Project Zero 2: Wii Edition Review

There aren’t many survival-horror aficionados who would dispute that the Project Zero/Fatal Frame games rank alongside the finest that the genre has offered over its bumpy-but-glorious twenty-year history. With its snap-happy combat, relentlessly sinister ambience and nightmarish narrative, Tecmo's series deserved far better than mere cult status.

That's fine, but why release a 2003-vintage PS2 title just before the Wii passes the baton onto the upcoming Wii U? Also, why only release it in Europe and Japan (no North American release date has been confirmed yet)? Well, there's evidently a method to the madness, with Nintendo now officially co-owning the IP to the ghost-busting series – perhaps it sees the excellent Project Zero 2 as the ideal opportunity to 'relaunch' the brand in advance of an all-new Project Zero/Fatal Frame on the Wii U. We can but hope.

Unlike so many games from our misspent youth, Project Zero 2 has aged remarkably well and arrives on the Wii feeling perhaps fresher than it did all those years ago. With classic survival horror conspicuous by its absence in 2012, going back to explore the murderous mysteries of the mist-shrouded All God's Village is a rare treat.

For the benefit of those of you who missed out on Tecmo's classic the first time around, the story focuses on the perilous journey of twin sisters Mio and Mayu, who stumble upon an eerie village where the tortured souls of the dead roam. But their misfortune is somewhat balanced out when they chance upon the Camera Obscura - no, not fey Scottish indie popsters, but an antique device that can take pictures of the undead and exorcise their spirit in the process.

“ The game's ghost-busting combat is endlessly fraught.

Armed with this one and only weapon, you work your way around the village and its various rickety buildings, zapping ghosts and finding objects that help you gain access to the next section. Structurally, it's classic survival horror fodder, albeit in a satisfyingly self-contained set of environments that keep annoying backtracking to a minimum.

The real star of the show, of course, is the game's endlessly fraught ghost-busting camera combat, and it's an element that's tailor made for the Wii's fluid point-and-click control system. During your travels, you'll inevitably stumble across a few tortured souls angling for some aggro, and - more often than not - the only way to progress is to put these screeching spooks out of their misery.

Rather than wee yourself and curl up in a ball when a ghost approaches, the answer is to whip out your mighty Camera Obscura and show this undead the power of exorcism. Loaded up with special ghost sensitive film, the action flicks to a first person viewfinder mode, whereupon you attempt to take a series of ghost-troubling snaps to literally suck the life (or death) out of them. By tilting the Wiimote, you can adjust your viewing angle, and by locking-on with the Z button, you can begin to charge up your shot. Once the reticule is fully filled, you're ready to loose off a shot with the B button, repeating the process until they're finally out of commission.

“ As a mechanic, it's deliciously nerve-wracking.

As a mechanic, it's deliciously nerve-wracking, with each ghost wriggling around with inconsiderate unpredictability, nipping in-and-out of shot, and often re-appearing right behind you to give you a welcoming hug. This being a Wii version, such moments of intimacy result in you having to flail for your life, so make sure pets and other loved ones are out of arm's reach before you wind up giving someone a black eye in a moment of uncontrolled alarm.

Nintendo has also managed to turn the simple task of object collection into a disproportionately nervy minigame, with ghostly hands often reaching in for a smooch just as you're about to pick something up. It's enough to give those of a nervous disposition a heart attack.

There’s also a new Haunted House mode brought to this special Wii Edition. Each of the Haunted House missions is curated by the sinister Kureha, who likes nothing more than to hear the piercing shrieks of the terminally afraid. Set in a sequence of on-rails missions, the basic premise of these short interludes is to walk slowly from A to B without keeling over with fright, as the game measures your jumps and terrified flailing through the Wii remote and nunchuck’s motion sensors.

Some test you in your ability to remain cool and calm while being subjected to various other worldly shrieks, moans, bangs, warped faces and generally unsettling nonsense, while others task you with collecting dolls while being chased by everyone's worst nightmare: a long-haired Asian goth schoolgirl. Turning around periodically stops her in her tracks, but if you allow her to get too close, you must suffer the indignity of an unwelcome cuddle. And we all know how that feels. Aside from this welcome-but-throwaway new mode, most other changes to the Wii Edition are subtle and cosmetic, with widescreen support, a new pulled-back third person camera angle, cleaned-up visuals, brand new voice acting and a slightly less cutesy look to Mio and Mayu - not that the latter point will be especially apparent if you've not played the original for a long time.



