I finally found some time to get back to playing LEGO Star Wars II with my sister. We were able to complete it in three or four sessions. While I had mixed feelings about this game, it can be analyzed through two very different perspectives: that of the critic and that of those looking to have a fun time.

As a critic, I have several reservations. The first game had straightforward gameplay and a clear path. I was able to play it with my four-year old cousin and still go in the correct general direction. With this game, however, we often found ourselves wandering around rooms, trying to push and pull and jump on everything. We kept scratching our heads, asking, “What do we do now?” We had to resort to a strategy guide online almost every level, while a strategy guide to the last game would be a joke. There was very limited help in the game (i.e. no real tutorial) and success in some levels seemed to be based on sheer luck.

My sister and I would sometimes find ourselves shouting at each other, thinking the other incompetent because the simplest task for the character was ridiculously complicated. One such incident occurred when we were trying to put on stormtrooper hats at a stormtrooper hat machine. These machines are generally placed in the screen before the stormtrooper-activated doors. The screen with the doors had guards that would fire at you, and when a character was hit, they would lose their hat. The guards would not re-spawn. Unfortunately, one of the hat machines was placed in front of a point where enemies would re-spawn at regular intervals. My sister and I would end up arguing, the guards (or even one of us) would end up shooting the other and then the hat machine efforts would go to waste. It was the frivolousness of such efforts that made the play frustrating at times.

The game was far too difficult for small children, making it a poor family game (as it was advertised). From a critical perspective, I felt that this was not a very strong sequel to the original LEGO Star Wars. I have told many other people of my frustration and how it is simply better to stick with the original.

On the other hand, I have to give this game some credit. Thinking back to Bernie DeKovern’s Well-Played Game, it isn’t always about winning or feeling happy and relaxed. Sometimes being totally involved in the game is valuable. Many of DeKoven’s guidelines, such as the willingness to play, safety, trust, and familiarity were met while my sister and I were playing. It did give us a reason to block out time to be together and bond over head-scratching puzzles. Occasionally, the trust was broken (such as the mistaken incompetence issues mentioned above), but we do trust each other to delegate tasks in the cooperative game mode.

The issue of familiarity reminds me of another reason that I had to love this game: it included memorable characters from one of the most beloved series of my childhood. We eagerly anticipated the Endor level for the chance to play an Ewok. Much to our dismay, there was only one Ewok, but we each took a turn and found Wicket adorable even when we were not in control of him. (Although I cannot guarantee that Wicket was always squished by accident under my Chicken Walker’s mechanical foot).

While the familiarity with the series made me roll my eyes at the slapstick-laden movies (such as Darth Vader coughing in the steam as his spaceship’s door is lowered), I have to admit that I did enjoy seeing Star Wars in a friendly LEGO atmosphere. My sister enjoys watching me play games more than playing them, and this one allowed her to join in with relatively little difficulty (compared to my usual RPGs or plaformers). Together, I think we were able to have a well-played game, even if the game was not as well-made as its predecessor.  

After a stressful week, I find that playing a video game can be rather therapeutic. You can project your enemies onto the plethora of monsters you must fight and gain a sense of satisfaction from completing in-game tasks. While the individual tasks in a game as long as an RPG can be quite nominal, they are fairly easy to complete. I am a person who makes lists and loves to cross things off of them, so it is fun for me to go through with a strategy guide and mark my progress.

Richard Bartle would probably classify me as an achiever for this reason. I do thoroughly enjoy running around the levels and collecting items. I like playing independently – I enjoy competition most if it’s against the game or myself. I don’t mind leveling up at all, but there could be two possible motivations for this. The first would be that I enjoy gaining levels, another form of achievement. I find that higher levels make boss fights a little bit easier, and I am a fan of low-stress games. My second motivation is that I enjoy killing monsters. As I mentioned earlier, I can unleash any pent-up aggression on the virtual monsters. If a monster scares me, it shatters that line where I feel safe (like when I jumped and screamed after the sudden appearance of a monster in Doom). This takes me out of the play and I would much rather fight monsters when I can see them clearly.

