How Certain Affinity Improved Forge for Halo 4

Forge mode is coming back in Halo 4, and it's in development at Certain Affinity, the creative house responsible for Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary and Halo: Reach map packs.

Certain Affinity based its improvements to Forge on fan feedback, allowing for more creative freedom and ease of use. Players can link duplicated objects using magnets, for instance. In the demonstration below, designers create a headquarters with a bridge, and it's built much faster than it would have been in Halo 3's or Halo Reach's Forge.

What's more, users can lock objects in place, which prevents them from accidentally deleting or ruining their designs, as was a past problem.

The most interesting addition, however, is the Trait Zone. These custom fields allow you to change the physical properties of Spartans in specific spots. In the demo above, you can see a Spartan's speed and jump height boosted, as well as other options including damage absorption, shield multiplier, and recharge rate.

Or you could just lower the gravity of the map altogether.

Source: The Verge

Mitch Dyer is an Associate Editor for IGN's Xbox 360 team. He’s also quite Canadian. Read his ramblings on Twitter and follow him on IGN.

Source : ign[dot]com

The Ville, ChefVille Are Zynga’s Next Social Games

Zynga has revealed the two newest entries in its Ville series: The Ville and ChefVille.

Coming tomorrow, The Ville is Zynga’s “house and people” game and allows players to build a whole life for themselves, including a house, career and even their own appearance. Players will be able to throw parties and invite their friends, leading Zynga to call the game its “most social game to date.”

Players will unlock new objects for their home as they level up and will interact with other players to build relationships. Interactions are key, and Zynga notes that the more people you talk to, the more happiness you’ll build up in-game. The Ville will be available on Facebook tomorrow and will be coming to Zynga.com “soon.”

Meanwhile, Zynga also revealed ChefVille, a new restaurant sim that “uses food to bring friends and family together.” Players will be able to create their own kitchen and build a restaurant by combining multiple ingredients to create new dishes. Each recipe a player creates will be emailed to them, allowing them to try the dish in real life for what Zynga calls a “Game to Table experience.” ChefVille will come to Facebook in addition to Zynga.com.

Beyond The Ville and ChefVille, Zynga also hinted that FarmVille 2 is coming soon and announced the latest game in the With Friends series. The company also unveiled new games including Zynga Elite Slots and Ruby Blast.

Look out for a full rundown of Zynga Unleashed in our additional coverage later today.



Source : ign[dot]com

Diablo III Real-Money Auction House Delayed Again

If you logged into Diablo III today, perhaps you noticed the real-money auction house is not yet live. According to an in-game notification, the real-money version of Diablo III’s auction house will go live on June 12, 2012.

This is the third time the real-money auction house has been delayed. Initially it was expected to launch one week following the game’s May 15 release date, then it was pushed to May 29.

Over the course of the past two weeks the virtual currency auction house has frequently been down for maintenance as Blizzard addressed technical issues.

“We're also continuing to investigate latency affecting search results, active auction lists, posting auctions, and successful sales and purchases on the gold auction house, and hope to have all transactions running smoothly as soon as possible,” said a recent official post.

As of this moment, the virtual currency auction house is up and running, but it’s not possible to sell commodities such as crafting components and gems.



Source : http://www.ign.com

Diablo III: Inferno and the Auction House

I used to think of the Auction House as a curiosity, a backdrop of microtransaction static that, after the still-missing real money version goes live, could serve as a way for me to make small sums of cash by selling any absurdly rare items. Through Normal, Nightmare and Hell difficulties I found I developed a resentment of the Auction House, as it undercut the powerful sense of reward associated with finding items on my own. When a legendary Fjord Cutter dropped on my screen, it wasn’t some random Fjord Cutter, it was Fjord Cutter. Even if it wasn’t even as powerful as the epic fiery club I was using, I stored the Cutter in my stash. It was a trophy, proof of my growing heroic legacy, and not something I wanted to throw out for others to bid on, to turn my success into an unremarkable sum of gold that lost its identity as soon as I combined it with the rest of my funds.

So I interacted with the Auction House sparingly, tossing magic items up for sale for in-game gold, but staying away from obsessively searching for reasonably priced items with Barbarian-appropriate affixes, and snatching any absurdly low priced items to flip for a profit. Then I hit Inferno, and my self-reliant approach to item acquisition was no longer possible.

