Epic Fail

Epic Fail: The Story of Bungie's Plagiarism
Posted by: Marcus


Before I dig into the meat of this entry, I do want to give the opening statement that this blog is simply my perspective of Bungie's popular Halo series, given through the eyes of a longtime gamer. This entry will also deal with my opinions of Bungie as an independent developer, and how they and Microsoft have priced their products in a hard economy.

The story for me begins when I was 18, and had my first real encounters with the Halo franchise. Beforehand, I had played the game for a little bit at a friend's house, but at the time hadn't beaten Metal Gear Solid 1-3 to the point where I had the story memorized, so I didn't think much of it.

So, right as I graduate from High School and start working for my uncle, my roommate has an Xbox and is a huge Halo fan, and immediately hooks me into the series. It was fun stuff. The multiplayer had fairly balanced weaponry, with each weapon having its place and function. Each map had a good feel to it with a decent amount of power-ups and ways to counter them, along with what may be the best Capture the Flag matches in any game to this date.

Another thing that struck me was that the single-player and co-op campaign was one of the better ones that I had played in a First-Person shooter. The storyline, though it wasn't incredibly deep, was good on its own, but had a very good way of delivering itself through Cortana's wit and interaction with the player. The only major issue was that the game felt a little short, and at the same time dragged on in certain levels that were basically prior levels played in reverse. It also had a good sense of atmosphere at certain levels, especially the level where The Flood was introduced.

However, as time went on for me, I distanced myself away from the game a bit, finding other little gems like Bioware's Knights of the Old Republic and id Software's Doom 3 to grab my attention. Around the time that Halo 2 came out though, I found myself playing it, and then quickly losing my interest in the title. The weapon balance from the previous game was outright gone, with each multiplayer match being a mad scramble for the Battle Rifle, which was overpowered and uninspired. There were improvements in the Covenant weaponry, but nobody noticed because hardly anyone remembered the one good thing that came out of the game: The Arbiter.

I still maintain to this day that the Arbiter is the best thing that came out of Halo 2. Unlike the Master Chief, Bungie took the time to flesh him out in-game and through him were able to shine some light on the Covenant, and give that side of the war a little more understanding for the people who enjoy having a solid storyline in gaming. However, like anything Halo campaign oriented, the storyline ended up being way too short, and had the worst ending that a video game has ever had. The game of Halo 2 was more of an expansion pack than an actual Halo game. It didn't feel like a full experience. It added a weapon set that was worse than the first game, online multiplayer that wasn't anything more than average, and a story that seemed like the developers just outright stopped writing it at one point, and then realized they needed an ending. Halo 2 was a terrible game, and if Resident Evil 4 hadn't come out when it did, I would have gone insane.

Going forward from there, around the time Gears of War came out I started taking notice of Epic's video games, picking up the original Unreal and Unreal Tournament. From then on in, I started to see some things that disgusted me. Halo, for better or worse, had a multiplayer system that was structured almost exactly like Unreal Tournament, but a little slower in the pacing! I couldn't believe it. How did they get away with such a blatant ripoff? I also started to draw major lines in the story similarities as well, to the point where I couldn't really see Halo as an original IP. All the Elites now seem like to me are the Skaarj bred with the Yajuta from the Predator movies.

Either way, the revelation disturbs me greatly even to this day. The nail in the coffin for me was when I saw that, out of nowhere, the Master Chief is now the head of a 4 man squad, and also now has armor with magnets on the back to store weaponry. I literally just shook my head, because the initial screenshot from that reveal looked like a throwaway promo image from Gears of War, but with Halo characters instead. It's stupid.

Truth be told, I really don't think Bungie really has had many original ideas. Their first series, Marathon, was a Doom clone. Their newest "game," Halo 3: ODST looks like Gears of Halo Duty 3 1/3. A blatant ripoff of Horde mode, and the trademark Nameless Marine from Call of Duty? Jesus Christ.

Also, I'm starting to think that the pricing for Halo products is outright robbery. 800 Microsoft Points for 3 maps?! $60 for a game that isn't much more than an expansion pack?! There couldn't be anything that angers me more than a game that rips off the consumer, especially with the current economical climate. It sickens me to no ends.