Source : ign[dot]com

ZombiU: Good Cop / Bad Cop

ZombiU was one of the surprise hits of this year's E3. A return to classic survival horror gameplay, it makes extensive use of the Wii U controller's screen and shows Ubisoft is serious about supporting Nintendo's new platform. But is it really going to be a great game, or were gamers just excited to see something that isn't a sequel?

IGN Australia's Lucy O'Brien and Cam Shea have both played the game, but came away with contrasting opinions. They battle it out in another classic IGN AU Good Cop / Bad Cop debate...

Good Cop Lucy: As you know Cam, I am a massive survival horror fan. My love for the genre knows no bounds. Well actually it does; I played Silent Hill: Homecoming. But as we all know, it’s a genre on its knees, long overtaken by balls-out action clamoring for our attention spans. Remember when the scares in video games came from what we couldn’t see? Remember when we weren’t ultra-powered space marines with muscle to spare, but weedy everymen? Remember that frantic scramble past packs of zombies to reach that single green plant?

Luckily for me, a bunch of good folk at Ubisoft remember all that stuff too, and are currently developing something remarkable on the new Wii U tech – a game that actually evokes our sense of dread. The use of the Wii U controller as both a useful tool and a means to put your character into a vulnerable position is a killer blow to our senses, and I found myself terrified despite the fact I was surrounded by a bunch of media and a Ubisoft rep who politely ignored my loud swearing. I caught up with you later that day, sure we were going to riff gleefully on ZombiU’s virtues, only to find the game left you cold. What gives?

Bad Cop Cam: It's not that I hated ZombiU, more that I found the demo resolutely mediocre. I agree that there's a lot of potential for tension in the inventory mechanic, which leaves the player vulnerable while they rifle through their backpack on the Wii U tablet screen, or pick items off a corpse, but the gameplay itself was too predictable for this tension to ever come to fruition. I didn't ever feel I was doing anything I haven't done before, so whether it was zombies shambling towards me on the post apocalyptic city streets or zombies lurching at me in the darkness of a dank basement, it just didn't get my blood pumping. I may be way off, but I wonder whether the fact that the traditional survival horror genre is "on its knees" means you're willing to cut this a lot more slack than I am. For me, very little about the E3 demo seemed particularly fresh or compelling.

Even what is arguably the game's most interesting feature - the fact that the player starts afresh as a new survivor when they die - isn't something that I think is necessarily going to work that well. On the one hand, I like the idea that you'll have to find the zombie version of your former self to retrieve your stuff. This should make for some incredibly tense sequences. On the other, it's still really 'gamey'. I can see waking up over and over again in the safe house, then - essentially - teleporting back to the start of the area you died in, getting old really fast. Are all these survivors just lining up outside the safe house? Twiddling their thumbs waiting for their turn? Ubisoft is selling this as something unique - no checkpoints and no game over screens, but the system effectively is just another form of checkpoint… with infinite lives and more time required to get back into the action.

There's also the potential for horrendous bottlenecks where the player dies in a situation that's going to take a lot of attempts to get through. Oh great, I'm back in the safe house. I'm all for making it challenging, but this is going to have to be balanced really tightly to work. I also thought it was interesting that the team has said that survivors gain 'skills' the longer they last. When a survivor dies, you can retrieve their stuff, but not their skills. This may make sense, but - again - could be a source of frustration and feel overly punitive. Am I missing the point?

Good Cop Lucy: It’s a pity you found the gameplay mediocre. I agree that my love of the genre could have meant I was more ready, more open, to being scared, but I found the careful dispersion of zombies and claustrophobic environments absolutely terrifying. So while the demo may not have been ‘fresh’ as you say, it struck me as very finely-tuned. And that’s not taking into account the implementation of the gamepad.

I’m sure Ubisoft will build a narrative wrapper around the survivors being re-spawned, and considering you re-spawn as a whole new person, losing your skills whenever you die makes sense. And it’s a brilliant punishment, too, as the finality of every playthrough demands a hugely considered approach. I don’t know about you, but I was moving forward at a snail’s pace, taking into account every part of the map, every corner of my current surroundings and nerve-jangling groan in the background. In this sense the game can be compared to Dark Souls, another game where achievement feels more euphoric thanks to punishing mechanics. ZombiU’s online integration – where you can encounter other zombified-survivors – also echoes Namco’s title, their presence acting as both a warning and a threat. Isn’t it time for more games where greater punishment offers greater reward?

The best backpack management sim ever?

