And the Game of the Year is...

It should come as no surprise that Assassin's Creed II is my game of the year. I loved the first one, and Ubisoft Montreal blew my mind this time around. Visionary, stunning, phenomenal. These are words to describe this game. And every single one is an understatement. Since i know for a fact that the people who read this blog have already beaten the game, I will skimp on gameplay and just go to some thoughts. IF YOU HAVEN'T FINISHED THE STORY DO NOT READ THIS BLOG.

The story is excellent. The quest for revenge, the massive conspiracy, the historical implications and the confusing ending all come together perfectly. The interesting thing about how the game plays out is that I didn't feel like I was playing a nicer looking version of Assassin's Creed I. With the well drawn characters, multiple settings and varied missions, I felt more like I was playing Grand Theft Auto IV. And it worked. Ezio completely eclipses Altair, and most of this year's video game characters for that matter. His complexity really reminded me of Niko Bellic. Each character gets a great backstory too. No one feels one dimensional. I loved the Mario joke too...

Now on to some gameplay. The controls feel like I'd never left the first game, and I love the new addition of being able to jump up and grab ledges to more quickly traverse buildings. However, I would love even more fluidity when free running. Maybe some ropes to swing from or a faster way to get down to ground level than just dropping down from ledge to ledge. Just a thought. The new weapons are nice but not really necessary since most kills come from counters anyway. But the three things that jumped out at me were the brilliant economic system, water, and glyphs. Hands down, I have a man-crush on this economic system. You upgrade your shit and things are cheaper. You buy better gear and you fight better. You do more for your town and you make more money. It's a system that actually matters. Next up, the water. The first time I jumped into the water, it was one of the most freeing moments I've ever experienced in a video game. This is probably because most free roam games don't incorporate water into play (the first Assassin's Creed didn't). But it was like Ubisoft was saying, "Yep, we broke the rules. Now there is no place you can't go." Going from a high rooftop all the way down in a glorious dive to evade enemies was one of my favorite parts of the game. Thirdly, the glyphs. Ryan, make a category for best collectable/findable and give it to this. 20 encypted messages that reveal a massive conspiracy throughout history all commentated by Subject 16's slow descent into madness. It makes Dan Brown look like a pussy. The complex puzzles are a nice break from combat and free-running, and the photographs of the likes of Harry Houdini, FDR and Ghandi with a piece of Eden cleverly placed inside is awesome. No detail is spared, including letters revealing the Templars and Edison ruining Tesla's plan to reveal a piece of Eden, Henry Ford giving his own piece of Eden to Hitler, and Oppenheimer using his to create the bomb. Bloody brilliant.

But now onto what I really want to talk about: Assassin's Creed III. Now all this will be speculation, as the Assassins say: Nothing is true. Everything is permitted. First off, if there is a third ancestor of Desmond, I imagine he or she will be in a time later than the Renaissance instead of before. The question is when? I personally believe that they will skip ahead some time. Remember that it has to be during a historical time of great importance, both politcally and socially. Also remember that the difference between the first game and second was 1476 from 1191, a difference of about 300 years. The next game could involve the Protestant Reformation, but that would mean Ezio would still be alive to some point of it beginning. Interesting if it could work. What's weird is that if you tack on 300 years to 1476 you get the American Revolution. Thomas Jefferson (among other Founding Fathers) were notable Free Masons, which is usually interpreted as modern day Templars. But there is also the possiblity of the Mexican American War, the Civil War, the War of 1812, Reconstruction of the South, the Industrial Revolution, and a million other events that could hold the next chapter in Desmond's story. Also keep in mind that the cryptic ending makes perfect sense with the Sun's geomagnetical reversal; the Mayans predicted the world would end that way in 2012 (the year the game takes place).

So that's my take and final blog of 2009. One final note: I got my final two ACII achievements, Messer Sandman and Sweeper, in a single fight, then was able to escape the guards by casually getting on a gondola and rowing away. LOL. Thanks Ubisoft Montreal. You deserve this award. I ♥ you. PEACE.

Responding to your Comments.