These two motivations are not mutually exclusive, however. While Bartle’s ideas apply mostly to MUDs, I do think that it is possible that people can fit multiple classifications, and these qualities may be seen more clearly in different games. I believe that I do have a bit of a killer in me – I’ve been known to shout Bartle’s “Die! Die! Die!” (a killer classification quote) when excited about any fight. However, I think that my neurotic collecting and leveling up would classify me as an achiever, even if I do decide not to go after EVERY ultimate item at the end of these games. (Usually, at the end of RPGS, I am at such a high level that it really does not matter if I get all the items since it would not make it significantly easier to beat the game.)

I had been neglecting my RPG addiction in an effort to spend time with my mother during her recent visit and get my homework done. However, once I had a few spare hours to myself, I decided it was time to jump back into that genre I love and give Kingdom Hearts II another try.

I was so excited to play again, thinking that after my first five hours, the game would really take off. I had regained control of the original party (not the main character’s doppelganger and his friends). I was thrilled to have to chance to run around and collect items, and maybe slay a few enemies along the way. Unfortunately, I had triggered a story point before I saved that cleared the area of monsters. How disappointing. While it was nice to run around quickly, I missed the satisfaction of slaying the monsters. I told myself not to get too upset, as I would soon enter a new area that was sure to offer more enemies.

I was bitterly disappointed when I played for the next two hours, when I encountered fewer than 20 fights (lasting about 15 seconds each) and more and more movies. The movies were obviously being used as a crutch to patch together an overly complicated story. I was in control of the characters for less than half of the time again. I found that the play mood was interrupted and I was rudely thrown outside this game “magic circle” each time a new movie appeared. There were so many that I kept wondering how long it would be until I would get to play again. This game me the felling that I was not invited to my own party – they didn’t need me, the player, to help them tell the story. I was just there to hack up the occasional enemy (ridiculously easy) and move along a very clear path in order to trigger more movies. It not longer felt like play.

Even if the killer in me could not be satisfied by the fights, I had hoped that the achiever part of me could find satisfaction. However, the collection of items didn’t even seem fun anymore. After eight hours of gameplay, you could collect synthesis items to synthesize better weapons but you didn’t have enough to actually improve weapons yet. Even the ready-made weapons were (what I considered) worse than what I already owned. Plus, I did not have enough money because I had barely been allowed to fight. The only other way to gain money in the game was to complete ridiculous mini-games and I really did not want to waste my time re-playing games that were ridiculous when I completed them earlier as the doppelganger.

After all this, I really thought that I would give the game one more shot or at least play it until I got to the Pirates of the Caribbean level. Unfortunately, my strategy guide walkthrough showed me that it would be at least 5-10 hours away, and I simply did not have the patience to wade through so many movies for a level that I heard wasn’t nearly as cool as it seemed.

The magic circle was shattered and my needs as a player were not met. I decided to send this game back and stop wasting my time being disappointed by a game that would not satisfy my player types.  

I have been so busy lately that I have neglected games at home. This has happened to me multiple times during my school career, and each time I feel myself getting increasingly anxious. Neglecting games means denying a real passion of mine, and I have decided that I really must make more time for fun games. So made a date with my sister tonight to play LEGO Star Wars II, a game that was released a week ago last Tuesday and I have talked about excitedly to no end. It was wonderful to finally sit down and play it with a pal; after all, its real strength is the co-op mode.

I was a huge fan of the first LEGO Star Wars for its cleverness and good-natured fun. There were unlimited lives and simple puzzles that depended on each player’s unique abilities. I had played it multiple times, with five different people between the ages of four and 24. I have found few games that can match it in appeal for a co-op game that even non-gamers can enjoy.

LEGO Star Wars II is based on the original trilogy (whereas the first was based on the new trilogy). The sequel is based on the movies I grew up with as a child, making it much more of a nostalgic experience for me. We didn’t have a large amount of time to play this evening, but it was enough to notice a few key differences.

