A True Tour de Force

Storytelling has never been Bungie’s strong point in my opinion, but last year’s spinoff, Halo 3: ODST, was the studio’s narrative pinnacle. If Bungie can build off that huge success and apply pure, gritty, and compelling emotion into Reach, gamers will be glued to the edge of their chairs throughout the entire experience. Reach, a prequel to Halo: Combat Evolved, has the best chance of any Halo game to pull this off. For those who don’t know, Reach will tell the tale of the fall of the Spartan home planet of Reach. It’s going to be a dark experience…700 million civilians will die, and you’ll be along for the ride.  Unlike past entries, you won’t fight alone in Reach.

Knife to the back, it's super effective.

You’re part of Noble Team, a group of elite supersoldiers, fighting the nefarious Covenant. Bungie has spoken very sparsely of the game’s campaign thus far, which is a likely indication the studio doesn’t want to spoil what it’s so tirelessly worked to perfect. Come September 14 gamers can expect some of the largest, most epic firefights, set pieces, and voice-acting ever seen in a Halo game. All things considered, a large percentage (sadly, likely over half) will jump directly into multiplayer and forgo what will be in the grandest tale Bungie has ever told.

Multi-freakin’-player

As said above, multiplayer is, for many gamers, the main draw of any Halo game. And who can blame them for thinking this way? I can still remember playing Combat Evolved on Blood Gulch thinking to myself “this is ridiculously fun, I probably won’t ever stop.” Fast forward to Halo 2 and Halo 3, and the experience only got better. However, Bungie has created the ultimate, most engaging, multiplayer experience ever with Halo: Reach. It’s more than just Armor Abilities (though they are completely incredible), and Loadouts; it’s Invasion.

New Invasion map, Spire

This game mode, sort of like Battlefield: Bad Company 2’s Rush, pits Elites against Spartans in a largely scaled and dynamic ground, air, and vehicle skirmish. Crafting something as ambitious as Invasion was a bold move on Bungie’s behalf, but based on May’s multiplayer beta alone, I’m already sold. In addition to Invasion, new modes HeadHunter, Generator Defense, Stockpile, and Arena will offer countless hours of enjoyme

nt. Oh, and all the standard gametypes and JETPACKS. Suffice it to say, multiplayer in Halo: Reach, barring some catastrophe, will be excellent and the new bar for shooters to aim for. I play Call of Duty online, but I hate it. I’ve always said “a game anyone can be good at, no one is truly good at.” Halo multiplayer has always taken skill, and Reach will up the stakes yet again!

ForgeWorld

Halo 3 came with this new tool called Forge. It allowed gamers to create whatever the hell they wanted within the Halo multiplayer universe, share it with the world, and make Halo essentially a never-ending game. Halo: Reach expands upon Forge, and introduces ForgeWorld, a monumentally large sandbox to play, create, and kill in. As Bungie said in the video embedded below, the possibilities are endless with ForgeWorld, and I can’t even imagine what the community will develop with such a magnificent tool in their hands. I’ve never been able to design a strong, balanced, and fun map, but when there’s millions of others out there who are capable? I let them do the work for me!

The Unknown

Bungie has told us what feels like a lot about Halo: Reach, but for a game that’s the studio’s largest and most ambitious yet, I feel like there’s a heck of a lot we’re still in the dark about.

Of course Bungie isn’t going to reveal everything pre-launch, and what I think is most exciting is just what the heck else is on that Reach disc. We’ve already seen a killer space-combat sequence (a first for the Halo series), but what else might Bungie have in store?

Space combat. F*ck yeah.

The Bungie Support

Bungie knows how to treat its paying customers. If I’m going to fork over $60 for a game, I want a developer’s attention, and Bungie has never failed me in this department. Despite already being heavily invested in the studio’s first multiplatform game, Bungie has promised to support Reach post-launch. What does that mean? Map packs are a given, making damn sure servers stay online is a must, but I really hope Bungie surprises us here. Perhaps single-player DLC…how rad would that be? Think about this: your girlfriend might cheat on you, but Bungie will be true to the end.

Fear not, Bungie will watch over us all

Halo: Reach hits shelves September 14. Look for my review at ThatVideoGameBlog.com, and add me on Xbox Live @ eddie_not_eddy to hop into some multiplayer!

I never drink that much

My name is Eddie Makuch, and I take serious issue with how blogs handle newswriting.

The best picture of me...ever.