Damnit Ryan! Your witty blog made me wanna do one too. First off, before I respond to your comments I have to say something: No matter how much my blogs make your opinions seem stupid, or make you feel inferior about your intellect, or insecure about your body, or make you want to cut yourself, or give you a boner, PLEASE be polite when leaving a comment. Thank you. :D

First, a big ass comment that SOMEONE posted about NFL Week 15:
"I know plenty of people who don't think the Eagles are the best team".
Ok, this was bad elaboration on my part. The Eagles are not the best team in football. In my personal opinion, there really can't be one definitive best team. What I should have said was that the Eagles are one of the best teams and have consistency each week when they play. Same with the Chargers. It's that consistency that makes them dangerous competitors in the postseason. If you don't think that, then you're an idiot. :D
"the Colts may have not lost, but do they really need to learn much?"
Once again, bad elaboration. What I should have said was that the Colts have to stay sharp into the postseason. It's harder to do that when you've already secured a first round bye, homefield advantage, and your division. Plus as you said in another comment, the postseason is leaps and bounds from the regular season. You can't always count on Manning's plays, especially against more stalwart defenses.
"I disagree with you on the Favre thing. With a situation like taking out somebody because the coach doesn't want them hurt, the person that should know this the most is the quarterback. In many cases the coach's word is solid. But in a situation with Brett Favre, who knows what he is doing on the field, the coach's word is not always solid. At the skill level and knowledge and experience that Favre has, he is almost as much a field coach as the coach himself. If he feels he can handle it, the coach should take that into account. I don't think Favre had any wrong actions. It just was a shitty situation all around. And they were gonna lose anyway."
I'm afraid you need to reevaluate your reasoning here. Though I agree Farve knows what he's doing (it's Farve for Christ's sake), it's not about what he wants. It's about what's best for the team. Julius Pepper was running circles around the offensive line. If he had hit Farve the wrong way and Farve got injured, that would have been it for the Vikings Super Bowl hopes. Plus any player in the history of sports knows that the coach's word is law. You don't have to like his decision, but you have to respect it. Having the unofficial title of "field coach" doesn't mean shit. Not to mention that the Vikes were not going to lose anyway. Their little spat occured in the third quarter when the Vikings lead 7-6. Childress wanted Farve out to keep him safe and put in Tavaris Jackson, who is more agile and could escape the Panthers pass rush.
A quick note on the new Batman game:
"I don't expect this one to come out until Holiday '11."
Agree with the 2011 release, but do you think holiday or post-summer like the first one? I can really see why holiday because it is now a successful franchise, but there is the more pressing possiblity of MW3 coming out around that time too. Just thinking...
And finally, a note about the Things Fall Apart blog:
"Week 12-13 is when I start seriously considering teams for the Super Bowl."
Well, it's week 16 almost. Who is it, buddy? I wanna know. :D
So as always, this is just my response to you guys and I hope you comment and vote in the shiny new poll. Thanks for reading and of course, commenting!

NFL Week 15

Look out kiddies, there are new sheriffs in the AFC and NFC. It's not Manning and Brees. It's McNabb and Rivers. WHA-HUH?!? That's right. Don't let appearances fool you. The Philidelphia Eagles and San Diego Chargers are the two best teams in football right now. For all we know, we are looking at a Super Bowl matchup between these two while Manning, Brees and Farve sit at home watching The Who perform during halftime (so awesome).

If you don't think so, you're an idiot. The Eagles started the season lacksidaisically (yes it's a word) but have turned up the heat, winning their last 5 games and are now one game back behind the Vikes. McNabb has found his form. Westbrook is coming back. DeSean Jackson is unbelievable. Andy Reid is fat. These guys are going places. The Chargers are also in great shape to upset the Colts (they have done so in the past three seasons). Rivers is having his best NFL season yet. LT has found new life. Norv Turner is in contention for Coach of the Year. Not to be outdone by Philly, these guys have won nine in a row and are easily looking at a first round bye.

