Mmm... tanky.

ack in November, Modern Warfare 2 sold more copies on its opening weekend than any game in history. Left 4 Dead 2 arrived in November, as well, and Halo 3: ODST preceded that by a few weeks. And in January, PS3 owners got MAG.

That’s four top-flight shooters, more or less all at once, one of which now boasts 25 million unique online players. In other words, gamers have eaten a lot of lead this winter.

But spring is fast approaching, the days here in Vancouver are growing less grey and depressing, the city still seems to show signs of its Olympic high, and Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (EA, DICE, Mar. 2, PS3, 360 and PC) has thrown down the gauntlet (or anti-tank mine, maybe) and wants to compete for our shooter dollars and hours. All of this serves to cheer my ass up in a big way.

Now, if you’re a shooter freak, you probably have clear ideas about what you like, and don’t need to be told what’s what. You may even own all four games already. Furthermore, FPS love is often about gaming with others, so your preferred game may simply be the one your friends are playing. In other words, it’s probable that your standard ’side-by-side-by-side’ comparison article won’t sway you, or even help you much.

So instead of doing that, I’m just going to talk about my experience. I was pretty into Modern Warfare 2 for a while there, but Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (and not MW2) is going to be my go-to multiplayer shooter in 2010. Here’s why:

Is there anything more satisfying in life than shooting a camper in the ear with a shotgun?

BC2 mastery requires the total package: good shooting, planning, sneaking, and thinking, and Modern Warfare 2 rewards the quickdraw: those with raw reflexes, and those with better ping. Period. And I much prefer (and do much better in) games that reward the former.

Yes, there are windows to shoot from, static obstacles to run around, and some basic fake-’em-out and stealth action in MW2, but most of the map designs promote everyone being funneled down one or two main corridors, resulting in lots of twitchy, head-on firefights where tactics don’t help much, and there are few opportunities to outthink your enemy; the dude who starts shooting straight first wins.

The fact MW2 maps are tight and fast also means lots of dances—scenarios where 2 players more or less bump into each other, spotting each other at the same time—where the quicker draw or faster connection gets the kill.

BC2 has vehicles, and they aren’t gimmicky! They’re a ton of fun to drive. Tear around the perimeter of the map on a quad bike to flank, or crash an enemy stronghold with a tank, feeling the ground shake as you unleash hell with missles and a chain gun. I dare you not to smile while doing it.

In BC2 there’s lots of space. Maps are really big (making those speedy quad bikes even more appealing) and because of how things are laid out, flanking is always a viable strategy. In Modern Warfare 2, ‘flanking’ usually means retreating, because you have to leg it a LONG way to get behind the guy, and usually have to run a set route, so you’re unlikely to get there without running into combat somewhere else.

Similarly, there’s time to stop and think (and plan) in BC2. You can stop and heal your squad, repair your tanks if need be, and decide from which direction to approach the next target.

Stop and breathe... but stay here for too long and your ass WILL hurt.

Virtually every hiding spot and perch is vulnerable to attack from behind or the side… making camping a losing strategy for all but the best snipers (who would probably kill you regardless). There’s nowhere you can stand still in BC2 without leaving stalkers and flankers a way to kill you.

Many times in the first couple of nights playing, I chased someone into a building, but then turned on a dime, ducked around the side, and shot them in the side of the head through a window, while they were watching the door. Now THAT is satisfying, much more so than just being the guy who got to the trigger first. And that’s the result of good map design.

The environments in BC2 are destructible, which means you can knock down walls and fences (creating new pathways and destroying your enemy’s cover) and—get this—collapse buildings full of snipers!

Similarly, if you know someone is out of ammo and cowering in a house with his sidearm trained on the door, you don’t need to poke your head in there and get it blown off; you can just blast holes in the wall of the house.

I’m pretty sure blowing stuff up is a base pleasure for most of us, and the thrill of wrecking things is accentuated by sound design and graphical flourishes which are better than I’ve ever seen. Even when you aren’t killing anything, it’s pretty satisfying to shoot an RPG and hear that deep thump and see the window get twice as big and bricks and dust flying everywhere.

A MW2 match is over in ten minutes or less. BC2 games are generally twice that long, giving you time to observe opponents and start predicting which window they’ll try to shoot you from.

Destruction 2.0. Yes, they actually call it that.