In the first game, you would lose health points if you shot an object close to you (in order to get money inside it). You are not harmed by the exploding objects in the second game, which is nice since you don’t have to be as careful. There are also a couple of doors specific to characters you can unlock later. There were only a couple of locked doors in the first game. The new design really encourages the free play mode, which I have found to be one of the best features in the original game. Free play is an excellent way to show off the kitschy value of Star Wars scenes completely redone with LEGOs, as non-gamers can enjoy exploring the familiar worlds with less pressure. Also, the levels are more detailed. The graphics are better and there are more intricate interactions with the environment (such as sliding off awnings and sandhills or riding creatures and vehicles). The expanded environments can make it more difficult to determine where to go next, but it’s simple enough for most older players.

The original game also had a large dependency on characters who could use the Force to manipulate the environment. A Jedi was necessary in almost every situation, but it fit with the story. In the classic movies, the Jedi aren’t always around. This problem was easily overcome by allowing any character (except droids) to build with LEGO pieces. I had wished that characters could build in the first game, since it seems such an integral part of the LEGO theme. It is also very funny to watch a character’s arms flailing as the LEGO pieces are assembled.

From the small amount of time I have spent with the new LEGO Star Wars, I am quite pleased. While it is no perfect, there seem to be a lot of nice features to help keep the game challenging for adults but still accessible and fun for children. I am excited to play more and learn about all the new features. I hope it is another keeper because I do love playing games with non-gamers friends.  

Today in class we had the chance to play some old games. I got a chance to check out Real Myst, Doom, Quake, and Castle Wolfenstein. I rarely take the time to try out the older games, and it was fun to go “out of the box” a little – I’m used to my happy children’s games and RPGs.

Real Myst was probably the game I played for the least amount of time. I was playing with a friend, and both of us had grown frustrated by the puzzles of the original games. I had the advantage of a strategy guide, but I quit before playing five hours simply because I felt so lonely in the first Myst. After discussing the exciting ability to move more fluidly through the world in Real Myst, I was excited. However, as soon as I encountered the first puzzle, I decided that I had seen enough of the pretty graphics and wanted to move on. The Myst series appeals to a very select audience, especially in this age (with more variety in games). I think it takes a very patient person, and many people in my generation simply aren’t used to waiting around to appreciate the beauty of a game.

Castle Wolfenstein was not what I expected. When I first heard the game, I thought it would be an 2-D platformer/adventure game, not a shooter. I played it for a short period of time, in which I was confused by the number of identical doors and the limited mise-en-scene. I had little idea of what to do (other than shooting) and shooting didn’t interest me much. After I had seen some of the Germans, I decided that I had the general idea and moved on.

Quake and Doom helped me realize once and for all why I never play FPS games. I was playing Quake and I died in almost no time, even on easy mode. I simply am not motivated to run around in the dark and kill things. I always seemed to be running low on armor, which made it even worse. I felt like I was on suicide missions. I am also very jumpy. I thought I was doing okay when I was playing Doom. I had worked out a strategy where I would strafe behind newly opened doorways so I could scout out enemies and scan the area. If I ran around shooting at the slightest hint of movement, I seemed to eliminate most enemies. The dated soundtrack and growling sounds didn’t seem to bother me too much. After hearing an irregularly large number of growling sounds, I assumed that there could be a monster nearby. I spun around in the dark and saw nothing. Then, I suddenly realized that I was being harmed and screamed aloud in terror as a pixilated monstrosity appeared out of nowhere. Seeing as I was wearing headphones at the time, my classmates all turned to look. My friend, who was watching, stated that it was probably best that I didn’t play FPS games. I think he’s right.

While I do appreciate returning to some of the classic games, it is very clear to me why gamers often stick to genres they love. My friend, who had played many shooting games, picked up the controls easily and found the game design easy to navigate. Many genres, like FPS, RPG, or racing games have similar strategies that experienced players can master. I think I will still devote most of my time to the genres I most enjoy, since it’s much more comfortable, creating a more enjoyable experience.  