Now on to Colts and Saints. First off, a very lucky win over Jacksonville hurts the Colts. The Colts are set. They have homefield, a bye, and clinched their division. But they are not perfect. By winning a game that they should have lost, the Colts lose the opportunity to learn from what they did wrong. The more they win, the less likely they succeed in the post season against teams they've never played. The Saints on the other hand are now in a better spot than they were before the loss. The party is over. It's time to work. You don't think that Sean Payton is yelling at his offensive line to protect Brees? Or yelling at Brees to learn to hang on to the ball when sacked? Think again. Now they can fix what was wrong just in time for the postseason. Turns out a loss is sometimes a lucky break.

Now on to the playoff race. First off, in order to keep his job, Wade Phillips must: 1. Make the playoffs. 2. Do well in the playoffs. 3. Get a Christmas miracle comparable to the ending of It's a Wonderful Life. Nuff said about that. A guilty pleasure of mine: The Packers snagging the Wild Card slot and then beating the Vikings in the postseason. LOL. Stuff that will happen: Vince Young send a "You're Welcome" card to Jeff Fischer for saving his job and the Titans' season. Chad Ochocinco changing his name to 85 in Japanese then later to what he truly wants: Chad Twitterific. Mark Sanchez going colorblind with all of Rex Ryan's bullshit.

And now on to the biggest news of the week: the Vikings drama. In case you didn't hear, Childress wanted to bench Farve in the third quarter to keep him from getting hurt. Favre wanted to stay in because they were only up 7-6. They had a little sidelines tuffle and Farve stayed in, only to lose the game 26-7. So who was in the right, Childress or Farve? Both. Childress wanted to protect Farve from getting hurt and wearing himself out before the postseason. Farve wanted to win to stay in contention for homefield and not to let the Eagles come close to the No. 2 seed. Fair opinions on both, given Farve's december collapse last year and the current situation with the Eagles. But who is in the wrong? Farve. Sorry Brett, but if coach wants you out, you go out. A united team in the playoffs is better than one with a first round bye. Remember you came to play, not coach.

So that's my take on things at present. As always, I love comments about how you feel. I will be writing a Broncos blog later in the week, but right now for some reason whenever I see or hear the word "Broncos", I mysteriously throw up (yes I have vomited twice since writing this paragraph). I hope you have a wonderful Holiday season and enjoy your gifts and time with family. Thanks for reading. :D

Reclaiming Asylum.

The VGA's produced a multitude of things we should know about the gaming world. First, Meghan Fox will only win things because she's hot. Second, Green Day has achieved "Rock Band" status. And finally, Mark Hammill is a dirty rotten liar when he said he was done playing the Joker because there is a brand spanking new trailer out confirming the existence of Batman: Arkham Asylum 2 (if this is the actual title of the game I want Paul Dini to run me over with the Batmobile and harvest my organs with a Batarang).

My first thought of the game: awesome and a no brainer. The first game was fun, sold like crazy and was given great reviews. A sequel is smart and a great way to build a franchise. Plus with already solid controls there is no need to reinvent the wheel. The developers will most likely add some sort of new gameplay style that adds to the experience (my gut tells me driving the Batmobile but I'd like to see some sort of complex puzzle solving too).

Here's some of my thoughts on the trailer that was released. First off, the game definetly takes place in at least some of Gotham. That much is clear. To what extent I'm unsure, but I'd like it to be somewhat smaller than a sprawling massive city. The great thing about the first game is that while the area was huge, it wasn't too big as to ruin the atmosphere of the story. Plus you'll care more about the area you're fighting in, instead of it being just one of many places that could use your help. Second, the trailer plays in deception vs reality as much as the Joker does. As pointed out by IGN, some parts of the trailer seem crudely edited in against the otherwise detailed setting. For example, the gate of the new Arkham looks very makeshift compared to the rest of the trailer. Second of all, Harley Quinn (who is mysteriously silent) is still wearing the same outfit she wore in the first game, as is the Joker. Not to mention the people in the street look awefully familiar to the goons you beat up in Arkham the first go-around. So is this a trick to throw us off what the new game is really about? Or is it exactly as it appears? All I know is that with the Joker involved, answering that question won't be easy.

