The Great Playthrough: Game 73 - World Cup Italia '90

World Cup Italia '90
Released on: Sega Mega Drive, Sega Master System
Played on: Sega Mega Drive
Release Date: 1990 (D'uh!)

Before I start this review, I feel I should make a confession. I don't watch football, I don't play football. In fact, I'm not a football guy at all. The only reason I even own this game (as you may be able to tell from the photo above) is because it is part of a compilation cartridge.

But having said all of that, I do remember playing certain football games in my youth (most notable Sensible Soccer) and not hating the experience. And I do like a large selection of video games, so maybe I'll be surprised by this one.

Well, that was my hope. Sadly, though, it was not to be.

There's very little I can say about this game that is positive. I plugged it in, started it up, and then spent five minutes selecting which members of my team I wanted to use. "Ooh," I thought, "This looks like it might be some tactical suggestions, that's always a good start."

Well it would be, but then, when I started the game, I realised that it looks like this.

It's a top down football game. Where every player is white-skinned with black hair, and there is no indication of which player is which - so why ask me to select my team in the FIRST F@*#ING PLACE??

And speaking of the top-down situation, you'll see that the characters are quite large, so you can't see very much of the pitch at all... but that's OK, right? Because you've got a map? Let me show you that map closer...

Yes, that map shows lots of little dots where the players are. However, it makes no discernible difference between your players and the opposing team's players - so how the hell am I supposed to know where any of MY players are???

Sensible Soccer got around the inherent problems of a top-down football game by having the players the size of a couple of pixels, so you could see a lot of what was going on around you - but this game just stumbles badly at this first hurdle.

The controls are - OK. You have a ground pass button, a high pass button and a shoot button. However, the computer teams also appear to be able to head the ball, but try as I might (and even after much reading of the instruction manual) I couldn't find an option to do that. So that put me at a disadvantage anyway.

You also cannot select which player you are controlling at any one time. The computer automatically selects one - and it automatically does so about 30 seconds after you wanted it to. So you'll still be controlling a player at the top of the screen, the opposing team have the ball and are running down the pitch, and it changes your control to the player the opposition run past JUST AFTER the opposition have already run past him!

Seriously, it's a nightmare.

There's also no polish to this game - if you score, then you get the following screen:

This is actually the computer team scoring, because I didn't score any goals.

 

Please note - this isn't a representative still of a moving image, this is the picture that comes up on the screen for thirty seconds once you've scored.

*Sarcasm Mode engaged*

Wow - I'm having trouble containing my excitement.

*End Sarcasm Mode*

Look, I know I was never going to be the target market for this game. I don't do football - never have, never will. But I do know what makes a good video game, and this is quite definitely NOT a good video game.

Rating: 2/10Time Played: 15 Minutes
Would I play it again? No, no I would not.

Thanks for reading - and please do let people know if you regularly read this blog - they can also find the facebook page for this group here.

Also, I'm considering doing a video blog for a future entry - anyone got any advice/suggestions?

The Great Playthrough - Game 72: Doom 3

Yes - it's the funky Steelbook edition!

Doom 3
Released on: Xbox, PS3, Xbox 360, Windows, Linux, Mac
Played on: Xbox
Release date: 2004

I have often mentioned how good I feel that the original Doom is - it's the FPS I enjoyed playing as a teen, and I feel it is the gold-standard of shooters - but I'd never played the second sequel.

Doom 3 came out in 2004, at a time when FPS's were on the rise - in fact, it was the year Halo 2 was released, which kind of says it all. As I discussed in my Halo 3 review, a lot of the trends in more modern FPS's are the things that put me off. The dull colours, the darkness, the boring cutscenes, the fact that most levels are just corridor after corridor of industrial / brown dullness.

But Doom 3 has the Doom name attached, so it's surely going to be more fun, right?

Well, yes and no. I think that more than anything else, this game highlights the differences between old-style FPS's and modern ones. And that's not really a good thing.