The spawn ticket system: In Rush and Conquest game modes, when you run out of tickets you lose; game over. Ticket depletion is linked to how well you capture and hold objectives, but also, every time you spawn, you lose a ticket. BUT if a medic revives you, your team doesn’t lose a ticket. Thus, medics actually directly help your team win. In MW2, medics don… oh right, MW2 doesn’t have medics; everyone is just a killing machine.

And, despite being bigger and slower, BC2 gunplay is more chaotic, frenzied and somehow more exciting than in MW2. I’m not the only one who thinks so; I did some informal research in some gaming forums and a player named Machine74 hit the nail on the head, as far as I’m concerned:

When it all comes together, BFBC2 creates that firefight that I like. And watching buildings come apart as the battle progresses is too freaking cool. I thought MAG had some great maps, but BFBC2’s maps are even better and more beautiful (but that is not a surprise). And let me say this…The firefight is what i like about shooters. Unloading copious amounts of ammo, is what’s fun to me. Bullets flying all around and tearing everything up; those are the fun games. That’s why I play.

And he added that BC2’s assault class has the ability to drop ammo for his squad mates, providing still more incentive to run with a squad and do things cooperatively.

There are no killstreak rewards in BC2, which, after a bunch of MW2, I missed at first. But in time I realized that with no one getting “rewarded” with 5 or 10 free kills, victories weren’t continually going to the team with one hot player.

And finally, nobody has screamed obscenities at me in a screechy prepubescent voice, in three full nights of BC2.

I liked MAG in principle (tactical, big maps, varied multi-step objectives, classes, leadership roles) but it didn’t grab me; I found it visually bland, and too few people properly utilized leadership roles and squad tactics. The run-and-gun fun of Modern Warfare was more casual and more accessible, and for a lot of reasons (including 60fps, the callsigns, the ACR, and a shortage of friends with MAG) I went back to MW2 after only a week or less. But after acclimatizing to Battlefield: Bad Company 2, unless future expansions swing things back in someone else’s favor, I doubt I’ll be going back to either. I freaking love this game.

Quick, press "x" to not die.

he average reaction to Heavy Rain seems to be lots of praise, followed by an in-depth rant about how frustrating and flawed a mess it is. Which may have left you unsure as to whether you need play it.

“Do you like mysteries? Experimental media? Troubled loners? Origami? Then you’ll love it. This is the best interactive drama that world has ever seen… but did I mention the story is absolutely awful? But yeah, it’s a real achievement. Except the acting is terrible, too. But yeah, it’s really good.”

…right.

But it’s interesting that a game has people talking as much as this one has.

You know what they say about opinions… and butts. But undoubtedly, Heavy Rain (developed by Quantic Dream, published by Sony) is a beautiful game but also a frustrating one because, by most accounts, the story doesn’t pay off, or even entirely make sense. There are some glaring technical issues, yet its core mechanic is ingenious. And such paradoxes always result in more discussion than usual. ‘Nuff said, probably.

But who can resist throwing in their own two? Not me. So here’s another Heavy Rain ‘pros and cons’ rundown. Except this one is nice and short.

Starting with what we didn’t like:

-When walking around, it feels like you’re in Playstation Home. Yes, that clunky and awkward.

-Setting the table, cooking virtual scrambled eggs, gazing thoughtfully at yourself in mirrors, and bandaging injuries (there were but THREE meticulously detailed sequences where you’re cleaning and dressing wounds) aren’t fun, will never be fun, and don’t belong in video games.

-Story problems—some plot revelations make earlier sequences seem completely ridiculous or irrelevant – it’s as if they were written before the writers knew who the killer was. I wish I could say more, but I don’t want to spoil it.

-Voice acting that sometimes feels like they just grabbed whomever was handy. Making allowances for the fact it’s an import (Quantic Dream is a French studio) and an international flavor was to be expected, the performances nonetheless sound phoned-in, and the American accents are ridiculous; this is a game set in the US and one obviously french girl said “feefty-books” instead of “fifty bucks” and at this level (a big international release by a first party publisher) that’s just not cool. And don’t get me started about the FBI agent who comes across like a mix between Fox Mulder, Woody Allen, and Robocop.

Yes, you see her naked.

-Heavy Rain’s overall vibe is a lot different from that of any other game. And different is good. (sidebar: it doesn’t exactly feel like a movie, but with regards to it being “cinematic” I don’t think it feels like Silence of the Lambs; you may read that here and there, but I think it’s way off. I think it feels much more like 12 Monkeys).