Now, I know what everyone will say who reads this. "Yeah, but Bungie's making money!" That's what makes me mad. If this game had sold absolutely nothing, then this blog entry would have no need to exist. However, I've decided to post it because I believe in my heart that gamers need to be informed with the truth. If you like Halo, that's fine. Just keep in mind that by supporting Bungie without questioning what they're doing, you do nothing for gaming or gamers.

A Fedor Discussion

A Fedor Discussion: Best Heavyweight in the World?

Posted By: Marcus

UFC 100 answered a lot of questions for me. Right now, it is almost undisputed as to who the number one heavyweight in the UFC is. Brock Lesnar not only defeated Frank Mir, he made Mir look like a fool, and looked like he could have fought another fight and won. He answered my question of whether or not he was a good enough wrestler to outright neutralize someone's BJJ game.

However, the fight raised new questions to me. Now that Lesnar's beaten Mir and Couture, who the hell is going to challenge him now? It's obvious that middle-of-the-road MMA fighters can't do it. He picked apart Heath Herring without effort, so guys like Kongo would get wrecked. I'm not sure whether Cain Velasquez or Shane Carwin could take him either. Carwin has nutty strikes, but Lesnar will know that beforehand, and will go to ground and stay there. Cain Velasquez, on the other hand, has a good chance of going five rounds, but Lesnar's strength will probably keep him dominant.

Side Note: If you're on Kongo's nuts, hop off them. He's got no ground game whatsoever. Lesnar would take him down once, and Kongo would neither get up, nor remember how much France sucks afterward.

So, that leaves two guys who could really mess with Lesnar: Minotauro and Fedor. With Nog, I want to see how he performs against Couture before I say anything about him fighting Lesnar. Right now, I'd give him slight odds, but I've never seen Mir outright made to look like a rank amateur.

Fedor, on the other hand, is an enigma when it comes to the UFC. He's defeated the UFC champs of old, like Randleman and Coleman, and also has noteable wins over Tim Silvia and Andrei Arlovski. However, its those wins that make me question how well he would do in the UFC against someone like Couture or Lesnar.

Looking at it from a cynic's stance (it's called Cynic's Corner for a reason) I can't see Kevin Randleman during his Pride days even making a decent fight for Couture, and Lesnar would destroy him. The same goes for Coleman. Both men, though tremendous wrestlers, have questionable standup, and had gaping holes in their ground game that Fedor exploited. Also, both men have been beaten down badly by men smaller than they are, like Shogun Rua and Chuck Liddell. You can make the case that both hit almost as hard as a Heavyweight, but the point still stands.

As for Arlovski, let's take a good look at his fight with Fedor. Arlovski's hands were golden. He was punching like he was in a boxing match with Ali, not fighting Fedor. It was probably the best punching we've seen from him. The problem? A man who probably knows next to nothing about Muai Thai went for a flying knee, and Fedor caught him, hard. Though a lot of people love that fact, now let's compare it to something else. Ask youself this: Were you impressed when Houston Alexander knocked out Keith Jardine? How about when Rashad Evans knocked out Chuck Liddell? I use these instances to make you think for a second. All three are simply knockouts where someone made a mistake and got caught.

As for Tim Silvia, come on. Tim Silvia sucks. He has no ground game, and has been made to look like a fool by the best in the business. Nobody would put him up against Lesnar, Couture, Nog, or Mir and give him odds on favoritism without being asked if they're mentally handicapped. He's not one of the all time greats. He's not even good. He's tall, and sort of strong. That's it. Fedor knew that, and you should too.

Now, you're probably asking yourself, "Why does this guy hate Fedor?" I don't. I like Fedor. I think he's got the clearest head and calmest demeanor of any fighter in the world, and every short fight victory he's had has been because of those abilities above and beyond even his immense skills in Sambo and Judo. This is a guy who I look up to because of how great of a sportsman he is, and how he's such a great credit to his country, like fighters like Henderson is to America, and Nog is to Brazil.

However, as a fan of Fedor, I know for a fact that he's won some great fights, but he's still got to fight the best. I want him to fight in the UFC because I know that if he wins fights there, then there's no disputing him anymore, and that means there are no more questions to ask. My biggest problem is the legend is probably bigger than the man. People on the net say he could beat Lesnar with no problems, among other things, yet Heath Herring went 10 minutes with him, and he couldn't finish Nog no matter what he did. Though he dominated Mirko Cro Cop, he couldn't finish him either, which is something that Gonzaga did with no problems. Why couldn't he finish Renato Sobral, who Chuck Liddell has destroyed?