Let's start at the beginning - the plot appears to be that a weapons company is more powerful than anyone ever and they are (shock, horror) not too careful about what happens to scientists in the name of progress. So this is clearly not going to end well.

I have no problem with a game having a plot. Granted, you didn't need any kind of plot backstory for the original Doom (or Doom 2) to enjoy the game, but I have no problem with modern games having a plot. However, when the plot is ridiculously generic AND means that you spend the first fifteen minutes of the game either watching cutscenes or walking around without any kind of weapon or action going on, I think it's taking the piss a little bit. But eventually I met my commanding officer (obviously, I mean my unnamed character's commanding officer, not my own personal commanding officer. I don't have a commanding officer (that I know of) - but anyway, I think I've digressed a little) and was allocated a mission.

'Yay,' I thought, 'We're through the opening plot/tutorial bit - now I get to play!'

Then I walked around some tunnels for another five minutes, and found the scientist I was looking for. Then some portals to hell accidentally opened, and.. weird flying skulls came out and possessed the scientist, who turned into some kind of zombie/demon. So I shot him. And then the game started proper.

And then, about six minutes later, I died.

And I hadn't used the quicksave function since the end of the main cutscenes. So I started again.

This time, I made it to about eight minutes. But I had saved.

Sadly, I'd saved when I had 7 pistol bullets and 2 shotgun shells left...

So I kept dying.

Now I'm not complaining about the difficulty too much - it felt a little unfair, but not game-breakingly so, and I absolutely loved the touches like the fact you have to choose whether to use a flashlight or have a weapon equipped, and the controls are nice and intuitive.But considering I was on medium difficulty, I did die a LOT.

Also, the other thing that annoyed me - this game did that thing that lots of modern day games do - you are given instructions over the radio. Sadly, when the legions of hell attack, the radio keeps transmitting the noise of people fighting them off, and repeated calls for you to return to base. But at no point does it ever SHUT THE HELL UP so that I can figure out IF THERE'S A MONSTER IN THIS ROOM OH NO NOW I'M DEAD AGAIN!

Sadly, Doom 3 just didn't quite click for me. There were slightly too many of the modern touches that I found awkward - including having to aim vertically as well as horizontally, which I know sounds silly, but that's one of the things that I'm apparently very bad at. I miss old Doom aiming, where as long as you are facing the enemy, you can just keep shooting.

It's not an awful game - in fact, it's better than many other FPS's of its era, but I was sorely disappointing by it. It was just missing the slightly crazy Doom magic touch.

And then I worried - what if Doom doesn't have that magic touch anymore? What if I'm comparing Doom 3 to an ideal that never existed, and is just clouded by rose-tinted glasses?

Luckily, Doom and Doom 2 are included on the Doom 3 disc, so I fired up Doom for fifteen minutes, and was pleasantly surprised to find that it is still fun - it'll get its own full review somewhere in this playthrough.

In fact, that fifteen minutes of playing Doom made Doom 3 feel even worse than it had done before.

Sorry Doom 3, but this is a case of must try harder.

Rating: 5/10
Time Played: Doom 3 - 45 Minutes (and then fifteen minutes of Doom)
Would I play it again: The Disc will get a lot of use for Doom and Doom 2. Doom 3 though, not so much...

The Great Playthrough: Game 71 - Super Mario Galaxy 2

Super Mario Galaxy 2
Released on: Nintendo Wii
Played on: Nintendo Wii
Release date: 2010

Unlike films, games sequels can often be much better than the originals. When I reviewed Super Mario Galaxy I concluded that the opening of the game was not the best way to experience what is a great game - as the first hour is quite pedestrian and filled with opening cut-scenes and tutorial levels that are very averagely designed.

The good news? Super Mario Galaxy 2 has learnt from the mistakes of the original game.

The opening is tight, a lot of the cut-scenes are at least partially playable - and more importantly, within five minutes of starting the game, you are on a playable level, which is pretty well designed.