Even the starting area zombies hit hard, and the first wretched mother killed me in a flash. The armor I’d accumulated through drops in Hell difficulty suddenly seemed like napkins. I still had a level 32 chest piece, my helmet had higher intelligence bonuses than strength, and my shoulders didn’t even increase vitality. I was a mess, doomed to cycles of death and ceaseless repair penalties. I could have returned to Hell to farm better items. Maybe I’d find them in five minutes, maybe five hours, maybe five months -- such is the uncertainty of randomness. Perhaps I’d find a sword with higher damage, but to have a chance of fighting anything aside from the standard enemies in Act I of Inferno, I needed the higher damage and the right stats.

There was no way around it, I needed money. Alongside a dozen or so rare items, I sold my Fjord Cutter. From the Auction House I picked up a new spear with life restore on hit and big strength and vitality buffs. I upgraded to a double-socketed level 60 chest piece with life regeneration and a helmet that gave extra resistance against physical damage. It cost nearly all the gold I had, and suddenly I was able to hop right into the middle of a zombie pack and whirl, slice, kill and repeat with little downtime. I was back in rhythm, but my victories weren’t as complete, as it felt like I bought my success. I didn’t deserve to make progress.

The disappointment of the near-mandatory use of Auction House interaction at Inferno difficulty setting lingered, but several new mechanics presented themselves to offset the sense that I’d somehow cheapened my experience by buying relevance. Elite-level champion packs and unique monsters, for instance, were still immensely challenging even with a few upgraded pieces of gear. On Inferno they have four unique attack modifiers, so they can be fast with extra health, leech health and periodically drop frozen bombs all across the battlefield. These modifiers can sometimes arrange themselves in combinations that make the elite monsters seem invulnerable. Even though I’d upgraded myself, there was still so, so much room to improve.

I could have simply snuck past the elite enemies until I reached the next area, but there are powerful bonuses associated with defeating them. After level 60, killing a rare monster or champion pack earns a Nephalem Valor bonus, which boosts gold find and magic find ratings for 30 minutes. Killing another elite monster resets the timer and stacks the bonus. Unlike Diablo II, which rewarded repeated boss runs with showers of rare and set items, Blizzard encourages you to actually play the whole game in Diablo III for the best chance of finding rare, useful items. Chaining elite kills then proceeding to a boss fight is then the best way to go, assuming  you don’t reset your active skill set and a random disconnect from Battle.net doesn’t wipe out your bonus.

In addition, Inferno’s level of challenge makes it feel as though I’m truly playing the game for the first time. That’s a ridiculous thing to say after over 80 hours of gameplay, but precise movement, proper skill use and rune selection have never felt so important, where the possibility for failure exists with nearly every click, and where overcoming a crackling pack of electrified, venom-spewing, shielded champion enemies with mortar attacks feels more rewarding than anything I’d achieved all throughout my time in Normal and Nightmare modes. Even Hell feels kind of tame by comparison.

Even so, I can’t quite shake the notion that I could steamroll the rest of the content with a few Auction House purchases, and that the real reason I continue plunging back into dungeons is to earn money to spend on items found by others. I feel like I need to maintain a balance between buying omnipotence and just enough, ensuring the degree of challenge is steep but, with dedication and skilled play, conquerable. Inferno is Blizzard’s pre-made setting, but in many ways it’s my responsibility to fine-tune the difficulty.

The issue of the Auction House is perhaps more noticeable to me in Diablo III than in the many MMOs that feature similar systems because few games I’ve ever played relay a sense of evolving personal power as effectively as Diablo III. The designs of weapons , armor and individual potions, the detail in larger stacks of gold, the artisans’ carts, the designs of your AI-controlled followers’ gear – with extended play, elements not only becomes more significant statistically, but in appearance as well. With the exception of a number of reused item models, form and power rise alongside each other evenly on an incredible scale, starting from the lowly rags and leather of Normal into the fearsome spiky plate armor found in the depths of Inferno. It’s easy to dismiss statistical increases as you swap in new gear in other action-RPGs as trivial, but in Diablo III the changes are often easily noticeable, in the numbers that pop from enemy heads to the rapidity with which a once seemingly invincible foe is obliterated by the might of high-end gear. The occasional trip back to Normal from Hell to one-shot demons who used to instill fear is worthwhile simply to feel how far you’ve progressed.

As soon as Diablo III loses its forward momentum and starts to feel like an endless farming field I doubt I’ll continue to log in. I know the moment will arrive, eventually, but I’m not quite ready for it yet. The apparent necessity of the Auction House in Inferno was, hopefully, merely a one-time thing, and the rest of my journey can progress without a need to pay virtual currency to avoid the slog of excessive farming or spending a fortune to spin the reels of the blacksmith slot machine. With Nephalem Valor to aid me and, ideally, a stream of item upgrades and additional elite monster behaviors from Blizzard in the months to come, I’m hopeful the gameplay will stay interesting enough to keep me hooked and searching for the next best item and, more importantly, let me feel like I earned my power. If I fail to kill an enemy, I can accept it’s because I lack the required skill, but am uncomfortable with the idea that it’s because my virtual wallet simply isn’t big enough.