So, I say to Fedor, come to the UFC and fight. Affliction can't offer you anything you haven't seen before, and neither can Dream or Strikeforce. Fedor's managers need to get their hammer and sickle out of their asses and let Fedor fight in America under a brand that matters.

To finish the blog, I have two things to say.
1. Dan Henderson makes me proud to be an American.
2. GSP wouldn't trade with Alves because he was scared. Plain and simple. Quit laying on people.

A Few Marcus Reviews

Marcus' Quick Reviews and Opinions
- Posted by Marcus



Since I'm kind of in a rush today, I'm just going to throw some quick stuff in the blog for this week's entry. Don't worry, the "Epic Fail - The Story of Bungie's Plagiarism" will come in the near future, but not quite yet.

Here we go......

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is good for what it is, an Action movie CG-fest. Not a lot of depth, but enough action to keep you glued to the seat, and enough Megan Fox to keep you drooling. In certain respects, the movie hits the sophomore slump, but it's not like the Transformers were really considered "Intelligent Sci-Fi" in the first place.

Prototype is not an amazing game, but it's really good. The Web of Intrigue keeps enough replay value for those interested in the backstory, and the game itself doesn't have many technical problems that are going to bug you time and time again, like Saints Row 2. Also, I don't care what anyone else says, the story is better than Infamous' storyline. The story of Prototype pulls a lot from Alan Moore (Watchmen, Swamp Thing) and David Micheline (Amazing Spider-Man, Iron Man) and has an incredibly solid concept, whereas Infamous comes across as a Brian Micheal Bendis throwaway.

UFC 2009: Undisputed is bar none the best sports game on the market right now, so I'd advise picking it up. The only issue is that many people seem to be shying away from the online play, due to the fact that Sturgeon's Law evidently applies to people who play online games as well. Still, I'd advise picking it up, mostly just because it's an excellent game.

Fight Night Round 4 sucks. Don't buy it.

Murphy's Law does not apply if you suck.

UFC 100 hits on Pay-Per-View this Saturday, so good luck to all of the fighters. If you want my predictions, I posted them in an earlier post, but I will be sure to have a post-fight entry after it's all said and done. Hopefully each fight is good, and I hope everyone enjoys it. I also hope that C.B. Dolloway defeats Tom Lawlor, though I also hope it's a good fight.

Tim Silvia is by no way, shape, or form one of the greats when it comes to MMA, so don't even try to sell me on that.

Well, that's all for now. Thanks for reading.

Introductions and Blood. All in a day's work.

Introductions and Gears of War franchise talk
- Posted by: Marcus


Hey there, kiddies. I've posted two blogs thus far, and before I get into my subject for today, I'd just like to point out that I'm not the only member of The Cynic's Corner. The other two brains behind this little project are Clarity and Raziel. Clarity is a student at the University of Paris Island, and Raziel is a cool dude from Australia. I hope you look forward to hearing from these two in the future, due to Raziel's love for Anime and Game Reviews, and Clarity's MMA know-how and similar game love.

Anyway, I want to talk today about Gears of War, which is probably more than obvious due to the image to the left.

Gears, for me, came out of left field. It was the video game equivalent of the quasi-famous "throw-back" scene from the movie Rookie of the Year. When this game came out, and a friend brought it over on release day, I was utterly shocked by everything that was in the game. The first thing that hit me, first and foremost, was that the game was not only wearing an M rating, but really embraced the rating and used it as an accurate branding of the content. It was dark, gritty, down to earth, violent, and made no bones about it. In the time of the Halo's and Call of Duty's, an M rating seemed like a joke on a killer app. Not so with Gears.

Aside from that, I found myself being sucked into the campaign's co-op mode, not so much because of how good the action was, how cool the weapons were, or how different the combat was. I was absolutely loving how teamwork was so integral to the experience. In every fight, I found myself relying on my friend that I was playing with completely and utterly. It was so different from anything I had played in so long, that I could not believe that those mechanics made it into a killer app.

Multiplayer shocked me in the same method. Every single mode was Team Deathmatch, but with a different twist (this is before Annex was added). I loved the simplicity, and I loved how Epic was essentially shouting at the gamers, "THIS GAME IS ABOUT TEAMWORK!"