In fact, all of the levels I got to in the opening hour just served to throw up new design ideas and new mechanics, completely justifying this sequel's existence. Let us not forget that no other 3D Mario game had (at the time anyway) generated a direct sequel. Super Mario 64 and Super Mario Sunshine are both good games (although one is better than the other) - but Nintendo didn't feel that either of them required a direct sequel, always preferring to push onto something new.

But Mario Galaxy totally deserves the sequel, as there are so many new concepts, techniques and ideas based around the Galaxy motifs - including the appearance of Yoshi, who adds a whole new aspect to the gameplay!

Also, Super Mario Galaxy 2 has a great two player mode - well, we certainly enjoy it in our house. Player one is Mario, who does all of the usual Mario things - running around, jumping, collecting coins, collecting stars etc. Player 2 takes control of a Luma (the weird floating chubby starfish-type things that are prevalent in the Galaxy games) by using the wii-mote as a pointer, so that player can delay/defeat enemies, pick up coins/lives etc and generally be of help to the first player. It's a really nice and innovative two player mechanism. And it means that Neety and I can play together - which is important in our house! Two player co-op should be more prevalent than it is... but I digress.

Now don't get me wrong - it's not a perfect game. I know that when I reviewed Galaxy (the original), I moaned about how long it's plot took to get going, as it is just a case of Bowser kidnaps the Princess, this time in space. However, the plot of Super Mario Galaxy 2 is slightly weird in the sense that it does not acknowledge any of the events that occurred in Super Mario Galaxy 1. Lumas are new to Mario, he is astonished at giant-size Bowser, and everything seems new to him all over again.

Now this may be explained when you complete the game (as I must confess I haven't ever totally finished this game) - and I know that at the end of Super Mario Galaxy 1...

*SPOILER ALERT*

*NO REALLY, I KNOW YOU MAY JUST BE HAPPILY SKIPPING PAST THIS, BUT I AM GOING TO TELL YOU WHAT HAPPENS AT THE END OF THE ORIGINAL IF YOU'RE NOT CAREFUL*


*YOU'RE STILL HERE? OK, WELL DON'T SAY I DIDN'T WARN YOU*


... the galaxy / universe is destroyed and re-booted, so the implication could be that Mario doesn't remember it all. But even so, that means that the average player who didn't get to the end of the original would be confused as to why Mario is being such a forgetful idiot.

Well, it's either that, or he's just hit his head against too many blocks over the years, and it's had an impact on his memory.




*END OF SPOILERS - IF YOU ARE TRYING TO STEER CLEAR OF IT, YOU MAY CONTINUE READING NOW*

But regardless of strange plot issues - Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a fabulous game. The graphics are gorgeous, the music is outstanding (indeed, I think it's one of the best scores to a video game EVER) and it has such replay-value that even as I'm writing this blog, I'm looking forward to going back and playing it some more - especially since I haven't completed it yet....

So yes, I know that this review is predictable, but I loved this game. And so will all of you - it's a video game that transcends boundaries and is just so infinitely playable! And given the increase in quality between the original and this one, I am a little sad that there is no indication of a Super Mario Galaxy 3 any time soon...

Rating: 9/10
Time Played: An hour and a ten minutes
Would I play it again? Are you kidding? I'm probably going to play it when I get home!

The Great Playthrough: Game 70 - Sonic the Hedgehog 4: Episode 1

So today, it's time to review a game on a format I haven't reviewed before - and no, that doesn't mean I bought a new console (not yet, anyway)...

I couldn't take a photo of me with the box, because it's a digital-only
game. I also couldn't take a photo of me playing it, because I played
it on my phone, which is what I normally use to take photos...

Sonic the Hedgehog 4: Episode 1
Released on: iOS, Android, Xbox Live, PSN, WiiWare and many many other digital distribution systems...
Played on: Android Phone (Samsung Galaxy Note 3 if you are interested)
Release date: 2010

When this game was first announced, I was ridiculously excited. Yes, Sonic 3 may have been a slight disappointment in comparison with one of the best videogames of all time - Sonic 2 - but all of the early 2D Sonic games were entertaining at worst, so I was hopeful about Sonic 4.