Source : http://www.ign.com

Resident Evil and the Hollywood Zombie Movie

Capcom's Resident Evil series has changed dramatically from 1996 to 2012, its humble beginnings as a haunted house survival horror increasingly distant in the rear-view mirror. It’s easy to look back on the original as a dusty curio now, but its influence still lingers, even if the series itself has taken an action-orientated turn.

The same goes for the Hollywood zombie movie. When Night of the Living Dead debuted in 1968, George A. Romero introduced the shambling re-animated corpse to the world and built a sense of escalating dread around it. Nowadays, the zombie movie is often a hard-edged thriller featuring fast-paced creatures – rarely is the word ‘zombie’ used anymore - or tongue-in-cheek schlock intended to be watched with a raised eyebrow through a pair of Buddy Holly glasses.

In fact, the recent drought of decent undead cinema leads us to wonder if the genre has temporarily dried up, or perhaps it's just enjoying its affair with the small screen. The Resident Evil series, however, is continuing to reinvent itself in order to stay relevant, sometimes to the chagrin of its fans.

With Resident Evil 6 on the horizon, it's time to take a look at the evolution of both the iconic game series and the zombie film, as bloody bedfellows.

This article contains minor spoilers. And we’re sticking with Resident Evils 1-5 for reasons of sanity and simplicity.

Resident Evil (1996) / Night of the Living Dead (1968)

Famously influenced by early ‘survival horror’ games such as Alone in the Dark and Sweet Home, Shinji Mikami’s Resident Evil also shares many similarities with Romero’s Night of the Living Dead. An emphasis on escape over combat and survival on limited resources is typical of both, as is the ‘shambling’ zombie. Both are eerily quiet experiences, a nervous mixture of sudden shocks and quiet dread of what could be behind the next door.

Ultimately, both impacted the genres in which they were working in irrevocably – Living Dead serving to popularize the zombie in cinema, while Resident Evil ushered survival horror into the mainstream.

Resident Evil 2 (1998) / Dawn of the Dead (1978)

While Resident Evil 2 may not have been as influential, it succeeded in perfecting its predecessor’s formula. The same can be said for Romero’s 1979 sequel, a bloodier affair with significantly more bite. By taking the scares ‘out of the house,’ Resident Evil 2 and Dawn of the Dead serve up a potent array of unique moments.  Resident Evil had ‘lickers,’ giant crocodiles and dogs in the sewers, while Dawn of the Dead had an entire mall to soak pulpy red.

Today, Resident Evil 2 and Dawn of the Dead are considered classics, their critical and commercial success cementing the longevity of their franchises. It is only in the brains department that the pair part ways – Dawn of the Dead is a successful allegory on consumerism, whereas Resident Evil 2 retains that dunderheaded charm so particular to the series.

Resident Evil 3: Nemesis (1999) / Evil Dead II (1987)

Okay, this was a tough one. Resident Evil 3: Nemesis never really felt like a 'proper' sequel - perhaps because it was never intended to be. Originally pitched by Capcom as a side-quest story, Nemesis focused on Jill Valentine, leading up to the events of Resident Evil 2. It was a limited exclusivity deal with Sony that demanded the numerical title, despite the ongoing production of Resident Evil: Code Veronica, who many consider to be the purer sequel.

Sam Raimi's Evil Dead II, while not a zombie movie in the classic sense (bear with me), built upon the foundations of the original Evil Dead with only cosmetic additions. Set in the same cabin a few hours after the events of Evil Dead, number two was essentially a remake, defining itself with a schlockier tone and an upping of bloody ante. Like Nemesis, it plays like a '0.5,' bridging the gap between its predecessor and a vastly divergent sequel.

It's a stretch, but hey, it's creative.

Resident Evil 4 (2005) / Dawn of the Dead (2004)

With a new over the shoulder perspective and emphasis on fight over flight, Resident Evil 4 was a thrill to play. It did, however, remove much of what had become so typical of the series, and indeed, typical of survival horror in general.  No longer were we crippled by sluggish controls or a scarcity of bullets; new precision aiming and (relatively) plentiful ammo meant Leon Kennedy had a glut of ways in which to dispatch his foes. It was a resounding success, Pandora's box had been opened, and the genre never fully recovered.

Zack Snyder's 2004 Dawn of the Dead remake pumped similar adrenaline into the zombie genre. With its alt metal soundtrack, sprinting zombies and frenetic action, the remake hurtled zombies into, somewhat ironically, the video game era. For better or worse.

