Aziz Talks Games: Injustice: Gods Among Us

When I found out NetherRealm, the makers of MK9 were making a DC comics fighter I was excited and it felt like an age until it came out. I’m going to preface this by saying I enjoy fighting games but I’m not particularly good at them, I’m better than the computer but frequently get destroyed on Xbox Live so take anything I say about the difficulty with a pinch of salt. In this review I’m going to try to leave my fan boy bias out of it. No promises but I’ll try. I still love this game, so some of the negatives might seem like nit-picking. Not that there isn't any flaws to talk about. So let us get the negatives out of the way first before I rant about how much I love the game:

The main flaw that stands out the story mode; it was far too short when I played Mortal Kombat 9 the story lasted around 9 hours and spanned over a few days. Injustice lasted a mere 1 hour and 45 minutes (would have probably been longer if I didn't play half of it on easy, but I’ll get to that later) it seemed to be over really quickly. It lasted only one night. When I played MK9 I thought we were seeing the future of fighting games. It had a strong and good length story that gave the game another dimension. Fighting games, generally, are just a multiplayer experience with the single play experience being a ladder. So I am pleased there was an enjoyable and engaging story to follow just slightly disappointed it was so short. On a related point; I was disappointed at the lack of variation. You only play as a handful of the characters. Also, the mini games existed as more of a distraction with no major incentive for doing them, they only lasted a minute or so and some of them still managed to be boring.

The only other thing that got adds a mark against the game is the lack of variety. There is only one super move per character which can get a bit boring. Some are still cool, like flash running round the world and superman’s, some get a bit dull after a while. Although it pains me to say Batman’s is the main super move that bores me the most it is pretty cool the first few times but it really isn't that visually stimulating. There should have been 2 or 3 per character. They are the only main negative I can think of, although I will go through my nit-picks later.

So on to the positives. The controls are pretty much lifted from MK9; you've got the light heavy and medium attacks as well as the throw, which is unique to each character. One of the changes I didn't really like was the back button being block. It took a while getting used to and I prefer there to be a button but that is just personal preference. The game play is slightly different with strong, fast and gadget characters playing differently, which adds variety and takes you longer to master different characters. The combat is easy to get the hang of and difficult to master which is ideal for a fighting game and adds an extra something to the games shelf life.

The roster is a good size with a large variation, each character feeling different. You won't be able automatically play as Superman if you've just played as Batman. The interactive arenas and arena transitions are the best I have seen in a fighting game allowing you to be creative with your fighting. For a fighting game there is some variety with the S.T.A.R labs and the battles. They add to the single player experience and are definitely a lot of fun but to be honest I can’t really find much to say to about them. They add to the experience and are fun but they are not brilliant.

Finally, the multiplayer is awesome. As well as 1v1 there is King of the Hill and Survivor (same as KOTH but the king’s health decreases each match) mode; with the latter 2 you can watch the fighting take place when it is not your turn which means you aren't just waiting around and removes some of the boredom King of the Hill can have while you’re waiting around. While playing MK9 online I found there was some lag which I haven’t experienced at all; even when playing a friend in the Middle East.

On to my nerdy nit-picks. They won’t affect my score, there is only a couple and nobody else probably cares but I noticed them. First; the Joker is not voiced by Mark Hamill. I knew Arkham City was going to the last time he voiced the Joker but I still noticed the difference and it just didn't sound right to me. Next, the default story mode setting was easy. I went through the game thinking “this game is too easy” went to change the difficulty and realised it was on easy. There is nothing wrong with this I just expect the default to be normal. And probably the nit-pickiest and a bit of a SPOILER so skip to the next paragraph if you don’t want to know: Harley Quinn arrests the Joker. This is personal preference but I just didn't like it. She’s fallen out with him before but she always goes back. The last one is the lack of dialogue in the S.T.A.R labs; it just seems lazy that it is text instead of audio.