Then I read that they were distributing it exclusively via digital platforms and episodically, and I was (frankly) a little disappointed. I know this makes me sound like an old fart - but nothing beats having a physical copy of a game. I can understand and appreciate the digital distribution model, but to not give people the option of a physical copy is annoying, as if it existed, I would probably have bought it by now on a proper console.

But four years after the release of Episode 1, and two years after Episode 2 came out - there's still no sign of it. So when I saw Episode 1 appear as part of a Humble Bundle Mobile package, I decided it was time to give it a try.

(NOTE - If you've never encountered Humble Bundle, then go and check them out right now! They do great bundles of Phone Games, PC Games, eBooks, Comics etc.. all for a donated amount that goes to charity. I have bought three or four bundles in the last couple of months and intend to keep doing!)

This bundle of games was the first set of mobile games I have ever paid for, as I've always been a bit wary of mobile gaming. And, do you know what? It was a bit of a disappointment...

I should clarify. I know I'm going to end up tarring Sonic 4 and mobile gaming with the same brush, so I'll say here and now that I don't think Sonic 4 is a bad game by any means. Is it on a par with Sonic 2? Not a chance. It's not even on a par with Sonic 3, but it's way better than a lot of other games in the world.

But, sadly, mobile gaming really lets it down. The problem with porting games to touchscreen phones is the controls. Games that are developed for a touchscreen initially tend to have no problem - look at the world-destroying Angry Birds for proof of that. However, when you try and apply console style controls to touchscreen phones then it tends to go wrong, and that was sadly the case here.

Trying to control a game via virtual touchscreen buttons is a nightmare - mostly because of the complete lack of feedback. When you press a physical button or move a physical d-pad, you can feel what you are doing, whereas on a virtual screen I find myself constantly looking down at the controls to check that I'm doing it right, which affects my way of playing the game. And that's no fun.

On a much lighter note, the game itself (as I said before) is not bad at all. The level design is mostly good, the graphics are pretty (although I personally don't like the style of art as much, but hey, that might just be me), and the gameplay is typical sonic gameplay - which for me is a good thing.

But it's not perfect. There are a couple of little things that bug me - why give me the option which order to tackle the levels in? It's not like Mega Man, where if you tackle certain levels first you get power ups that are an advantage for another level - it's Sonic - you run to the right until you succeed - and why give people the choice of doing Act 2 BEFORE Act 1? That's like going to a dinner party and saying that you can eat your desert before you eat the main course if you'd prefer - both courses will still taste nice, but there will be a slight feeling of unease...

I know it's a strange thing to moan about, but for me it means that the feeling of achievement is gone, because you can play any level at any time...

The Physics are strange - Sonic feels slightly floaty when jumping, and it feels more like luck than skill when landing (although how much of that can be attributed to the control scheme I'm not sure.) There are fun Sonic 1-inspired bonus rounds with the spinning maze that we all remember - only because I'm playing it on a phone, you control it by tilting and rotating the phone - which is a method of control I'm REALLY not a fan of - especially when it comes down to precise control.

But my biggest problem with the game design itself (excluding the platform I am playing it on) is the second act of the Casino Street Zone - where instead of having a fun level to navigate through while bouncing around on flippers and bumpers etc, your objective suddenly changes as you have to earn 100,000 points by bouncing Sonic into the fruit machine over and over. And that's just dull - sorry Sega, but it's the truth.

In conclusion, Sonic the Hedgehog 4: Episode 1 on a proper console (which I may at some point purchase - especially if they EVER do a physical copy) might be a 7/10 game, with the Casino Street Zone Act 2 letting it down as well as the slightly strange physics. However, Sonic the Hedgehog 4: Episode 1 on a phone? Well....