Bad Cop Cam: Sure, and hopefully the development team can make the most of it. I just worry that the kind of game design where dying actually punishes the player - or is something to be avoided at all costs - and this particular game may not gel that well. Survival is a reward for skilled play, but this is a horror experience built on manipulating the world around the player to surprise and scare them, as opposed to giving players a lot of choice in how they're going to play, thereby putting survival on them in no uncertain terms. Survival horror games need things jumping out at the player, they need claustrophobic environments where there's very little room to move, they need weapons and ammo to be scarce. Do you think it would be fair for ZombiU to, say, drop the player into an enclosed space with five zombies, then punish them for failing to find the door quickly enough, or having the wrong weapon equipped? That's what's going to happen, and the fine line between fair and frustration will be crossed - particularly if you lose something significant as a result. Compare this to a game like Diablo III and its hardcore mode. A hardcore character's death is permanent, but players with skill and a deep understanding of the game mechanics will be able to survive. Such are the options available to the player that if they die, it's pretty much their own fault.

I'm getting a little sidetracked here, however, as we don't yet know what skills the player will earn in ZombiU, and thus what will be at stake. I will say, however, that you very clearly played through the demo in the spirit of the game more than I did. I assumed I'd be able to take on whatever the game threw at me, so wandered about hitting zombies with cricket bats then shooting them in the face with relative abandon. If death had been permanent in the demo I would have played it differently, but instead I wasn't too worried about dying, because hey, I wanted to see how the safe house mechanic worked, anyway. This obviously means it was stripped of a lot of its atmosphere, and is probably the reason it felt so unremarkable. I just wasn't doing anything all that interesting. Shooting zombies? Done it a million times. Finding a key card to open a locked door? Ditto. Finding medicine for some dude? Yawn. Being forced to step on a burnt section of floor that I know is going to collapse then having it collapse? C'MON!?

Did any of the uses for the Wii's second screen - aside from backpack management - excite you? Lockpicking? Scanning the environment?

Dying on work's Stupid Hat Day... how embarrassing.

Good Cop Lucy: I understand your concerns regarding ZombiU’s ‘survive at all costs’ pillar, but the game isn’t quite as ruthless as you’re suggesting. The game always presents the player with a variety of options, so it’s up to you to decide if you’re going to crouch in a darkened corner, hands over your ears while mumbling the national anthem, or if you’re going to quickly scan the room, bolt towards some ammo and carve your way through. At one point during my E3 playthrough I was totally overwhelmed by a horde and seemingly trapped without an escape route or ammo, and my first instinct was to back into a wall and more or less crucify myself. But somehow – and honestly, I experienced an inexplicable zen - I put some space between the horde and myself, enough to spot some obstructed stairs. Anyone who’s played a Resident Evil or Dead Island will know that the top of a flight of stairs are your friend, particularly when you have a cricket bat. Sure, it’s not a great example of rewarding knowledge of comprehensive game mechanics, but it’s a great example of the minute-to-minute challenge to keep your sh*t together. In this regard, the player takes total ownership over the outcome.

And while I wasn’t thrilled by lockpicking and scanning the environment as singular experiences, I did enjoy the way they helped gel the experience together into something more cohesive. It’s a tactile thing, nothing more, but having an actual 'toolkit' in your hands helps immerse you in the game, doesn’t it? For me, that immersion has always been the appeal of the Wii U’s second screen. And ultimately, I think it’s exciting to see Ubisoft doing new things with the tech. They’re paving the way for other publishers, and they’re being bold with their experimentation. For that reason alone, I’m glad ZombiU exists.

(Not Particularly) Bad Cop Cam: Here's hoping I got the wrong impression. This game definitely has potential, and while the demo didn't excite me a great deal, there's no doubt that there are some good ideas here. I liked the sequence, for instance, when you encounter that teleporting mini-boss and the feed to your "prepper" (the player's guide, essentially) is cut. Suddenly the second screen's only showing static and your ties to everything you've been relying on is gone. Doesn’t necessarily make a great deal of sense, but it shakes things up nicely.

Coming back to the parallels with Dark Souls, you can also leave messages on walls for other players that are only visible using a black light pick-up you get at some point. I should also mention that when you finish the game you unlock Nightmare mode, where you have just the one survivor. I've already voiced my concerns about this, but that's a good addition if they can make it work. And last but not least, I also agree it's great to see Ubisoft taking a leadership position with Wii U and creating a game that isn't based on an existing franchise. Fingers crossed you make me eat my words later this year!

Source : ign[dot]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

Supernatural: "Survival of the Fittest" Review

Note: Full spoilers for the episode follow.