Here's my thoughts on who will appear in the next game as well. First off, Batman. Duh. But in what state we are unsure. There's the debate of whether the Joker is old or just ill. In my honest opinion, I think this game does NOT take place in the future for a few reasons. Rocksteady wouldn't want to make all the characters old for the sake of story. They can do more by making this game an actual sequel to the first game as apposed to a standalone adventure. Think of how the first game ended. Bane gets his hands on the Titan serum and Batman rushes off to stop TwoFace. As far as we know, the game could pick up right from there, and the trailer we saw is merely what Joker makes of the city in his inevitable escape. We know that the Joker, Harley Quinn and Two Face are all in the sequel. But I think that the Penguin could make an appearance (hence the Iceberg Lounge) and Black Mask as well (hence Sionis). Who knows? Rocksteady could do something as classic as a Villain gang war or as dangerous as a Villain team up (Joker and Two Face?) I'm leaning toward gang war because of the poster of Two Face (Uncle Sam I want you poster) being torn up and the graffiti of "Long Live Joker". Not to mention the mass anarchy in the streets as Joker watches.

Anyway, that's my take. And since I'm not Batman expert, I could really use another opinion on this. Leave a comment and vote in the poll (choose multiple answers if you want). Thanks for reading! :D

INSERT CLEVER TITLE HERE!

Wow, I'm unoriginal. You would have thought the topic of this blog, Mass Effect 2, would have produced something clever out of me. Oh well. I wanna talk about the characters of Mass Effect 2 and how the second game to the best sci-fi video game franchise of all time will handle characters from the first.

My first thought: don't worry. Remember that Bioware is a quality developer. Don't expect Shepard to step out of the Normandy for a piss only to have it blown up with his crew inside. I expect to see a quality handling of things in terms of what happens to each. My second thought: change is good. As you can see from the trailer for ME2, the only confirmed character returning is Tali. That leaves the fate of your other crew members up in the air, and this is a great thing. With this, Bioware can do what it does best: use characters we care about to enhance the narrative of a game. Think about it. Bioware can do more with letting your former squad do its own thing and can add side missions and even add to the main plot.

With the old characters not joining you, you can meet them in other situations which will feel more natural than forcing the characters to come along with you. Here are a few scenarios to elaborate what I'm talking about. Ashley, who I don't think will return as party member, could be relocated (she is a soldier after all) and you might meet up with her in your travels. This presents a "woman scorned" side mission that would fit well into your morality. Or Wrex working for an opposing corporation on a main story mission. This presents a "I let you live once, don't make me regret that" type thingy. The point I'm trying to make is that Bioware can do more and better by bringing in new characters than recycling the old ones. In ME1, it was like Band of Brothers, we knew their background and we could trust them to stick with us. In ME2, it's gonna be more like The Dirty Dozen, we have little idea about these dangerous individuals, let alone if you can even trust them. It works better. You have to honestly ask yourself who from the original group would accompany Shepard on this suicide mission. Ashley, the Carth Onasi guy (Caleb? Calik? Fuck if I know...), Liara, and to some extent, Garrus, were all upstanding people of the law. Would any one of them be willing to get their hands dirty? Only Wrex, Tali, and to some extent, Garrus would be able to stomach the shit Shepard wants to do to beat the Reapers, though it might be more interesting if Garrus were to take over the Citadel Security Force (the way he handled shit I would expect it to be quite different if he did). Tali we know is returning, but her main deal will be to report to her home world (Conclave? Colony? Fuck I don't pay attention...).

A few quick notes. One, I am really interested in Legion, the Geth that dresses up like Shepard. In my opinion, it has something to do with the Reapers. Remember that Shepard beat Sovereign, the galaxy's only Reaper and stopped more from entering our universe. This has to have some religious implications for the Geth, who probably see Shepard as a "God-killer" or something. I expect it figures leaps and bounds into how you dealed with Saren too. Second, Captain (or Counselor) Anderson. Remember that ME1 gave you a choice between appointing Anderson or Udina (more like Udouche-bag) to the Counsel's post. The choice for Anderson was obvious, but I expect it comes back to bite you somehow. Remember that Anderson was and still is a soldier, and he may not appreciate his new desk jockey roll in government service. Just a thought. Finally, Cerberus. It's awesome that Shepard works for them instead of the Counsel. They are so much cooler with Martin Sheen as Illusive Man and Yvonne Strahovski as Miranda Lawson ( She > Ashley and Liara 8 days of the week). All we know is that they played a huge role on Noveria and I'm sure your actions there will have major implications. Hooray for smoke-filled-room corporate handlings!