I’ve interned at GameSpot in San Francisco, attended Comic-Con, PAX, E3 and other industry events, had my work sourced on Kotaku, Joystiq, and countless other blogs, sat at the gaming news editorial helm of BlastMagazine for 13 months, and am the current weekend editor at ThatVideoGameBlog.com. How I got there is a story for another day, but what is imperative is where videogame newswriting is headed, and why it can be a very slippery, ugly slope to slide down.

For as much as I adore the blog style of newswriting, as it currently stands, it is the antithesis of “journalism” (more on that hot topic later). Like any publication, a blog’s main ambition is to amass eyeballs, and in turn sells those pupils to advertisers to keep the outlet financially afloat. I’m a capitalist, I know how this works, and so do you. The problem here is the way in which these blogs go about their newswriting practices.

Newswriting on blogs, as I’ve seen it, is all about speed, having the information before anyone else, and being able to say “we had it first!” The problem with this editorial process however, is that it diminishes the gravity and informational penetration of each story that is written. Further, how often have you seen ugly spelling, grammatical, or glaring factual errors? To conquer these literary atrocities, more time and effort is required on the behalf of the publication’s writers. But these gamer scribes are lazy.

I’m a blogger, I know the feeling of the rush when I’m about to publish a story no other blog, site, or forum yet has. It’s exciting. Your window of opportunity to have the “exclusive” is tiny. To get the first scoop you’ve got to have the sleuthing skills of Sherlock Holmes, a sharp and quick-thinking mind, and fingers likes bees on meth. Few possess these skills, and somehow they all seem to be bloggers.  When bloggers write, their eyes are fixed on the “publish” button, when these individuals should instead be more concerned with assembling the most readable, informative, and eloquent phrases.

ummm...omgz!

But that’s not the only problem with videogame newswriting.

Additionally, there’s the fundamental debate amongst game journalists of how the term “journalism” translates to blogging. Really, how does it? There’s no book on the topic, no universally accepted method on the matter. Destructoid’s love-to-hate editor, Jim Sterling, cries out every day that he’s “not a journalist.” But if he unearths gaming news, assembles it into the less-than-300-word template that he and other bloggers so steadfastly cling to, what is he doing? He’s being a journalist.

As readers, we wish to consume information in easily-digestible, bite-sized pieces. We want to read a story on the snarling litigious imbroglio surrounding Infinity Ward and Activision, and the next minute divert our eyes to a post on the next Pokemon game. This isn’t a problem. The video game industry is a billion-dollar endeavor composed of thousands of companies, each wishing to communicate information every day. This informational onslaught stops for no one, and bloggers are often ostensibly affected by this assault (follow any writer on Twitter and you know what I’m talking about). That said, it’s always been, since the Hartford Courant debuted in the 1700s, a journalist’s job to communicate the subject material in a way that’s easy for the reader. It’s a writer’s tasks to exert minimal pressure on the reader to comprehend the story at hand. From headline, to body, to conclusion, the reader should simply read line after line and get smarter with each passing phrase. However, blogs often don’t let this happen.

I’m not decrying the blogosphere. It’s clearly where gaming journalism is headed, if it’s not already there. I’m of the blogging breed, and I love my job to death (though my girlfriend would have something to say about what I do all day). I would love someday for my commute to be from the bed to the desk, and eat steak while I write about games. But if I am to embrace this profession, I want the writing community to shape up, take more responsibility for, and pride in, their work. Is that too much to ask?

I hopped on a bird of steel and headed to San Francisco Tuesday afternoon on a gross, rainy and bleak Connecticut day. The rain-soaked air strip kept us grounded for over an hour past out scheduled departure time, and I was certain I’d miss my connection in Detroit. I knew I’d miss my connection. Our flight was 90 minutes late, how/why would it wait for me?

Long story short (you’re really only missing my silly nervousness) I made it aboard and, though late, we departed from sunny San Francisco.

As chance would have it, I sat in a window seat with no one sitting next to me. A nice, older lady on the aisle seat, but no one sat next to me. A quick check of the cabin revealed the true rarity of the situation.

On the flight Leap Year was shown. It was not very good, at all. Why can’t in-flight cinema ever be decent? (Apart from a trip to Vegas where Kangaroo Jack was shown).

Again, fast-forwarding in time. I get into San Francisco International Airport around 10:30 local time and it wouldn’t be until after midnight (3:00 a.m. body clock time) until I was asleep in my bed in Mill Valley, a nice little city across the Golden Gate Bridge.