Rating: 5/10
Time Played: 1 Hour and 5 Minutes
Would I play it again? On my phone, probably not. If I ever buy it for Xbox or PS3 or if I ever get an Ouya and buy it for that, then I'd give it another try...

The Great Playthrough: Game 69 - Magic Carpet

Magic Carpet
Released on: PC, Playstation, Sega Saturn
Played on: Sega Saturn
Release Date: 1994

I remember when Magic Carpet came out. At the time I was 13 and a PC gamer - not owning any of the then-new generation of consoles. So my first memory of this game was that when it came out it was the must-have game of the time, and many articles in PC Gamer and other 90's PC magazines advised me of this.

I only have a vague recollection of the game itself (which I am sure was a PC copy "borrowed" from a friend) and that memory is that it was graphically impressive, but I strangely don't remember any of the actual gameplay - so it's one of those games where the memory of the hype and reputation is vastly greater to the memory of the actual game.

And that was a worry for me when I started it up on the Saturn. To give a popular example, how many of you remember Knight Rider? (And yes, I mean the original 1980's show, not the 2008 remake that I should have hated but actually have a soft spot for).

Back to the original point - Raise your hand if you think that Knight Rider was one of the greatest shows of your childhood?

*Counts hands*

Now, raise your hand if you think it is massively over-rated?

*The hands that were raised drop, and a smaller selection of different hands are raised*

And how many of you have watched any episode of the show in the last fifteen years?

*99% of the same hands stay up, one other hand raises, and Raptorneet (a small yet colourful utahraptor) does backflips in the corner of the room.*

This is my point. It's a show that is great in your memory, but really doesn't hold up to repeated modern viewing. Every episode is the same, the acting is awful, the effects are cheesy, and it's just not something that most people would spend any time watching...

And that is true of my experience with Magic Carpet. The reputation of it has clouded the actual gameplay - and that is the elephant in the room.

*Raptorneet looks up at the mention of an Elephant and starts hunting around for one*

The METAPHORICAL elephant in the room....

*Raptorneet stops hunting and looks sad*

... is that Magic Carpet is an awful game. And I have no idea why I don't remember that. I mean, the hype thing becomes more obvious when you realise that the games designer was Peter Molyneux, a man famed for hyping up his games as being the most amazing thing ever to appear on this earth, but I don't know why I've failed to remember the awful, awful gameplay.

And I'm sure that this game has fans, and I'm sure I'm insulting many of them, but the combination of the early 90's 3D graphics (which looked impressive then, and look dated now), the fact that it's a third person shooter with awkward controls (primarily due to the d-pad style Saturn controller) and that it has strategy elements (which are never my forte) render it essentially unplayable. It's completely unintuitive as well - I had to pause after playing for five minutes and examine the manual carefully, at which point I still didn't understand what I was doing. I accidentally built and lost a castle, because I couldn't find it on the map and it was then destroyed by monsters/enemies unknown. I couldn't aim spells in any way accurately, and I found my enthusiasm waning fast - and I'm enthusiastic over almost every video game I've ever played!

But I know what question you're all asking... "Why is there a small and colourful utahraptor invading this review?"

*Raptorneet looks up hopefully*

Well, the reason that she is here is that I wanted to inject some comedy into this post, but it's so tough with a game I dislike so much. And I am genuinely sorry if I have annoyed or offended any Magic Carpet fans, but I have never found a game I would want to play less than this game.

Well.. except for these two.

Hopefully the next game I play will be better...

Rating: 1/10
Time played: 16 minutes (including the time it was paused while I read the manual)
Would I play it again? I would never want to put myself through that again!

The Great Playthrough: Game 68 - Choplifter

Choplifter
Released on: Apple II, Atari 5200/7800, Colecovision, Commodore 64, MSX, NES, Master System and many more
Played on: Sega Master System
Release date: 1985

After my venture into popular modern gaming last blog, I'm back to some traditional retro goodness here, and I do believe this is the first Master System game I've reviewed...