My final rating is a 4/5 with the story length stopping it being a 4.5 or a full score. It is so much fun to play as your favourite comic book hero or villain, the game play is awesome and I still play online even if I get my arse handed to me most of the time. If you haven’t bought this game yet buy it now. There is no question that it is worth the money and I’d recommend the season pass as well. Lobo has already been released with Batgirl soon to follow.  So go buy this game and if your rubbish at it tweet me your gamer-tag and I will play you because I need a win.

Aziz Talks Films: Nightwing

           

           Hey people, with “Injustice: Gods Among Us” coming out next week I thought it would be a good excuse to talk about Batman again. Specifically, a Nightwing spin off to the Christopher Nolan Dark Knight trilogy. This is purely hypothetical as indicators are there isn't going to be a spin off, even though it was hinted at the end of Dark Knight Rises. I know that Nolan has said he has finished with the Batman and wanted to focus on “Man of Steel” but there are definitely different directors that can take over.  Joss Whedon has directed comic book movies before, but maybe not anything as dark as Batman (I think we learnt from Batman and Robin that dark is better than the cartoony style). J.J Abrams could also do a good job.

 If we Christopher Nolan did not want to do it, I’d like to see Tim Burton direct if it was to happen (probably a fantasy but there is no suggestion of a film so all of this is hypothetical). I think Burton did an amazing job and the films had strong characters, especially in the 1989 film. He has grown as a director since then; therefore I think he could do even better films now. I’m going to discuss why I think there should be a Nightwing spin off.

First, the Nolan films left it open to a Nightwing spin off, so it wouldn't be too contrived for it to exist in the same universe and will flow well from the original trilogy. Even though remakes, spin offs and expansions are often not successful (Star Wars prequels) and a Batman remake has been suggested I think it is unlikely to compare to Batman Begins and especially the Dark Knight. A spin off won’t be compared directly to them and has more chance of success.

Also, the Dark Knight trilogy redefined the villains and did an amazing job with them. Everybody agrees that Heath Ledger did an amazing as the Joker and they managed to salvage Bane’s image after Batman and Robin. Therefore I’d like to see more villains given the same treatment. A villain that I adore is Harley Quinn and I’m always disappointed when a new film is announced and she is not in it. I think that, before his sad death, the Joker was going to be in the second act of The Dark Knight Rises instead of the Scarecrow; with his anarchy being a contrast to Bane’s careful planning, it could explain why the third act seemed so rushed, but this is just speculation. If this had happened the sequence into Harley Quinn would be smoother but it could still be done well without Heath Ledger, although I would disagree with recasting the Joker as I don’t think anybody could do as good a job as Ledger. Instead of teaming up with the Joker she should team up with the Riddler. Harley Quinn’s vulnerable mental state would allow the Riddler to manipulate her and there would be a contrast between their personalities which will be interesting.

If Harley Quinn was to be used I think Kristen Bell would be ideal to portray her. I think she has the right look, with the right make up and outfit, and would really immerse herself in the role. She has stated in an interview that Harley Quinn was the one part she would take without reading the script, that affection for the character will mean a committed and strong performance. There has been some ideas floating around the internet for whom to play the Riddler, Jim Parsons and Jude Law are two of the more popular; both of these are strong choices; however the one that stands out for me is Neil Patrick Harris, he looks the part and I don’t think anybody can deny the amount of talent he has. He also voiced Nightwing in “Batman: Under the Red Hood”, so he is familiar with the franchise. I’d also like Cillian Murphy to reprise his role as scarecrow. He’s the only villain to appear in all three of the films and did an amazing job being funny, and the gas allowing him to be scary as well. I'm not ashamed to say I have a massive man crush on Murphy. He's hugely underrated in my opinion.

So. Why Nightwing? Why not Robin or a Batman reboot? Nightwing is a lesser known character so it could be argued that it doesn't make sense, however, the Batman franchise is more popular than it has ever been, so now would be the perfect opportunity to bring Nightwing into the mainstream, and I've never been a huge fan of Robin (let me explain) mainly because of his outfit, it’s the exact opposite of Batman looking like just a target. He seemed to be created just to get captured and for Batman to save. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the Nolan and Burton series are considered so much better than the Schumacher films.