I awoke the next morning and caught the #4 bus into the city at 7:30 a.m.  Arriving in the city at 8:30, I made my way to my office, where I was treated to an hour’s worth of HR shenanigans.

Once ushered to my desk and introduced to GameSpot staffers, I sat at my desk and started work. Just like that.

I apologize for the bite-sized details. I don’t enjoy this type of writing. Why am I even writing this? I have communicated the same information via Twitter (@EddieMakuch) and Facebook already as well as speaking directly over the phone with loved ones. I guess this blog is kind of irrelevant. If you’d like to know what I’m up to, read my Twitter feed or friend me on Facebook if you must know what I’m doing at all times.

I just think journal entries like this are kind of silly. Sorry!

I’m moving to San Francisco on the first of June to begin the internship with the world’s most popular video game website and I could not be more excited.

I’ll be learning from the best of the best of the best  working 40 hours a week, embedding myself deeper than ever in the industry I love so much and attending my first Electronic Entertainment Expo. I feel I’ll come out of the experience a much stronger writer and far more well-versed in video game news knowledge than ever before.

At the publication I write for now, Blast Magazine, I sometimes feel overwhelmed. In large part, I am solely responsible for continuing to update the site with game news day in and day out. I’m not griping at all, I’m simply saying when I’m with GameSpot I’ll be a part of a team. I’ll be able to bounce ideas off team members and I won’t have the burden of “doing it all” on my shoulders any longer. As saddened as I am to leave Blast Magazine, the site that provided a means to this glorious end, I’m eager to begin the next chapter of my life.

If you feel like keeping tabs on what I’m doing at GameSpot, feel free to read the website at www.GameSpot.com and keep your eyes on this blog for my day-to-day reactions of my new life embedded in games journalism.

Here. We. Go.

Best known for its online multiplayer PC efforts, the Swedish developer unleashed a fair rival to Infinity Ward’s “Modern Warfare” on Tuesday and is a must-play for first-person-shooter fans.

While the original was critically viewed as somewhat of a lighthearted affair, the sequel bubbles with fast-paced action, compelling narrative and of course, the best multiplayer available anywhere.

Clearly gunning for “Modern Warfare 2,” EA pulled it off with Bad Company 2, as in many ways, is a superior game.

It feels so good to take it down.

Bad Company 2 was built, like the original, employing DICE’s proprietary Frostbite game engine. This under-the-hood capability allows for anything and everything in your way to be eviscerated in the blink of an eye. While raiding a camp in South America you could, in theory, pick enemies off one by one by lurking around the perimeter, but you can also equip your grenade attachment and blow the bitch to smithereens. This game mechanic makes the game a highly dynamic and ultimately strategy-based affair. The game environment persistently changes as a firefight progresses. Cover is broken up and destroyed, leaving your enemies in plain sight, but it also works the other way.

Take it down!

I’m on a boat?

Often times throughout the game’s campaign you’ll pilot a pilot a boat, fight on foot and man a machine gun on the back of a speeding jeep, swapping from one to the other to the other in the course of mere minutes. This persistent variance allows the game to remain fresh and never dry or dull. In one particular level you’ll rip through a rural town with an Abrams tank, dismount, pop some bad guys in the dome, then pilot a UAV and rain fire down on rooftop RPG-wielders. It may sound schizophrenic and jumbled, but it actually works extremely well.

You put strong narrative in my FPS!

First-person-shooters are notorious for their lackluster and wholly unbelievable narratives, but Bad Company 2 doesn’t follow suit. The game opens with a very intriguing narrative approach (which I will not spoil) and it only gets better from there. Though the general plot is very predictable and consists of you and your burly squadmates stopping a Russian from launching a super weapon, you’ll grow attached to the characters because of DICE’s strong story-telling capability. Voice acting is phenomenal in Bad Co. 2. Every phrase feels genuine and this time when the guys joke around, it’s at appropriate times and is appropriately phrased. Cutscenes in the game are also well-executed. Whether it’s watching Marlowe sneak behind a sniper, slice his throat and watch the blood splatter or listening and watching the evil Kirilinko pace a room announcing his devilish plans, these scenes play out like film and are truly enjoyable to watch.

Just one piece of the vehicular puzzle.

Big guns, small guns, loud guns, quiet guns, rockets, knives and sniper rifles.