A few days ago, I received a rental in the mail. This week, it was Tomb Raider: Legend. I have never been a huge fan of the Tomb Raider series; I had only played Tomb Raider II briefly. While I enjoyed the earlier game’s Croft Manor training level (and was amused to no end when I discovered how you could shut the butler in the freezer), I had lost interest once the real adventure started. I didn’t like the one-hit death policy as a beginner. However, after hearing rave reviews of this game and its relatively short completion time (10 hours), I was excited to check out this game. After all, it was supposed to be the Lara’s comeback.

I started up the game and saw an interesting option on the menu: Croft Manor. From my previous Tomb Raider experience, I assumed that it was a training level. If not, I thought that it would at least help me to get a feel for the controls. It turns out that Lara can run around a large, open hallway and un up to her friends. However, she cannot talk to them or enter any doors until the first level was completed. So much for a training level. I exited and began a new game on beginner mode (since I rarely play this genre).

The opening cut scene was simple enough: a cute younger Lara gets in a plane crash (part of her history which I knew from other media). The graphics were only as good as the in-game playing graphics, but those are decent. It wasn’t RPG-quality, but it wasn’t meant for that audience.

I first gained control of Lara on a cliff. The path to follow is fairly easy to find – there is really only one way to go (usually up or out, depending on the level). Lara is fairly forgiving (aside from as incident when she died after falling 15 feet) and has excellent agility. She can grab ropes and ledges if you get her within a reasonable vicinity, making the game less stressful. She can also take out enemies easily; you barely have to aim. Both made for an ease of gameplay that allowed me to move fairly quickly and focus on the adventure rather than the details. Also, there is a tutorial, but it is integrated into the first level (another friendly feature). While some of the moves took a couple of tries, there was really no penalty if you did die over and over practicing (it appears as if the lives are not limited).

However, I easily got past my first onslaught of enemies without having to use a single medi-pack. I had to leave two to go to waste on the ground, as I could only carry three. Perhaps the enemies were easier because I was in beginner mode. At any rate, I entered my first temple and died a couple times over some spikes. The 15-second load screen after death is little penalty; it’s just a bit annoying if you die multiple times in a row (but you usually regenerate at certain “checkpoints” that are located conveniently near particularly challenging obstacles).

I was having an okay time running through the game until I got through the first puzzle. It is confusing and complex, especially compared to the rest of the game. This is the part where I usually diligently follow a strategy guide so I can continue on my merry way. I looked up a guide online, but soon realized that I didn’t really care about solving the puzzle. Why?

First of all, the game felt a little too easy. Also, I was running through Bolivia for apparently no reason. The witty comments didn’t catch my interest and there was little character to speak of. The NPCs I shot were so flat that I felt less guilty shooting them than the animals. I naturally avoid games that will stress me out (since I am very jumpy and a little bit neurotic, so my life is stressful enough). While this game was low stress (and thus very playable for its genre to someone like me), I still could not get into it. I had little interest in the affairs of Lara and did not want to take the time to solve the complex puzzles. I decided to send it back.

When I think about the game now, I would still rate it as a good adventure game. I think that the standard or advanced modes would provide a more even challenge in the game (and the puzzles would match those difficulties better). It just didn’t capture my interest, and I believe that that is mainly because of the type of player I am. I really love the Spyro trilogy and RPGs like Final Fantasy. Both have pretty colors. The RPGs I have really enjoyed are not only beautiful but also have complex, engaging stories. I like games that don’t try too hard to seem cool (unlike Tomb Raider’s Lara Croft) and kill creatures that are hurting the world (such as mythical or silly monsters, not beautiful leopards in Bolivia). If a game has puzzles, I want to be able to solve them within a few tries or have a strategy guide for the hard ones. I think it is good for me to play these other genres for inspiration and gain an understanding of mechanics. However, I think I will continue to send them back after a couple hours simply because of my nature.  