This is all fantasy and what I would like to happen but unfortunately probably won’t. I can always dream. Let me know what you think and if you agree or not. 

Aziz Talks Games: Tomb Raider

                

                The new Tomb Raider is a complete reboot of the series taking us back to Lara Croft’s first adventure and is essentially an origin story. Recently the Tomb Raider games have been under par and disappointing. However, this game brings back the franchise back to its best.

The art style for the game is beautiful as are the characters, especially on the PC. On the PC they have a new system called “Tressfx” which makes her hair more realistic. It’s a small thing but it is definitely appreciated. Unfortunately I played it on the Xbox 360, the graphics were still amazing, and they show it off just the right amount for you to appreciate it but not so much you feel like it is shoved down your throat.

The whole game has a cinematic quality. At time this can be amazing, but it does result in slightly too many quick time events, which I’m not a huge fan off. If used in moderation they can definitely add to a game, like in Star Wars: Force Unleashed, where you use quick time events to finish off a boss. In Tomb Raider, there is a major boss (I’m not going to say who or when for spoiler reasons) which is an entire quick time event, which frustrated me as I felt it was too easy so late in the game. It did not ruin the game though I still really enjoyed playing it and found myself not able to put it down and playing it for 4 or 5 hours straight.

The character designs are amazing, and I really cared about the majority of them, especially Lara I really cared about her and wanted her to get out O.K. The voice acting, by Camilla Luddington, was brilliant and made me really feel for Lara. Although, some of them seemed to be created to be killed, and to be honest I can’t remember some of their names. Another negative is the villain amongst you. There is a good chance you’ll be able to point him out straight away.

The story is good and kept me interested and thinking “I’ll play a bit longer to see what happens next” which is the sign of a good story. Lara is on a ship called the “Endurance” searching for an island, however they crash land on the island due to a freak storm before being kidnapped by the residents, you then escape from them in the form of a tutorial where you learn the basic controls. After the tutorial you are introduced to a relatively open world that consists of side quests and secret tombs. You start empty handed and have to find weapons and attachments. The game has an RPG element, with you gathering salvage to upgrade weapons and experience points to learn new skills, although this does not really affect the way you go about the game but does add depth to the combat. One criticism I do have about the story is how quickly Lara turns from innocent young women to ruthless killer. She seems to turn in an instant from being scared to killing 8 or 9 guys at once.

 The puzzles in the secret of tombs aren't difficult but some of them will have you thinking for a few minutes before you get the “duh!” moment. I enjoyed the puzzles and I always looked for the tombs. I played the game on normal difficulty and did not find it too challenging, the AI was intelligent and took cover and adapted to the way I was fighting by destroying my cover with fire or charging me if I stay still for too long.

I’m only going to briefly mention the multiplayer because I haven’t had a chance to examine it closely. So far, it seems just O.K, you can choose your character, but I can’t really see a difference (I may be wrong with that) and you have to level up to gain better weapons. It seems to be a pretty deep multiplayer and not something just tacked on at the end. Even though it’s not as good as other multiplayers. Especially if it's compared to games like Halo and Team Fortress 2 (i'd definitely recommend Team Fortress 2 for a fun multiplayer game that's free).  It is worth a play, but the maps seem to be too big for the team modes and I found myself spending a lot of time looking for people rather than shooting.

I’d label Tomb Raider a must buy, if you’re a new comer or a veteran to the franchise, there is definitely something for everybody here. I was going considering giving the game a 4.5 or 5 out of 5 but the final boss left a bitter taste in my mouth (I won’t say anymore as I don’t want to ruin it) and ended the game on a sour note for me so my final verdict is a 4/5.

