When I (that is, to say, my father) bought my current computer, a Vaio laptop that is much more powerful than it has any business being, the computer included a free Windows 7 upgrade. I was hesitantly excited about this, and sent in my proof of purchase, and such, in order to get this new piece of software.
I finally received this blessed new OS yesterday, Microsoft's attempt to make up for Vista. It's an important time for them, as more and more Windows users switch over to Linux or Macs. (Hey, everyone buys something stupid once in a while.) And, to cut right to the chase, it's obvious.
I was worried when I began the update that I'd have to reformat, and redownload my 60+ gigs of Steam, which is a dizzying prospect when your internet slaps a cap on anything faster than 200 kb/s. But, the upgrade went off without a hitch, and all my files were transfered, even the "My _____" stuff, which I specifically backed up, lest I lose my precious por-er... documents and music.
I installed all the necessary drivers with the companion CD, and, all-in-all, the process took about 4 hours, a reasonable amount of time. What immediately struck me about Win7 was the new toolbar and Start Menu. They've got a new tab-style system going, where everything on the taskbar is filed together by process. So, if you have two separate... MSN conversations open, they'll both be under the MSN tab. There are a few minor bugs with certain programs and tabs, but even they're not too great a nuisance. The "go to desktop" button, probably the most/only useful feature in Vista, makes it return, now moved to the right side of the clock, an unobtrusive little button.
Speaking of unobtrusive buttons, the Start Menu itself is still here, as you might expect, and it's been significantly improved. In addition to pinning things to the Start Menu still being possible, with new features that I'll get to in a moment, there's also a new little thing that I found useful. Remember that little bar of things beside the Start button, with one or two things you used, and about 10 you didn't? Well, it's back, simplified, and you can now add or remove things from it just as easily as pinning things to the Start Menu.
Making a segwue back to the Start Menu: items on it, whether pinned, or on that "often used" programs thing underneath your pins, may now have mini-menus attached, with a variety of useful features. I've been consistently using the Steam one to go straight to my favorite games. There's not a lot of support for it yet, it seems, but that will come with time, I suspect.
The new Windows is not without its problems, of course. The theme starts in that same spec-hogging Aero that Vista had, but it's easy to change, and most 7-capable computers can probably handle it now. Another old Vista problem, the "constantly asking permission" thing, is also still there, but the Control Panel now has a slider bar for how often you want Vista asking you if you want to do the thing you just told it to do, with settings ranging from "Vista with paranoia" to "none". Three guesses which one I picked. :P
This is just first impressions, because I can't say for certain whether or not 7 is good. Two days in does not an effective appraisal make. But, I've got a few things I've wanted to try, and I've heard good things about it, so I think I can safely say that it's better than Vista.
How much better, we'll see.
October 31, 2009
October 29, 2009
A Short Review...
A short review of Burnout Paradise, to tide you over, my non-existent reader, until I get around to finishing/doing my Arkham one. Or, rather, a summary of the experience.
VREEEEVREEEE-EEEEEEEK-VREEEEEVREEEEEEEE VREEEEEEEEEVREEEEEE VERRRRRRRRVREEEEEE-"OH SHIT!" CRRRSHCRAAAAAASHCRRRSH
"...Cigarette?"
VREEEEVREEEE-EEEEEEEK-VREEEEEVREEEEEEEE VREEEEEEEEEVREEEEEE VERRRRRRRRVREEEEEE-"OH SHIT!" CRRRSHCRAAAAAASHCRRRSH
"...Cigarette?"
October 26, 2009
A Strange Thought
I think you should be able to put video games on your resume. "Level 80 Tauren Druid", "30 boxes full of Shiny Level 100 Pokemon", "played a Korean MMO for more than 5 minutes", these things... this goes beyond playing a video game. This becomes a job, and one they enjoy. A set goal, which not only do people reach through hundreds of hours of their free time, repeating tasks over and over again, they pay for the privilege to do this. And they're not satisfied with that. Every day, they endeavor to do it faster, to go even farther. "Five Level 80s, all with the best gear possible." "All the Pokemon also have the best natures, EVs, and IV."
These people do not need a life. What they need is a career, harnessing this ridiculous dedication and attention span. You get someone focused the same way you get them to focus on WoW, and harness it for profit, you will never want again.