Bad Co. 2, as you’d expect, is full of weapons. Everything from the one-shot kill sniper rifle to silenced machine guns to the 12 inch jungle knife, proves the team at DICE know what’s what in the weapon department. As you traverse the game’s levels you’ll find weapons. When you pick up a foreign weapon, it’s added to your inventory which you access through the very useful “Crate” mechanic. At many places at many times during each level a crate will appear and accessing it will stop the game and allow you to resupply and change your primary and secondary weapon, based on what you’ve already collected. This is expressly useful when standing atop a hill looking down at a camp with a light machine gun. Access the Crate quickly and you’ve got a sniper rifle with devastating force.

Kill ‘em All

You look so good I could eat you

Bad Company 2, for lack of better phrase, is one sexy bitch. Throughout the campaign you’ll travel across hemispheres finding yourself sometimes in lush forests with flowing water and other times storming a bitterly cold frozen encampment. The commonality among these varied locations is how gorgeously they are rendered. What’s even more compelling is the game’s draw distance, that is to say, how far the eye can see in the game. At times you’ll sit perched atop a hill and rain sniper fire down on infantry storming from east and west hundreds of meters away, and it’s easy and beautiful at the same time. Bad Company 2 is definitely one of the most graphically-stunning games on the market today. And to achieve such fidelity without a second of lag or drop-in, is quite a feat.

It really looks this good.

It’s really all about the multiplayer

As compelling and strong as Bad Company 2’s narrative and single player experience may be, it all deeply pales in comparison to the game’s multiplayer component, and this is no oddity. DICE has been making Battlefield games for over a decade and in that time proven itself to be a guru of multiplayer design and execution. Bad Company 2 offers a deep, engaging and fun multiplayer component, the type you don’t just play, you love.

Its use of vehicular combat is staggering in its excellence. Everything from pontoon boats to helicopters and even jet-skis are yours to use and are central to a team’s success or failure in any given match.

In terms of game-modes, it’s pretty straightforward. Here’s the breakdown.

Squad Deathmatch- This mode pits four squads of four players against each other in a battle to 50 kills. These games are (relatively) short, fast paced and resemble the multi-team playlist in Halo 3.  If you’re looking for something similar to Modern Warfare 2, Squad Deathmatch is as close as you’re going to get.

Rush- This is the game type found in the demo for both the PS3 and Xbox 360, so you’re likely already familiar, but if you aren’t, it’s simple. One team defends a series of Comm-stations, while the other attacks it.

Squad Rush- Obviously similar to Rush, this mode pits two squads (4 teammates) against each other in a frenzied head-to-head battle over two Comm stations.

Conquest- This is a flag capture game mode pitting two teams of up to 12 against each other in a battle to control flags by defending them and capturing others. Needless to say, this mode is extremely fun, engaging and so very addicting.

With a host of environments ranging from the cold, snowy and desolate to a hilly, jungle map where you can pilot boats, drive tanks and fight on foot, the game’s multiplayer will keep you engaged for countless hours. Furthermore, an unlock system and perk system, similar to that of Modern Warfare 2’s, allows you to unlock and collect more powerful, accurate and deadly weapons and attachments for both weapons and vehicles.

Modern Warfare 2 who?

A few times (many I likely missed) throughout the game’s campaign, DICE pokes fun at its rival in some hilariously performed cutscenes. These include a scene where characters say “snowmobiles are for pussies,” clearly making fun of MW2’s snowmobile sequence and a segment referencing how heartbeat sensors and special ops are silly. They are lighthearted, sure, but their intent is clear.

Lock and load

Important Part: Battlefield: Bad Company 2 is better than Modern Warfare 2. Its story is richer, its scope larger, and its multiplayer far more compelling. DICE displays mastery in both vehicular combat and hot and heavy first-person-shooter goodness spanning both the campaign and multiplayer, a feat rivaled by none on the market today. Its campaign is short (about 7 hours), but it makes up for it in a multiplayer component you’ll likely log hundreds of hours in before you’re done. Bad Company 2 is a must-have for fans of first-person-shooters.

Battlefield Bad Company 2 was released March 2 by EA DICE. It’s available for PC, PS3 and Xbox 360. Game was finished in its entirety on Xbox 360 on the normal difficulty setting. A copy of the game was purchased for review purposes. Kill ‘em all.

First the bad.

