure, I already had a full-sized DeLorean and a bunch of other toy cars to drive, but there was something waiting for me at the end other than a pop-up saying “Congrats! You did it!” And that drove me to find them all. Achievements and trophies have changed the way we play games, but tying in-game rewards to those criteria makes the change worthwhile. I want infinite foam in Shadow Complex for reaching a high level. I want the ability to create more custom classes in Black Ops. I want more than a “ding” with an arbitrary number next to it. And games that give me that keep me playing for longer.

In opposition

Shawn Vermette: Self-contained achievement systems are all well and good, but give me a system-wide achievement system any day. Seeing an overall score go up with each game I play is satisfying in a way that individual achievement scores per game just won’t ever be. Additionally, there’s no reason that a system-wide achievement system can’t have in-game rewards as well, which is the only reason to prefer the self-contained system. Right now on XBL and PSN, in-game rewards tied to the system-wide achievements is optional, but has happened in a number of high-profile games, such as AC2 and ME. Due to the overarching and all-inclusive abilities of the system-wide achievement system, it is obviously the preferred choice between the two achievement models.

 

We’ve weighed in. What do you think? Let us know in the comments.

Jam City Rollergirls

February 8, 2011

Roller derby is sport where two teams of roller-skating athletes attempt to score points by having the point-gaining player, the jammer, pass members of the opposite team while the three defending teammates attempt to block the enemy jammer. A match lasts for ten minutes and is divided into two-minute segments called jams. When a jam begins, the first jammer to pass the six defenders becomes the lead jammer and can end the jam early if they wish. This all is the core of Jam City Rollergirls, the first roller derby video game.

The sport converts into a game well, and feels like a racing game at times. Unlike the actual sport, the player has access to a selection of powerups not unlike those found in a Mario Kart game. A single boost, a trio of boosts, the invincibility-granting fireball, the homing water balloon and the ultimate Pink Reaper are all part of the player’s arsenal.

The main mode of the game is a single-player career mode where one of five real roller derby teams is chosen by the player, who then creates a character to play as the jammer in all matches. Winning matches and performing tricks works up money to be spent in the game’s store. All the items in the store are appearance-changing, and many adjust the player character’s stats.

Beyond that, the game falls flat. It does have quick match and two-player modes, but you will essentially be doing nothing but playing with the same five teams on the same five stages over and over. The matches themselves feel a bit too long at ten minutes and having the ability to either adjust the time or just have them shorter would have been a reprieve. As it stands, this does nothing but pad the length of the modes, especially the career mode wherein once you finish 11 matches and become the champion, the game will infinitely loop seasons under the guise of having you “defend yourself as champion.”

And that’s not the worst of it. The visual presentation of Jam City Rollergirls looks like something out of a late PS1 or early PS2 game. The character models are fluid in their movements, but they and the stages just seem to fall flat and feel devoid of emotion. The audio presentation in its entirety is nothing more than one short song put on repeat throughout the entire game. Menus, matches, everywhere you will hear this short series of guitar riffs and shouts ad nauseum. 

While it creates a foundation for future potential roller derby games, Jam City Rollergirls falls far from the $10 asking price. Within two hours, you will accomplish everything the game has to offer and more.

Pros: Controls are user-friendly, gameplay is easy to pick up

Cons: Game is very short, visuals are bland, audio just hurts

Ubisoft has just revealed that a third title in their Call of Juarez series will be releasing this summer on PC and “next-generation consoles.” Titled Call of Juarez: The Cartel, it will leave behind the series’ trademark Old West setting for a more modern environment. READ MORE

Magic: The Gathering has achieved what many games haven’t: it made gamers hooked, and it made them happy that they were. The game is wonderful at instilling a “just-one-more-pack” mentality that keeps the money rolling in for the company for over fifteen years now. It’s not a surprise that makers of free-to-play MMOs would want some of that Magic magic, and with Magic: Tactics, Sony Online Entertainment went for an official endorsement.

The result is a game that feels like a cross between Magic, Dungeons & Dragons and Heroes of Might and Magic. For some, that sentence is probably enough for them to rush off and start playing, but you seem to have stuck around, so we’ll continue.

Players start a battle in a small square grid with only their “planeswalker” avatar and a hand of spells. Each turn, an increasingly larger amount of mana is generated (randomly based on the colors in the spellbook, since there are no lands), and you use this to cast spells and summon creatures around you. Everything follows line-of-sight rules, so the early game is about posturing and finding tactical positions behind walls and such, while the late game sees battles between imposing monsters on both sides. The match is over when the planeswalker is killed.

As a framework, it works well. The team promises multiplayer battles and various twists on the formula as time goes on, but the current format is fairly basic. As for the interface itself, it could use some refining. The creatures look nice and convey the correct atmosphere, but the camera is wonky and just doesn’t have an ideal angle for viewing the action. You’ll have to keep moving it around as the battle progresses to keep seeing what’s happening. It seems like they could have implemented a standardized wide angle view to see the full board, as that would have helped tremendously. 

The spells and creatures themselves, though not identical to their card counterparts, feel the way they should. The shift to a tactical format means that effects like first strike and trample work differently, and randomized elements add an element of uncertainty that was removed without the possibility of instants. The team told us they wanted “Serra Angel to feel like Serra Angel” and “Lightning Bolt to feel like Lightning Bolt.” On that front, they accomplished their mission.

In true Magic style, there are constructed tournaments and drafts, as well as free play, but the game also includes single-player campaigns. The first chapter is free, and contains five missions. Each subsequent chapter is $5. Playing these unlocks spells for you to use, as well as small amounts of gold you can save up for tournament entry fees. There’s also a daily mission, and completing it earns two gold.

The tournament structure right now is what’s most troubling about Magic: Tactics. While the gameplay works fine, the interface for tournaments glitches up, adds unnecessary delays between rounds without notification, sometimes crashes completely and even fails to deliver rewards for winning or cards bought for drafts. We’re hoping these issues get ironed out soon.

No matter the mode you play, you earn experience that can be used to level up your character. These are small increases, like giving your creatures a 4% chance of having an extra ability when summoned or randomly generating an extra mana occasionally, so it’s not broken, but it does give some personalization to a game that starts everyone out with one of the same three spellbooks.

With a free-to-play title, there are really two experiences to evaluate: the free one and one you get with a reasonable financial investment. For free, you get a five-mission story and a somewhat repetitive cycle of daily quests, entry into a tournament every ten days or so and a significant disadvantage. (You could use gold to buy cards too, but two a day doesn’t buy much.)

Let’s say you invest $40, though. With that, you’d have the full 25-mission campaign with increasing difficulty and five packs to get competitive spells and use in a draft. At that point, it’s very comparable to retail titles, with a robust online mode and a single-player experience that lasts about eight to ten hours.

We think that Magic: Tactics is a good game with a $40 investment, and the free option serves as a robust demo. Just be aware that, with future expansions and additions, things can be both significantly better and significantly more expensive.