The seventh season of Supernatural wrapped up with "Survival of the Fittest", an apt title when you look at who was left standing at the end of the episode.

"Carry On Wayward Son" launched us into the episode with a montage of what had happened earlier in the season. Using that song as the intro to each season finale is one of Supernatural's best traditions; the Leviathan storyline itself may have faltered this year, but the song managed to pick up some of the slack in raising the excitement level as the finale began. And for me the level of anticipation needed to be raised from about zero, so that was a very good thing. If the opening song wasn't enough old-school Supernatural for you, the return of the Impala was another great moment with "Born To Be Wild" blasting as Dean's car roared back into the action. It was a short-lived return since it was only used as a distraction, and Meg crashed it almost immediately, but they have fixed that car up from much worse accidents.

James Patrick Stuart as Dick Roman, head of the Leviathans, was the best element of the Leviathan storyline all season, and it was no different in the finale. The scenes of him hammering out the contract with Crowley (the excellent Mark Sheppard) were great; I loved the juxtaposition of modern businessman Roman working through old-school demon Crowley's contract that rolled out on the floor in a long scroll.

Although the Leviathans had been built up at the beginning of the season to be super-powerful villains, in the end, dispatching them wasn't all that difficult for the Winchesters and their allies, something that was a real flaw with the storyline. A simple distraction at the office and Sam and Dean were (apparently) easily into the building. Even chopping the Leviathan heads off didn't seem to be that difficult once the Winchesters discovered that a simple Borax solution would disable them. And although they had to gather a few supplies to make a weapon that would get rid of Roman, even that didn't turn out to be too difficult for them. As for the rest of Roman's plan, Crowley seemed to think that the rest of the Leviathans just needed to be rounded up and Kevin told Sam that they needed to blow up the lab. As unsatisfying as that was as a way to wrap things up, I will take it if it means that we don't need to do anything more with the Leviathans in the future.

All of that aside, where the Leviathans really missed the boat in being effective Supernatural baddies was that there was no sense of an emotional connection for the Winchesters, something that previous villains on the show have had in spades. Maybe the producers thought that having Castiel be the one to bring the Leviathans out of Purgatory would make it personal, but it didn't. The fact that Roman killed Bobby helped to give the Winchesters a direct connection, but even with that there was never the same sense of emotional high stakes that we have had in the past.

Supernatural: Jensen Ackles and Jared Padalecki Look Towards Season 8

Crowley, on the other hand, did not disappoint. His sarcastic comments were great as usual, a favorite this episode being "text me when Sparkles here retrieves his marbles" after seeing the state Castiel was in. More importantly, Crowley behaved as a "proper psychopath": he betrayed all sides to his own benefit. He worked with the Winchesters to get rid of Roman and also managed to screw over Sam and Dean in the process while getting his minions to collect Meg.

Where the emotion was missing in the fight against the Leviathans, it was present in the goodbye to Bobby. I had not been a fan of the decision to turn Bobby into a ghost, but at least they made the gutsy decision to take that storyline to its proper ending, with Bobby recognizing that he was doomed to turn into a vengeful spirit unless Sam and Dean burned the flask that kept him from crossing over. Jim Beaver was an integral part of the Winchester family and he will be missed, but I was glad they said goodbye rather than ruining the character by having him hang around longer as a helpful spirit sidekick. The scene itself was nicely done - a somber, but not overly emotional goodbye.

I also appreciated the focus that was put on Castiel and his relationship with Dean. Misha Collins and Jensen Ackles have always been great together and while Collins put a new spin on the character of Castiel with his stream-of-consciousness thought process and inability to engage in the battle, his connection to Dean remained strong. "Nobody cares that you're broken Cas, clean up your mess" was a great line.

With a change on showrunners next season (Sera Gamble is out and Jeremy Carver is in) hopefully Supernatural can get back to how good it was a few seasons ago. They left things at a good spot, the betrayal by Crowley may not have been that surprising, he is a demon after all, but what he did was a shock. The weapon that killed Roman also tossed Dean and Castiel into Purgatory, leaving Sam bewildered and alone. Jared Padalecki did a good job conveying Sam's confusion and fear at what had happened. Purgatory was effectively creepy and Dean's predicament was only made worse when Castiel poofed away. That ending was the biggest success of the episode: where they left both Sam and Dean made me want to see what happens next. That is a major accomplishment after the tedious nature of most of the season.

Source : http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/05/20/supernatural-survival-of-the-fittest-review