- a satisfying ’search-and-discover’ mechanic reminiscent of old Sierra games like Kings Quest where you traipse around, scanning the environment and watching for pop-up icons which indicate you can interact with something.

-Although I know some sections will be downright tedious to replay, I nonetheless want to play through it a second time.

-Police chases, fights, and construction site climaxes do belong in video games. And the ‘quick time event’ game play which accompanies these events in Heavy Rain (press “x” to make an escape, quick!) was borderline brilliant. The complexity (and difficulty) of the sequences of button presses you’re asked to perform corresponds amazingly well with the ordeals the on-screen character faces. I felt actual tension in my gut when I was on the giant ladder, in the fire, and on the highway (again I’m being vague on purpose, I want to keep this spoiler-free). I was reminded of the satisfaction derived from figuring out the pattern for a level of Dragon’s Lair or Cliff Hanger (the true quick time event pioneers) when I was little. Though unlike those games, Heavy Rain changes speed constantly.

-And it does that really well, too. Heavy Rain varies in pace, interspersing frenzied quick time events with slower search-and-discover exploration, and dialogue trees for conversations. It’s masterful. Mark my words: this game is going to set new standards for interactive fiction.

Suspenseful "24" style split screen action almost makes you forget you're an old dude with asthma.

I wanted a little more, and not just a tightening up of the controls. A little more of everything. It almost feels as if Heavy Rain was not done, like maybe the developers wanted to integrate another level of complexity, and file down some of the rough spots, but they ran out of time or money.

Um, imagine a game that’s a cross between Playstation Home, Kings Quest and Dragon’s Lair, by the people who brought you 12 Monkeys, done in the style of a graphic novel by the guy who writes Ikea instructions. With a nude shower scene. And a child murderer. That’s Heavy Rain. And yes, you need to play it.

It’s kind of clunky, but the developers still got their point across; it’s good for gaming that this one got made. And bad acting has never stopped us from falling in love with video game characters, has it? It speaks to Heavy Rain’s quality, that its shortcomings bother people so much. I disagree with those who would marginalize it as “an experiment” (a descriptor you might read elsewhere) because it manages to be engaging, despite its many flaws.

FILE PHOTO: Rory Schmidt has never been as happy as he was when this picture was taken.

“I love video games, but these programmers just don’t get it. Why would I want to play as myself? I’m a loser,” said Schmidt from his one-bedroom apartment on Wednesday.

“Sometimes they even make you alter your character’s appearance to physically resemble you,” complained Schmidt. “Imagine you’ve just scaled a tower and rescued a maiden, or retrieved a magical anvil and helped a hardworking immigrant save his blacksmith shop. And the cinematic sequence plays, but instead of feeling like a hero, you’re reminded of how big your nose is, in relation to your eyes.”

Schmidt, who was recently laid off from his job at Blockbuster, has more time than ever for gaming. Yet he said he’s “basically run out” of options. Motioning to a stack of games behind his frozen dinner, he said, “most of those ones call you by name.”

Many games personalize the gamer’s experience by instructing them to type in their first name. Schmidt said this raises an immediate red flag, for it will almost certainly hinder his ability to make a complete departure from reality and assume the identity of someone heroic, interesting, smart, or sexually competent. “You’d be surprised at how often they force you to be yourself,” said Schmidt, making a face. “Take a game like Fallout 3. My dad is Liam Neeson, I have a nice outfit and a sweet chinese rifle… but it’s still me. And I suck. It’s like, everywhere I go… there I am.”

Issues of role dysphoria aside, playing as himself also “ruins the story,” according to Schmidt.

“I think they call that suspension of disbelief,” he said. “In real life, girls would never like me, so I don’t date. So when Commander Shepherd from Mass Effect gets the girl, that’s cool. But when it’s me getting the girl? Talk about being brought back down the earth. I mean, I know it’s my choices in the dialog tree that created that ending, but still. It’s just not believable.”

Schmidt said many popular games go easy on customization features, a trend he hopes will continue.

“I don’t have any real skills to speak of, and my personal history is really dull. But lots of games give you a complete life story and a whole new personality, too. Like, you get to be a hyperactive plumber or a homicidal Russian cab driver. Escaped convict, professional thief, fratboy in space, tired old guy with asthma… one game even lets you play as a simple multicellular organism, so instead of being myself, I can be like a piece of pond scum. It’s great.”