My First Blog Attempt: Batman Returns

This review/retrospective is going to be me talking about Batman Returns starring Michael Keaton as Batman, there will be spoilers but it’s a 21 year old film so if you haven’t already watched it you probably won’t, unless I interest you but I doubt it. I watched this when I was a kid and really liked it, probably my favourite Batman film; so when I was looking through the Blockbuster closing down sale for games I came across this and thought I’d see if it stood me to me watching it as an adult, because (god forgive me) I liked Batman and Robin when I was young, god I was wrong. But this was directed by Tim Burton and starred Michael Keaton who was amazing in the 1989 Batman. I was a bit disappointed afterwards though and I think a lot of that has to do with the ending. I enjoyed the main story even though I probably shouldn't  it’s cheesy and the penguin is disgusting but I’ll get to that in a minute.  The story was pretty much standard for a Batman film, you've got the main villain a secondary villain and a love interest that for some reason doesn't work out in the end, and somebody always ends up finding out that Batman is Bruce Wayne.

 In this case we have Catwoman, portrayed by Michelle Pfeiffer as the secondary villain and the love interest. The Catwoman/Batman is always awesome if done right and was one of the good things about the Dark Knight Rises in my opinion.  And this movie is no different, as in it is good the two could not be more different. Hathaway is a strong woman who steals as a way to get by but doesn't want to, more like Robin Hood. Pfeiffer, on the other hand, is rooted well and truly in the 1990s. She’s a vulnerable woman that is pushed too far by her male boss and transforms overnight into a gymnast, martial artist, whip expert, but in reality all she really needs is a man like Bruce Wayne to make her vulnerable again. This pseudo strong woman was stereotypical of the 90s so I won’t judge too harshly. The good aspect of this character is between Max Shreck, played by Christopher Walken, and Bruce Wayne she is strong and plays on the male expectations of her being weak and you do get the image of her being deranged and pushed too far. Maybe it’s just because I like the Catwoman character in general but she is one of my favourite characters in the movie.

Now we get to Penguin the main villain. Danny DeVito does a good job of playing the Penguin but the character is disgusting; eating raw fish, biting a man’s nose, being a pervert towards every woman he comes across and constantly has something drooling from his mouth. Penguin’s counterpart, Max Shreck delivers a boring performance and I found myself not listening to his monotone dialogue. He’s more of a side character and barely warrants a mention apart from he pushes Catwoman over the edge, literally and figuratively, and he attempts to use Penguin as his pawn and is too stupid to realize that Penguin really is in control. 

Michael Keaton delivers a good performance as Batman as well as a solid performance as Bruce Wayne, although Bruce Wayne barely gets any screen time and hardly and dialogue, in fact most of the dialogue is from Max’s monotone. However, this plays to the movies credit as it shrouds Batman in more mystery. One of the only negatives of the Dark Knight Series is we seem to know everything about Batman and everything is discussed so Batman becomes less powerful.

Apart from the main characters none are really of mention, Michael Gough as Alfred is good but the mayor remains unnamed and has about 2 minutes of screen time, Commissioner Gordon gets the same treatment, we barely see him. The “Ice Princess” is your typical damsel in distress and Chip Shreck gets 1 or 2 lines.

My main gripe with this movie is the story. For the most part it is okay, it is typical of the Batman series so it is relatively predictable but still enjoyable. The main problems I have is with the ending. One of the most important aspects of Batman is his refusal to kill, however in this movie he blows up Penguins “home” with him inside, and then moments later lectures Catwoman for wanting to kill Max. The biggest “jumping the shark” moment is after this where Catwoman attempts to commit suicide and kill Max by electrocuting them both. We see Max’s charred remains (boring character with no redeeming qualities so no loss really) but the twist is that Catwoman survives. Somehow. If anybody has an explanation please tweet me (@AzizTalks). And that’s not mentioning Max shooting Catwoman 4 times, and not once aiming for the head or chest, it was like he was temporarily possessed by a stormtrooper.

That’s my say on the film. I’d give it 3/5, it’s not technically a good movie and some of the humour is good and the development of Catwoman is good, but Batman gets barely any development from the first film. I still can’t say that I didn't enjoy it and now I have it on DVD I will definitely watch it again, maybe I just love Batman and I’m blind to it.  Let me know what you thought of the film and my opinions on it via twitter (again its @AzizTalks) or comments.