These people do not need a life. What they need is a career, harnessing this ridiculous dedication and attention span. You get someone focused the same way you get them to focus on WoW, and harness it for profit, you will never want again.
On my Arkham Asylum Review
Well, over the last couple days, I've been thinking. Yes, it hurt. But, through the pain, I realized that, if I'm not giving a specific weight to the different scores, why not just give a flat score, and explain the pros and cons? It'd keep me from repeating myself so much, too. So, why not just give a flat score? I'd repeat myself less.
...Thinking hurts.
...Thinking hurts.
October 22, 2009
APIFO #1 - Batman: Arkham Asylum
Well, I decided to get right on it, and test out my new system. There are about a half-dozen games I want to review that are new enough that my opinion could conceivably effect whether someone buys a game or not, and this is the newest of said games, thus, my first choice for reviewing. I like to have cultural significance.
For those of you who live under rocks, or have the memory of an Etch-A-Sketch, Batman: Arkham Asylum is the product of Rocksteady Studios, whose only previous affair is a game no one has heard of, called Urban Chaos: Riot Response. Wikipedia tells me it's a first-person shooter that got decent reviews, so it's slightly unexpected that their next game would not only be nothing like their previous game, but also fucking marvelous.
It's no secret, folks. You probably know this already, but this game is amazing. I've heard "game of the year" thrown around a few times, which really doesn't surprise me, and it's definitely in my top 3 for this year, along with Prototype, and possibly Modern Warfare 2. We'll have to see. Anyways, I've ranted long enough. Time to get to the meat.
Appearance - 5/5; A - Let me just start off by saying that this game has fairly standard system requirements, but to get the full spread, you'll definitely need something a bit heftier than 1 gig of RAM and a cardboard slab for a graphics card. At maximum specs, the game is beautiful. Batman's cape flows like a fabric and not a roll-out texture simply attached to his back, characters have distinct and noticeable facial expressions, with remarkably subtle changes at certain points, and a surprising attention to detail.
But your sight isn't the only sense that Arkham will make sweet love to. One of the greatest tricks that Eidos and Rocksteady were able to pull was getting just about the entire Batman: The Animated Series staff on-board to reprise their roles. No disrespect to Heath Ledger, but Mark Hamill has a nostalgia-cemented place as my favorite Clown Prince of Crime, and he's definitely at his peak here, along with the rest of the cast. Kevin Conroy, Arleen Sorkin... They had to replace Gordon's VA, who has come down with a bad case of being eighty-four years old, but you'll barely notice a difference unless you compare them side-by-side, in which case you're just trying too hard.
There is one individual who's conspicuously missing. I don't want to spoil anything, suffice to say that a nice, juicy sequel hook is left hanging out there about them, so that can be forgiven. And they wouldn't do well trying to fight for the spotlight with everything else you've got going on, so leaving that-one-character-who-will-not-be-named out was actually a very wise decision.
Presentation - 5/5; A- - The presentation holds up to the same standard that the visuals and audio set. The game proper has a few minor storytelling bumps, and mishandled sections, but these are really only noticeable in retrospect. There are a couple of small bugs, such as one occasion where attempting to slow-motion kick a thug in the head while standing on a narrow stairway sent me flying through the air like he was in a kung-fu movie, but that was monumentally entertaining, and rare enough to not hinder gameplay to any great degree.
One section was, in a delightfully spoiler-free description, supposed to be tense and frightening, and for many people it may have been, but up until the end, it felt more like a chore than a scare. The end of the area more than made up for it, though, and it is played brilliantly. Rocksteady loses 50 hypothetical points for how they handle the last part of the final boss, tossing out a proper climax in favor of something that does not make for a tasty ending. Again, no spoilers, suffice to say you'll know it when it comes, or at least when it's over.
Even with the flaws, it still makes for a very Batman-y experience.
[Later: Interface, Fun Factor, and the thrilling conclusion to APIFO #1, Overall score! Pretend to be surprised!]
For those of you who live under rocks, or have the memory of an Etch-A-Sketch, Batman: Arkham Asylum is the product of Rocksteady Studios, whose only previous affair is a game no one has heard of, called Urban Chaos: Riot Response. Wikipedia tells me it's a first-person shooter that got decent reviews, so it's slightly unexpected that their next game would not only be nothing like their previous game, but also fucking marvelous.