Resident Evil 5 (2009)

Diary of The Dead (2007)

While Romero’s found footage-style Diary of the Dead may not share obvious similarities with Resident Evil 5, both did one thing extremely well: divide their audience. A dedicated audience of fans will flock to anything Romero directs, but Diary’s meditative tone and lack of any real scares lead some fans to question his authoritative grasp on his own genre.

Resident Evil 5 had similar speed bumps to overcome; after the triumphant 4, it was a predictably anticlimactic entry into the series’ catalog.  Criticism was leveled at the addition of a chatty partner and the brute power of Chris Redfield, stripping the game of the tension the series was renowned for. Both Diary and Resident Evil 5 were ambitious entries - successful in many ways - yet ultimately burdened by their own legacies.

Source : http://www.ign.com

House "Everybody Dies" Review

SPOILER ALERT: If you haven't seen the final episode of House, please watch before reading this review. Full episode spoilers follow.

One of the most difficult things in television is to deliver a series finale that summarizes the message of an entire show, ties up loose ends, and gives a satisfying conclusion to the folks who have poured hundreds of hours of their lives into following the story. With that much pressure on a single episode, it's no wonder that many series finales are often divisive or mediocre.

That said, it's doubtful that the final episode of House will inspire much controversy, and that's a bit of a shame. For a show that often pushes buttons and boundaries (or at least features a title character that does), the series finale played things very safe. It didn't ultimately betray the time investment of its audience, but it didn't take any risks, either.

After a prank that threatens to put House back in jail after violation of his parole, House finds himself in a burning building next to a dead body. The episode constantly returns to this location as we flash back to find out what put House in this situation. The gist of the main story is that House takes one last case, a drug addict (James LeGros) who finds more joy in taking drugs than living. House saves the addict (momentarily) even though the man, thinking he has nothing left to lose, offers to take the fall for House's prank. In saving the patient, House damns himself, proving he is less selfish than he claims... at least for the time being.

House takes up with the addict and eventually ends up waking from a heroin haze to find himself in the abandoned building with the dead addict. The main problem with this story line is that ultimately, House's bad behavior end up killing the patient, which undercuts his sacrifice back at the hospital (a main motivating factor in his decision making later in the episode). Of course, it's all just set-up to put House in a life-or-death situation in the burning building (it's never explained why the building is on fire), so he can start reflecting back on his life as the flames creep closer.

This allows the show to trot out a litany of familiar faces in a Scrooge-esque analysis of House's life: each ghost emerges to dig deeper into House's motivations for self-destruction in light of Wilson's impending death. The carousel of guest stars has long been a series finale cliche, but here it feels unnecessary. For some, it may provide closure to see Kal Penn or Olivia Wilde or Andre Brauger return, but it feels like a move that is made purely because this is the last episode of the series, and not because it is essential to bring these characters back to tell this story.

Having everyone back also puts a harsh light on the absence of Cuddy (Lisa Edelstein) in this finale. She exited the series between seasons and never got a satisfactory farewell, so it was disappointing that among all of the characters we see, the one who needs her story wrapped the most, and one of the folks who could have helped explore House's fractured psyche the best, does not get a swan song of her own.

Then there's the matter of the ending. Again, if you do not want to be spoiled, do not read further. Just as House has chosen to live, and change his life (it's Scrooge's revelation without the happy running through the streets hugging Tiny Tim bit), the building he is in explodes. Wilson and Foreman have tracked House to the warehouse and are there to see it go up, and by the time all the flames are out, virtually the entire staff is collected outside the smoking building waiting to hear House's fate. Eventually, a stretcher is wheeled out and later House is identified as the body. Dental records confirm it. But it's a little too coincidental that there was another body in the building that is never discovered, and so by the time we get to House's funeral, it's already pretty obvious he is pulling a Huck Finn.

Of course, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the false ending, or with House faking his death to avoid jail time and hang out with Wilson in his last days... it all just feels a bit tidy and safe. There is a braver ending out there, but not one that is as audience-pleasing, perhaps.

And the mere fact that the episode is safe does not make it bad; it just does not make it transcendent. But it does cap a comeback season; after getting bogged down in some wacky, wayward episodes last season, House snapped back to form this season and delivered a solid suite of farewell episodes.

This show has been a great success due to clever writing and great performances, especially the anchoring presence of Hugh Laurie, who has been excellent throughout the show's run. House has become one of the most memorable and unique characters in TV history, in large part due to Laurie. Despite a somewhat disappointing finale, the show will be missed. There's nothing on TV quite like it.

Source : http://www.ign.com