*Checks back over the list*

Oops, I was wrong! I totally forgot about Castle of Illusion!

Anyway, it feels like ages since I've played on the Master System, so I was looking forward to this - although, it has to be said, I was unsure about Choplifter. I got it recently when I bought a few games from a flash sale the wonderful Vintage Gamer had on Facebook - and I bought five games from them - four of which I really wanted, but Choplifter was kind of an impulse buy.

I remember playing a version of this game many MANY years ago when I was young and we had a BBC Micro (back in the days when you could just rip off other games and no-one really cared) and I remember enjoying it then, but I've been disappointed before with 80s arcade games when I try them out in the modern day.

So I fired up the Master System, took the pad, pressed the start button and.... spent five minutes trying to figure out how to turn the helicopter around!

But once I'd figured that out, I set out on my mission to shoot down planes, collect stranded soliders and get them back to base. And after getting over the fact that the game is quite hard (which is the normal state of affairs with older arcade conversions) I really got into it, and enjoyed my time with it.

It does have it's negative points (just like any game) - the sound design is pretty non-existent and very repetitive, and while I do enjoy a challenge, the difficulty level did mean that I didn't even make it past the first stage. The graphics suffer occasionally from trying to fit too much on screen at once, although it is a remarkably good job - whoever programmed this conversion really knew what they were doing!

In regards to the difficulty level, although it was hard, the game never felt unfair. In comparison to games I've spoken about recently, it felt more like Ghouls'N'Ghosts than Super Star Wars - death was common, but never malicious or unavoidable. Instead, thanks to the good game design, I felt like I was getting somewhere slightly further or learning something new every time I tried the level.

And I know this is going to sound strange, but the thing that affected me most about the game, and really reeled me in, was this innocent little box in the top-right corner:

That's right, the box shows you how many men are DEAD - whether by your chopper being shot down, or by them being shelled while you were ferrying their friends back to base, or (and this is the embarassing part) by you accidentally LANDING THE CHOPPER ON THEM AND KILLING THEM!

OH THE HUMANITY!!!!!

I may be mocking it slightly, but this ticking clock of death really made me worry about the people I was trying to save! And it kept me going back, over and over again.....

In short, it's a fun arcade game that will entertain you for a short time - is it a game designed for constant hours of play? No, but if you've got a spare half-hour, you could do a lot worse than to slot it into your system and enjoy the retro fun

Rating - 7.5/10
Time Played - 45 Minutes
Would I play it again? Definitely!

The Great Playthrough - Bonus Round: Uncharted 2 and Heavy Rain

It's time for a break in the normal playthrough for another Bonus Round! This time it's a discussion about two popular modern games that were lent to me by the ever lovely Andy Isaacs. So let me begin:

Uncharted 2: Amongst Thieves
Released on: PS3
Played on: PS3
Release date: 2009

Heavy Rain
Released on: PS3
Played on: PS3
Release date: 2010

When I started to play these two, I actually began with Heavy Rain - but I'm going to talk about Uncharted 2 first. This may appear to make absolutely no sense to you at the moment, but bear with me, and hopefully by the end you'll realise why.

These are both PS3 exclusive games, and for ages I didn't have a PS3, as we had an Xbox 360. Just to clarify, I'm not a Microsoft lover or a Sony hater or anything like that - it's just that the vast majority of games that came out for that generation were multi-platform (certainly the ones I wanted to play) - and therefore we picked an Xbox 360 because we got a better deal on one.

Also, the controller is better. There, I said it!

But I finally got a PS3 recently, so it's time to start looking at what I missed...

So, Uncharted 2: Amongst Thieves. The Uncharted series is one of the most popular series' of the current generation...

Oh wait. The PS3 is a LAST generation console now, isn't it? It's officially old news.... well there's going to be an Uncharted for the PS4, so the game series is still current, right?