We all remember the failures. Last summer’s “May Payne” adaptation had nothing decent in it. The problem was more deeply-rooted than a clumsy narrative and Mila Kunis playing someone other than Meg from Family Guy. This film had no redeeming qualities. Gamers got excited about it because “this would finally be the good video game movie,” but when they left the theater, hands in pockets, with desires to go all Men in Black and wave the wand in front of their eyes to forget the anguish, they realized a decent video game movie may never exist.

The much worse.

The movie: “Super Mario Bros.” This 90s film was so inescapably poor that I would hand Princess Peach over to the sinister Bowser himself if allowed to erase this film from history. We all know how it went down. Some movie producer thought it’d be a grand idea to cash in on one of the most beloved video game characters ever. And you might think a cartoon adaptation would be most fitting, but no, it was decided the movie should be a feature-length live-action endeavor.  Needless to say, the movie failed, and it failed hard.

The one that had a chance.

A movie based in the fictional world of Albion from the Fable” video game universe.

Storytelling is a facet of game-design Fable-developer Lionhead Studios have literally perfected from the beginning. The story is a literal coming-of-age tale about a young boy seeking vengeance on those who’ve wronged him. His life is surrounded with moral decisions, the consequences of which, remain with him and affect his daily happenings. The game world is littered with high-fantasy, action, adventure, and exploring. Those are all elements of a great movie, am I right? A film, based in the colorful world of Albion, properly casted, executed, and marketed, could be a big winner.

The one we want to succeed, but probably won’t.

2009’s “Uncharted 2” was a downright splendiferous video game. It had some of the best voice acting, characters both evil and pure, and bullet-ridden sequences in the history of video games, but it likely won’t make a great film. It could be decent, but its expectations would be so monumentally high, it would easily crush itself under its own Nathan Drake-buffed weight. “Uncharted 2” is a prime example of leaving well enough alone. The game is phenomenal and plays out much like a film. Why not leave that delectable taste in the mouth of millions, instead of a chewy, garbled attempt at blockbusterdom.

The definitely will be, barring catastrophe, good.

Jerry Bruckheimer, the man famous for directing the Pirates of the Caribbean films has a clear knack for delivering action-packed movies full of memorable moments. So when his name is tossed around the video game world, anxious eyes set their sights on him. The movie is “Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time,” and, based on a few trailers and a reveal of the general plot synopsis, this film may just be the one to rescue the rest and shine a banner of hope on the painfully disturbed genre. Jake Gyllenhaal plays the Prince of Persia, and with a glistening six-pack and a loin-loosening smile, might just make this film a winner when it releases in May, 2010.

Walt Disney won’t let me embed the trailer,but watch it here.

The video game to movie transition has its best chance with the Prince of Persia flick, but the main issue I believe is one of discretion. Sure you could make a film based on a popular game franchise, but should you?

It’s an understandable apprehensiveness. If someone said to me “I want to build a video game with a dragon named Spyro as its main character, oh yeah, and I want two years and millions of dollars to make it,” I might have said get out of my office.

These publishers, namely the largest two, Activision and Electronic Arts, want guaranteed returns on their lofty investments and so often only fund ideas they strongly believe will make them at least their invested capital back.

Take a look at 2009 for a realization of this assertion.

Last year, the video game industry released sequels, prequels, and spinoffs galore. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, Assassin’s Creed II, Guitar Hero 5, World of Warcraft: Wrath of the Lich King, Killzone 2, Halo 3: ODST, Gears of War 2, and Resident Evil 5, are prime examples, just to name a very few.

Those games, amidst all the others, sold the very best, and were all based on an already established franchise. Sure they were “new” games and some of the worlds you traveled to in them were fresh and exciting, but were nothing like the shellshock experience of an entirely new gaming experience.

Think of it like this.

Imagine how the first man or woman to experience an orgasm felt. One can only envision the literal excitement he or she felt during this moment(s). It’s this kind of feeling brand new video games can instill upon their users, but so often, we are denied this climax.

It is said that large risks can yield great rewards, but these departures from normative theory can also lead to dismal creative and monetary defeat. That said, I strongly feel a few creative failures are far more beneficial than the year in, year out appropriation of capital for games like the next Guitar Hero or Call of Duty.

The idea these publishers need to have force-fed down their throats is that at the end of the day gamers just want a game that’s fun to play.

Sure, I get excited about the next Legend of Zelda title but what would really buff my gaming libido would be if Nintendo created something without Links. I know it’s a major risk and a lot to ask, but is a life without risks a fruitful one? I don’t think so.