In class today we watched a documentary concerning the 1997 chess match between Garry Kasparov and IBM’s Deep Blue. While this footage reminded me of the emotional drama I once faced as a musical performer, it was useful in the context of our class because it concerned games and emotions. If a program such as Deep Blue can crack the nerves of chess master Kasparov, the issue of how games can play with your mind and emotions emerges.

It appeared to me that Kasparov was limited in his thinking because he assumed that Deep Blue would have a strategy; it would think like one human. It seems to me that one of the greatest advantages of an A.I. player is how it can combine strategies of multiple individuals; the computer thus appears to have a sense of spontaneity and no one linear “strategy.” Game Two was worst for Kasparov because he felt as if he had faced a completely new player. Why did he assume that the computer would act like one player each time? He was limited by his knowledge of human players, who enjoy the safety of tested strategies and familiar moves. Since the computer was able to store such a wide variety of possibilities in an organized fashion, it had access to multiple human strategies and was no longer limited to personal preferences.

Kasparov is definitely more human than the computer, but does that cripple his chess abilities? While it is easy to understand Kasparov’s mental and emotional breakdown toward the end of the tournament, it is clear that he lacked the endurance of the machine. Such endurance would be very useful in other endeavors, and it is very old. The concept of a mechanical “super-soldier” has emerged again and again in films and other media. Why not a super-smart chess player who is not affected by performance anxiety or mental exhaustion? Such ideas frighten me; I fear the age when we will develop technology so sophisticated that humans become inferior in terms of intelligence and efficiency.

Deep Blue may only have one talent, but its ability to “crack” a chess mastermind prove that A.I. may one day be more than able to match humans in other areas. Perhaps they will surpass our abilities, which may be very useful – as long as we are still able to shut it down when necessary.  

I switched game rental providers last week so I could play the new releases I had been eagerly anticipating. My first choice was Kingdom Hearts II, the popular sequel to the Disney/Square RPG I had beaten last winter. I already had the guide and was excited to play it despite disappointing reviews from my friends. They had warned me of the ridiculous mini-games and errand-runnning, but this was not what I have found to be the problems.

I popped the disc in and watched the opening cinematics, impressed by their clean lines and clever cinematography. The flashiness of the movie helped to hide the fact the clips didn’t really make sense within a narrative structure; I decided it was just a fun way of previewing an intricate plot.

The plot picks up after GameBoy game that takes place in between the first and second games. This linking game’s story was summarized in my strategy guide in a confusing one-paragraph description. The plot, involving regaining memories and running around a castle, seemed far-fetched.

Even more far-fetched was the idea that the game began with an entirely new character, Roxas. He appeared to be a parallel character to the first game’s protagonist, Sora. Roxas dreams about Sora and his memories.

While I do have a capacity for suspension of disbelief even in 60-hour RPGs, I found it hindered by the patience required through all the introductory movies. In a three-hour play session, I literally controlled Roxas for fewer than 30 minutes. This was not even consecutive. This few precious minutes consisted of moving my character around small sections of levels with a extremely basic tutorial.

For a game that requires such a great knowledge of a complex backstory, the tutorial is ridiculously basic. They explain how it’s a good idea to talk to NPCs (who repeat instructions thus far in case you forgot them in the thirty seconds since the last movie). They warn you to be very cautious in fights, yet most enemies can be defeated in a few single hacks.

In the beginning, the game allows you to set the challenge mode. I have been playing on “Standard” mode but am re-considering switching to “Proud” (challenging) mode. (There is also an “Easy” mode for beginners.) This game seems too easy for the seasoned RPG player. Is it geared toward children? If so, the plot would leave even the brightest child behind. I am a college student who understood the first game and am still baffled. How can children be expected to sit through all the movies when everything will go over their heads?

The opening of Kingdom Hearts II is far too dependent on cinematics to convey the plot, which is still a mystery. The gameplay is easy and does not provide a challenge; it tests the players’ patience after waiting through all the movies. However, I am still excited to play this game – I want to get through the Roxas section and believe there are fewer than two hours left of it. I will hold out hope that this game will get more challenging (I can switch modes if needed) and allow me to take more control. If not, I am going to send it back and move on.