*Watches Tumbleweed roll past as I realise I'm the only person who cares about the definition. Smiles and carries on*

Uncharted is one of those games that is described as "Action-Adventure" which is brilliantly non-specific. However, in my experience of games, it is quite like Batman: Arkham Asylum with extra guns. Or Resident Evil 5 with fewer zombies. Or...

You get the idea. It's like most current popular games that aren't a first person shooter. You take control of Nathan Drake - an Indiana Jones-wannabe with less scruples than Dr Jones but the same awful taste in sidekicks who you know will betray you - and you run around, jump, solve puzzles, sneak and get into gunfights in pursuit of a treasure of some kind.

Make sense? Good. Because that's about all I can tell you about the plot! The game starts with you injured and climbing up a train that is half-off a cliff in some snowy mountains, and then slowly but surely you see some flashbacks before jumping back in time four months for the second level.

Most importantly, however, it's fun. Lots of fun. Don't get me wrong, I'm not the best at modern games, so I found it quite hard going, but it's forgiving and if you die, you just automatically restart at the start of the section you were doing, which is great for me.

However, this had something in common with my previous blog - there are cutscenes galore. Lots of cutscenes in which vital parts of the plot are stated... but it turns out, I just stop listening. And that's the problem you get with cutscenes - if I don't know or care about the characters, then I just stop listening - and I found myself doing that more with Uncharted 2 than with Kingdom Hearts 2.

Maybe it's different for those people who played Uncharted (the original) - maybe you are more invested in the characters we see - but for me this highlights the problem with starting mid-adventure and telling your story non-linearly - you need to make sure the audience care, and it just doesn't quite pull it off for me here.

Discussion of cut-scenes leads us neatly to Heavy Rain - a game that is almost entirely made of cutscenes and quicktime events.

*Sees you all getting up to leave*

No wait! It's not like that! It's not a bad game. Although I'm not entirely sure game is the right word...

For those of you who don't know, Heavy Rain is an interactive drama that feels more like a film than a game. The graphics are gorgeous, and the plot is intriguing (if really rather depressing). You play as four different characters and it's all tied into a serial killer known as the origami killer...

"What the hell is an interactive drama?" I hear you all ask

It's a game that is more interested in telling it's story than giving you lots of gaming mechanics to master, and that should be one of my worst nightmares. But it isn't. The big selling point is that what you do early in the game affects the results of the story later in the game and that sort of thing is hugely intriguing for me.

As a game, it's really quite clunky. The controls for moving the characters are the modern-day equivalent of Resident Evil's notorious "tank" controls, and the "action-packed" sequences that involve quick button pushes would be fine, if my brain would remember which button was where on a playstation controller!

So to sum it up, I don't know why I enjoy Heavy Rain, but I do, quite a lot. It's not a game, but it is interactive entertainment, and I don't know how better to describe it than that.

Unfortunately my experiences with both of these games has been affected by the nightmare that is a Playstation 3.

Now I know many of you out there have a PS3 and use it as a primary gaming console, and I've got no problem with that. In fact, when I got mine I was excited. And then I discovered how often it downloads updates, then installs stuff, and then crashes and demolishes it's file system! It seems to be more sensitive than ... *searches desperately for a metaphor, before failing* - basically it's just ridiculously sensitive.

I've had to recover the hard drive three times in a month since I got the PS3, and I've now taken to backing up my save data on a memory stick every time I play. Sadly, I didn't do this for Heavy Rain, so I've played the opening twice, and then lost the save file both times... which means I am much less excited about playing it again to see where it goes!!

Uncharted 2: Amongst Thieves

Rating: 7/10
Time played: 1 hour 10 minutes
Would I play it again? Yes, I think I will . The story may be dodgy, but the gameplay is very solid.

Heavy Rain

Rating: 7/10
Time played: 1 hour 30 minutes (roughly)
Would I play it again? Yes, if I can stomach playing the opening for a THIRD time (Damn you PS3!)

Next time - We're going back to the 80s and to the 8-bit era....