It's no secret, folks. You probably know this already, but this game is amazing. I've heard "game of the year" thrown around a few times, which really doesn't surprise me, and it's definitely in my top 3 for this year, along with Prototype, and possibly Modern Warfare 2. We'll have to see. Anyways, I've ranted long enough. Time to get to the meat.
Appearance - 5/5; A - Let me just start off by saying that this game has fairly standard system requirements, but to get the full spread, you'll definitely need something a bit heftier than 1 gig of RAM and a cardboard slab for a graphics card. At maximum specs, the game is beautiful. Batman's cape flows like a fabric and not a roll-out texture simply attached to his back, characters have distinct and noticeable facial expressions, with remarkably subtle changes at certain points, and a surprising attention to detail.
But your sight isn't the only sense that Arkham will make sweet love to. One of the greatest tricks that Eidos and Rocksteady were able to pull was getting just about the entire Batman: The Animated Series staff on-board to reprise their roles. No disrespect to Heath Ledger, but Mark Hamill has a nostalgia-cemented place as my favorite Clown Prince of Crime, and he's definitely at his peak here, along with the rest of the cast. Kevin Conroy, Arleen Sorkin... They had to replace Gordon's VA, who has come down with a bad case of being eighty-four years old, but you'll barely notice a difference unless you compare them side-by-side, in which case you're just trying too hard.
There is one individual who's conspicuously missing. I don't want to spoil anything, suffice to say that a nice, juicy sequel hook is left hanging out there about them, so that can be forgiven. And they wouldn't do well trying to fight for the spotlight with everything else you've got going on, so leaving that-one-character-who-will-not-be-named out was actually a very wise decision.
Presentation - 5/5; A- - The presentation holds up to the same standard that the visuals and audio set. The game proper has a few minor storytelling bumps, and mishandled sections, but these are really only noticeable in retrospect. There are a couple of small bugs, such as one occasion where attempting to slow-motion kick a thug in the head while standing on a narrow stairway sent me flying through the air like he was in a kung-fu movie, but that was monumentally entertaining, and rare enough to not hinder gameplay to any great degree.
One section was, in a delightfully spoiler-free description, supposed to be tense and frightening, and for many people it may have been, but up until the end, it felt more like a chore than a scare. The end of the area more than made up for it, though, and it is played brilliantly. Rocksteady loses 50 hypothetical points for how they handle the last part of the final boss, tossing out a proper climax in favor of something that does not make for a tasty ending. Again, no spoilers, suffice to say you'll know it when it comes, or at least when it's over.
Even with the flaws, it still makes for a very Batman-y experience.
[Later: Interface, Fun Factor, and the thrilling conclusion to APIFO #1, Overall score! Pretend to be surprised!]
My Judging Format
Well, I'm in a rather productive mood, so I'm just going to get started on my first piece of actual content right away rather than wait for the mood to pass like a raunchy fart. One of the things I wanted to do with this blog was review video games, because I'd love it if I became big enough that the companies would start sending me them just for the privilege of being reviewed by me. Yeah, that's going to happen.
Anyways, I figure I'm going to need some kind of objective system, so here we go. Keep in mind that this is subject to change, as I am literally making this up as I go along. Without further ado, I present the APIFO rating system.
Appearance - A general catch-all for graphics, music, voice acting, and other direct sensory inputs. I figure that graphics and sound are so closely tied together that if one sucks, the other probably will, too. Same goes for if they're quite good.
Presentation - Atmosphere and experience. This differs from "Appearance" because, while a game can be quite visually appealing, if it's applied poorly... It's comparable to the difference between having a large vocabulary, and being a good public speaker. Or the difference between Intelligence and Wisdom, for my fellow D&D nerds out there.
Interface - Ah, here we go. You'll notice a lot of the categories so far are combinations of multiple related factors, and this one is no exception. Controls, menus, set-up, this one could also be described as "Ease of use".
Fun Factor - The big one, the final exam that makes up 90% of your grade, the last quarter, fun. This section feels a little redundant, because a game being fun should be the forefront of playing it, but that doesn't always seem to be the case.
Overall - This is not an average of the other scores, rather, it's just my final opinion on the game. TL;DR, it's the TL;DR score.