Schmidt recalled an incident while playing Fallout 3, where, playing as himself, he’d just defeated mutants and infiltrated a fortified radio station to come to the assistance of a DJ who was trapped inside, who subsequently gave him ‘shout-outs’ in his radio broadcasts for the remainder of the game.

“That was nice of Three Dog, sure, but the simple fact is, I’d never be involved with anything that interesting. Seriously. Spend a day with me. I mean, I know you won’t, but if you did, you’d see, “ said Schmidt.

Anyway, much props and thanks for the cooperation of everyone who helped us push up the production values a bit, even if that just meant not getting annoyed at us as we threatened your physical safety with lighting rigs and giant extension cords…

Also, many thanks to the developers of Chicken Riot, for calling a game Chicken Riot.

But Adam, Abbie, Patrick, Sterling, and the other guy (sorry, other guy) always put together a pretty good weekly show. All of them are witty, right-sized, and likable folks. But most of all it’s just the only game podcast out there which, if you’re an actual gamer, is always worth your time. And here’s this week’s show:

It’s a cap from this… annoying to listen to, but kind of amazing to watch:

And a squad mate, Chronic_douche 420, is ignoring your cries.

“Come on man, you’re standing right there; heal me. Dude. I can see your plus sign.”

He bulldozes right past you and out into the open, and starts unloading at something. He misses his target, and takes a rocket-propelled grenade in the mouth.

Now you and Chronic_douche420 are both flailing on the ground. You bleed out, and wait to re-spawn… a long way from the communications array you were trying to capture.

Because your squad mate is A)  chronic, B) a douche and C) unwilling to heal fallen teammates, both he and you are now essentially useless to the team for the next little while. Terrific.

Now normally, the actions of dipshits can’t really ruin your fun in an FPS—you learn to play around the dipshits (and chronic douches) in the universes of Killzone, and Halo and Modern Warfare, and you still have a good time. It’s totally doable.

But as a games writer I’m in new territory here; I don’t know whether to pan MAG or praise it, because MAG matches are really cool when other players play the game as they “should” and when they don’t, you can feel the futility.

The game’s got a terrific concept: a massive-scale FPS where 256 players are distributed into squads, platoons and companies, designated leaders call in specific orders, and their underlings are provided with tangible incentives (in the form of double XP) for actually following those orders and sticking with their people and playing the game like humans, instead of like dipshits, thus creating some semblance of tactical, strategic warfare.

And amazingly, I think Zipper Interactive and Sony got it right. MAG doesn’t break or blow up. It actually works pretty well.

By definition MAG is brainier, more tactical and more of a team game than basically any other shooter, because of its large maps, multi-step objectives and chain of command system. No one player can swing a match the other way, and the best organized and most communicative teams beat lone wolves and dipshits nearly every time.

There might be no ‘I’ in team… but there are multiple instances of the letter I in dipshit. In Week 1, lots of people are playing MAG impulsively and selfishly and without regard for teamwork, and it actually can ruin the fun. Dipshits don’t win at MAG, and they’ll take you down with them.

Zipper must have known they were creating a game where the attitude and behavior of the user base would dictate the quality of the experience, to a greater degree than any software element. After all, they didn’t include a single player mode, and they haven’t provided much guidance, or even very detailed instructions; it’s all in the hands of the users. The community isn’t even entirely sure how the Shadow War contracts or the win/loss system works. And anyway, unless you’ve got 7 friends with shitloads of free with which to form a squad, you’ll be playing MAG alongside dipshits sometimes. And while it is a good game,  at this point I have doubts as to whether it will rise above the douchebaggery and dipshittery. It’s just too difficult to feel like you’re accomplishing anything, in dipshit-riddled matches.

Any of the following may indicate that the MAG game server has thrown you behind enemy lines with a bunch of dipshits:

• The arrows on your mini-map (your squad mates) are not in proximity to one another, nor even moving towards the correct objective

• You die several times in a row without being revived

• Your squad leader has no mic

• Teammates are on the attack despite that the objective clearly says “defend”

• You hear words like, “You stole my kill.”

But I’m trying not to forget it’s a new game. Really new. People are still figuring out how to be good at it, and even how to enjoy it. MAG has potential and I’m going to stick with it for awhile, and try to add players to my friends list who are explicitly interested in forming a squad and playing tactically. But here’s hoping the dipshits get bored soon, and go back to Call of Duty.

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/adventure/heavyrain/video/6247738?hd=1&tag=topslot;thumb;1

whoa, drama.