You see, this is what Epic gets right and Bungie and Infinity Ward don't. Call of Duty and Halo are about these nameless, faceless, undeveloped characters of soldiers walking out against glorified cannon fodder and slaughtering them wholesale. It's like Colonel Sanders against an army of chickens. Gears of War, though it has its figurehead, makes you realize from the get-go that you are by no way, shape, or form a one man army. It's you and your squad against an enemy that is highly trained, willing to kill, and willing to fight so they don't die. Completely different ballgame.

Anywho, when it came time for the sequel, I found myself enjoying the game just as much, but here is where I started to see some kinks in the armor when it comes to this series, bringing me to what I want to call the Gripe section. Essentially, Gears of War 2 is still an excellent game. It's probably the best of what I call the Big 3 of XBL online play (the other two being Call of Duty 4 and Halo 3). It's quality is bar none superior, but the problem is that though it is great, the game could be mind-blowing if done right.

So, I've decided to organize these into what Epic can fix, and what they can't fix.

[UNFIXABLE]

- The Remaining Networking Problems -

Let's face it. You can't fix the problems of people bridging connections or lag switching. It's unavoidable. Those things are easy to make, but they're also easy for the XBL staff to pick out and ban people. Gears fans, please stop blaming Epic for this. For some odd reason, these pricks gravitate toward Gears, and Epic can't do anything about it. On that note, Epic should never apologize for the actions of these jerks who do this. They're not responsible. If people want to act like little kids, then they have that ability, but they'll learn the lesson that there are repercussions.

- The Cheaters -

This is the big thing that Epic cannot solve. Sturgeon's Law applies to people too. 90% of them are crappy human beings, and most of them have decided that XBL is a great place to be, which sucks for those of us who are sporting people who like a fair game, and don't mind losing provided the playing field was level. These morons will always exist, but keep in mind that at the end of the day how people on the outside looking in view fair fighters against cheap douche bags.


[FIXABLE]

- The Game Setup -

Gears of War's online and campaign setup is far too cookie cutter for such a great game. Gears multiplayer doesn't need matchmaking, and it doesn't need to take rank into account. I say set up the Multiplayer like Call of Duty. Keep the ranks there simply as a badge of honor, and then just throw a bunch of guys in it and let them throw down. Another idea would be to have an option of setting up your own room, or using Matchmaking. Merging the two games' multiplayer styles for the next installment wouldn't be a bad idea. Single player wise, every single moment of the campaign needs to be just as good as the opening. The first game had this down, but it was too short. Gears 2 has the length and pacing of the campaign right, but Skorge was a puss, and the final boss was lackluster. There was nothing that compared to the fight with RAAM.

- The Storyline -

Gears of War 2 has one of the most heart-wrenching moments in a video game that I've seen in a long while, and had really solid dialogue for what dialogue there was. Truth be told, Epic really knows how to nail soldier to soldier interactions, add tidbits of humor in dark situations, and give a real feeling of pressure and confusion. The only problem here is that there are still far too many blanks to be filled. To put it simply, we know Marcus, and we know Dom. Give us a little on Baird, a little on Cole, then explain the Locust, and the game's universe will be wholly fleshed out. Though I'm excited about what's next for the story, and jazzed about the next book, there's so much room for failure.

- Books for Storytelling -

Though I know I just said that I'm jazzed about the next book, I really don't want Gears to fall into the same slump that Halo did, relying on third party media to tell backstory so you don't have to try as hard with your narrative. Gears should not allow itself to go and get itself into that funk when it comes to the story. Use books to tell history, side stories, and other fun extra stuff. Don't use them to try and fill in the blanks, because we all know that half the base audience won't read the books, no matter how good they are.



At the end of the day, I could actually come up with other things I'd like to see the series do different, but those don't come from the idea of fixing something. Gears of War, as a franchise, is incredibly solid in its format and what it tries to accomplish, and all I wanted to do is simply point out the flaws, not ask for a reinvention of the formula. Gears of War is a fantastic franchise, and will probably continue to do things that Infinity Ward can't do, and Bungie will blatantly rip off.

Wait, what's this about Bungie ripping off of Epic, Marcus?

That's coming soon, kiddies...............