Thankfully, this groundbreaking change isn’t merely confined to the waves of my brain. It’s actually happening, that is, if you believe rumors which surfaced in early January.

Believe it or not, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2-developer Infinity Ward may not develop Modern Warfare 3. The California-based development studio, under the banner of publisher Activision, is believed to be building an entirely new intellectual property (possibly a first-person-shooter MMO), while Activision continues the Modern Warfare series with yet another studio handling the development efforts.

Activision clearly believes in the creative minds at Infinity Ward and is subsequently allowing the team to build something outside their area of expertise. It looks and feels like quite a risk on the publisher’s part, until you remember the company owns Guitar Hero, World of Warcraft, Call of Duty, and numerous other cash-cows, thus allowing them to continue to thrive, even if this effort doesn’t reveal itself to be as monetarily-effective as planned.

Maybe I just want what I can’t have, but I’d love to see a publisher take a risk on a game. Not only would such a move be great PR, but who knows, it could make some money as well!

I’m talking about video game reviews. Not how these exposes of assumed-value are written, but rather the numeric score attached to them.

I feel it is a fraudulent enterprise to place a percent-value on a game based on its merits in the eyes of the reviewer alone.

There are many problems with the current review system every publication from popular gaming Web destination IGN.com to the GameInformer magazine uses, but I’m disheartened to know and truly believe it won’t change.

The main problem with associating a game with a numeric score is that the adjectives connected with each number are not equivalent across the ever-growing avenues of analysis both on the Web and in print.

For example, a 9.0 on IGN’s scale yields the adjective “Outstanding,” while Blast Magazine, the publication I write for, uses “Excellent” to describe that same value.

Where do I draw the line between outstanding and excellent? Are these words equal? More importantly, when readers jump from publication to publication, to amass enough knowledge to warrant what they deem a justified purchase, is the game’s actual value lost in translation due to these differing declarations?

Additionally, I believe reviewers, no matter who you are, who you write for, or how much experience, knowledge or wisdom you have, should not be the one to decide why the game’s score vaulted to a 9.5 simply because “the game’s multiplayer component” pushed it there.

Game-play elements of a particular game matter to some and not to others, so I don’t believe it’s fair to generalize the issue.

The main reason why numeric review scores will likely never disappear entirely however is due to pressure from publishers. Global video game publishers like Electronic Arts, Activision and Square Enix thirst for these scores to slap on the back of the game’s box or tout in a television or print advertisement.

With the help of a number score, in just one glimpse, a reader, marketer, parent, or publisher can get an idea of how “good” the game is, and can do so, and often do, without reading a single line of text.

Is this where we are today? Do we seek the easy way out and not challenge ourselves to dig deep and discern the true merit of a game (or anything else in life for that matter)?

Thankfully, the games journalism field is an evolving beast, and many well-read blogs have bucked that trend and offered an entirely new structure of analysis.

Take for example mega- gaming-themed blog Kotaku. The daily readership of this establishment eclipses the multi-million mark and its review process is far from normal.

Instead of affixing a number score to each review written, the journalistic team at Kotaku forms their prose in a series of “Loved” and “Hated” statements.

In doing this, readers are not force-fed an analysis they may not agree with and can thankfully form their own conclusions about the merit of the game in question.

Whereas IGN seems to appeal to its corporate sponsors, reviews I’ve read on Kotaku, and the general sense I get from perusing through comments on its pages, is that of a significant weight and importance placed upon what the reader thinks. Crazy concept huh?

Video game reviews are important. These essays are often what compels or dissuades us from spending $60 on that “Halo 3” or “Modern Warfare 2,” so ultimately, shouldn’t it be your decision?

This final chapter does its job well and properly caps off what I felt was my most satisfying PC gaming experience of 2009 and leaves me absolutely thirsting for more.

If you didn’t play Chapter 4, you’re probably going to want to duck out right now because there are some heavy spoiler details about to be gushed.

Guybrush Threepwood. Mighty Pirate

Chap. 4 ended with the demise of Guybrush, or so we were lead to believe. The very first scene in “Rise of the Pirate God” begins with main character Guybrush thrusting his hand through his own grave in a dark and gloomy underworld graveyard. All Guybrush has is a his Shred of Life as he travels the land of the dead, meeting series antagonist’s victims, Morgan LeFlay most notably, on his trek to assume his body again and return to the land of the living to defeat the sinister Pirate once and forever. Oh, and of course, to rescue his beautiful “Plunderbunny” wife Elaine.