All five categories will be rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best, and given an accompanying letter grade and some commentary for a bit more detail. The scale breaks down as such:
5/5; A+ to A- - Superb! Very few, if any problems, this is what all games should strive for. A 5 in Overall is a whole-hearted recommendation of the game to anyone even vaguely interested in the genre.
4/5; B+ to B- - Well done. Minor, but noticeable problems, or good, if not mind-blowing performance, though this is in no way an insult. If a game gets a 4 Overall, you could do better, but you could also do a lot worse.
3/5; C+ to C- - Meh. Not bad, per se, just run of the mill. If you need something to kill a few more hours, you could rent one of these, or buy it if you're a really big fan.
2/5; D+ to D- - Oof... Definitely could be better. Rampant bugs, choppy framerate, generic music, mediocre experience, at best. Maybe a rental. Maybe.
1/5; F - Crap. Shit. Shovelware. An aneurysm with box art. Conceivably a deal-breaker if it's surrounded by otherwise good scores. For masochists and the morbidly curious only.
Insert witty closer here.
Anyways, I figure I'm going to need some kind of objective system, so here we go. Keep in mind that this is subject to change, as I am literally making this up as I go along. Without further ado, I present the APIFO rating system.
Appearance - A general catch-all for graphics, music, voice acting, and other direct sensory inputs. I figure that graphics and sound are so closely tied together that if one sucks, the other probably will, too. Same goes for if they're quite good.
Presentation - Atmosphere and experience. This differs from "Appearance" because, while a game can be quite visually appealing, if it's applied poorly... It's comparable to the difference between having a large vocabulary, and being a good public speaker. Or the difference between Intelligence and Wisdom, for my fellow D&D nerds out there.
Interface - Ah, here we go. You'll notice a lot of the categories so far are combinations of multiple related factors, and this one is no exception. Controls, menus, set-up, this one could also be described as "Ease of use".
Fun Factor - The big one, the final exam that makes up 90% of your grade, the last quarter, fun. This section feels a little redundant, because a game being fun should be the forefront of playing it, but that doesn't always seem to be the case.
Overall - This is not an average of the other scores, rather, it's just my final opinion on the game. TL;DR, it's the TL;DR score.
All five categories will be rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best, and given an accompanying letter grade and some commentary for a bit more detail. The scale breaks down as such:
5/5; A+ to A- - Superb! Very few, if any problems, this is what all games should strive for. A 5 in Overall is a whole-hearted recommendation of the game to anyone even vaguely interested in the genre.
4/5; B+ to B- - Well done. Minor, but noticeable problems, or good, if not mind-blowing performance, though this is in no way an insult. If a game gets a 4 Overall, you could do better, but you could also do a lot worse.
3/5; C+ to C- - Meh. Not bad, per se, just run of the mill. If you need something to kill a few more hours, you could rent one of these, or buy it if you're a really big fan.
2/5; D+ to D- - Oof... Definitely could be better. Rampant bugs, choppy framerate, generic music, mediocre experience, at best. Maybe a rental. Maybe.
1/5; F - Crap. Shit. Shovelware. An aneurysm with box art. Conceivably a deal-breaker if it's surrounded by otherwise good scores. For masochists and the morbidly curious only.
Insert witty closer here.
First!
Well, here we go. One more pointless webpage to add to the fifty-zillion already out there, and yet more contribution to the proof of Sturgeon's Law. This is where I will be stroking my ego with rants and blatherings about my opinions, hopefully with something resembling humor injected in there as well.
As for the name... Well, there are two reasons why this blog is called "Drinking Mouthwash". The "official" reason is because this blog goes through the motions of a proper blog, without really grasping the core concept, much like someone who uses Listerine as a beverage. The actual reason is that I was looking at a bottle of Listerine on my desk and drinking a Dr Pepper while I tried to think of a name, and it seemed quirky enough to work. Not a very good reason, but that's why I gave you the first one.
As for the name... Well, there are two reasons why this blog is called "Drinking Mouthwash". The "official" reason is because this blog goes through the motions of a proper blog, without really grasping the core concept, much like someone who uses Listerine as a beverage. The actual reason is that I was looking at a bottle of Listerine on my desk and drinking a Dr Pepper while I tried to think of a name, and it seemed quirky enough to work. Not a very good reason, but that's why I gave you the first one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)