I’m not dead…yet!

Where chapter 5 excels most, compared to previous installments, is in its cinematic intensity. The production values in this episode are so much higher than the others; you might wonder why the series isn’t more mainstream and well-known.

Telltale pulled out all the show-stoppers in this episode to make damn sure the finale was indeed a true finale and left a more than pleasant taste in the mouths of gamers. Aesthetically, the game looks superior to previous ones. Perhaps that’s because the environments in Chap. 5 look nothing like the ones seen before (except for a few returning locations), but however you slice it, the game looks better, and this is great.

On the narrative side of the game, Telltale wrote a much stronger tale than ever before. Gone are the lines of corny dialogue in favor of more substantiated yet still funny, but more appropriate, engaging, and believable.

The Boat Man of Death.

Complementing the excellent narrative is superb beyond belief voice-acting. Guybrush sounds like a living, breathing, though bumbling, pirate. LeChuck’s tone and emphatic and stressed deliverances are the kind of mastery one could only dream for, and the entire set of sub-characters are so well performed you’ll wish they had more lines.

The puzzles in Chapter 5, and there are loads of them, as these sequences of mysteries are the backbone of the game, are fun and engaging, but not on par with those of previous episodes. Far too many times was the task at hand merely “go here, collect that, bring it back here, use it to do this.” That formula is okay, I just wish Telltale varied the quests a bit more.

Here boy!

Are there more Tales of Monkey Island to be told? Ultimately only TellTale knows, but based on the way events ended in this chapter, it seems more than likely that there’s grander adventurers in stock for Guybrush.

Ultimately, Tales of Monkey Island: Rise of the Pirate God is a wholly entertaining, engaging, and pure fun point and click adventure. Though it may not be equal in wonder to past installments, it remains a better than average tale. The seas have been sailed, the evil; vanquished, and the girl rescued, what more could a pirate wish for?

That show was Entourage.

Before last summer I’d never seen an episode of Entourage in my life and, based on what I merely heard in passing of the show, presumed I’d hate it.

For those unaware, the show surrounds the life of Vincent Chase, a movie star and his entourage; his friends from back home, Brooklyn New York.

The show highlights all that I feel is wrong with today’s society (mindless self-indulgence, meaningless sex, boozing, etc.) and yet I became enthralled with the program the minute I laid eyes on it.

Whilst in Florida I watched the entire season 1,2 and 3, while my friends watched brand new episodes every Sunday night (season 6).

It was terribly easy to blow through each season. Every episode is merely 22 minutes long and each each installment ends on such a cliff-hanger that it’s truly impossible to not tune in for the next one. Additionally, watching the seasons on DVD meant no waiting whatsoever and allowed me to jump right into the next one.

The main appeal of Entourage for me is watching and listening to this crowd of men stumble through Hollywood haphazardly and reveling in their merriment. All the fancy cars, the beautiful women, the drugs and the booze are all elements of life that you’d think I’d frown upon, and I do, but in a TV show, well, it’s just alright!

I can’t decide who my favorite character on the show is, and this is another reason I love Entourage so much. Do I Vince? He’s a good looking dude, and a nice guy. What about Turtle? A pudgy aspiring student, who once dated young Ms. Soprano, what about him? Or E. A short little man in love with an equally beautiful character, Sloan?

When it comes down to it, I think Johnny Chase, or Drama, is my favorite. His mannerisms are so outlandish and so perverse that I can’t help but wait to hear what he’s going to say next.

But then again, what about Ari Gold? Mr super-Agent? I believe he consistently delivers an incredible acting performance and, with his cell-phone perpetually attached to his ear, and his liberal use of insane profanity, he’s easily one of the most beloved characters on the show.

What I find most alluring about the show though lies in the fact that Entourage is a television show about television and movie actors. Constantly the guys are on movie and TV sets, begging the question; what the fuck does the actual camera set up look like? So, it’s cameras pointed at cameras filming actors, playing actors? Is that right? I love it!

The show provides me an escape route from my somewhat puritanical views. I’m okay with watching, but I don’t think I could ever live the life of Vinny, Drama, E, and Turtle.

Long story short, as of yesterday, December 14, I am entirely caught up with the series.

I plowed through all 12 episodes of season 6 (the most recent) in less than a week, and cannot wait for season 7, which I believe begins in May.