That's my take. Please leave a comment giving me your take (and helping out with the names of people and places maybe?). Don't forget to vote in the poll too. Thanks for reading! :D

NFL Week 14: SAINTS ALIVE!

Back to the grind of the NFL. Yay! So we are slowly winding down the season, but for some teams, things are just heating up as the chance to snag a playoff slot rapidly approaches. Here's my take on a few teams who are going and a few that won't. Please comment and tell me what you think.

Where's my fork? I need it to stick in the Pittsburgh Steelers. Starting off the season 6-2, toppling the undefeated Vikings, then losing 5 games in a row. Now that's what Mike Tomlin said about "unleashing hell". He just unleashed on his own team. Injuries, a 3rd string QB in a key divisional game and losing three games to the Chiefs, Raiders and Browns (you can count all of their wins on one hand) have all but put the Steelers out of contention, especially now that the Ravens have resurged.

Wanna know the Titans record 2 months ago? 0-6. Wanna know it today? 0-6. But Vince Young is 5-1. Single-handely, he has turned around the team that was sure to go the whole season without a win. Though the playoffs seem even more distant after the Indy loss, this team has found a new leader and hope in the former Texas QB.

There is a revolution in New England, and it's now against the British. After a great 6-2 start, the team has slumped to 8-5, which is still a great record but are now only one game ahead of the Jets for the division. Some attribute it to Belichick, others to a weak defense. What's the cause? The Pats would sure like to know...

Saints and Colts. Both good. Both lucky. Both still undefeated. Superbowl matchup? Maybe. But both still undefeated at regular season's end? Let's hope not. Folks, a loss for such excellent teams is a good thing. It still keeps them on their toes and shows them what to focus on. If the Pats had gone 15-1 in 07, I think they would have won the Superbowl. It removes so much pressure of having to continually win games. Both teams have already cinched their divisions and have home field advantage, so what's the big deal about just one?

So here's why I think Drew Brees will get the league MVP over Peyton Manning. First, Manning won last year. The probability of winning it two years in a row is very slim, because the people who choose it don't enjoy doing that. Next, think of what Brees has accomplished. A team that barely even blipped on the radar screen last year is now a terrifying force of offense, defense and special teams. Brees accounts for nearly all the offense's part. Time and time again, he has used his mediocre receivers to put up massive points and stage unprobable comebacks to grab victory from the jaws of defeat. His pin-point accuracy has made mockeries of the Giants and Patriots in huge routs. He's given hope to a city that has never seen a 13-0 team (hell, an 8-0 team) and a team that's never won a Superbowl. If you don't think he deserves one, you're a flat-out idiot. Still, I won't mind if Manning gets it (he has played unbelievably well) or my boy Phillip Rivers, who is so damn underrated it makes me mad. Farve should be in contention, but I don't think he can compete with number 9 or number 18.

So that's my take. Please comment and let me know if I should do a blog about the current state of the Broncos. Have a good week and WHO DAT THINK THEY GONNA BEAT DEM SAINTS? Just kidding... 

In the tray: Modern Warfare 2

Yes, I know. This blog used to exist. But hey, it's back now that I actually have a life. Yay. And the other reason I haven't blogged about this game is because I've been playing this game. Duh. Gonna keep it brief, just cause I don't wanna spend a long time blogging anymore (lost the flair for me and felt more like a chore for a while.)

Just some stuff for Single-player. The writers of the game like movies. According to the campaign, they love The Rock, The Incredible Hulk, Red Dawn, Lethal Weapon, The Dark Knight, James Bond, Fast and Furious, and a hell of a lot more. But don't feel like these guys are unoriginal. Every scene taken from a movie was done WAY better than the movie. These guys wanted big action and badass moves. I love it. It's a whole new direction in Call of Duty, and that's exactly what the franchise needs.

OMGWTFBBQ. Multi-player is sooooooooooo much better than COD4. Once you learn how to play it, you'll enjoy yourself. The new guns and attachments are infinitely better than previous installments. The assault rifles have been put on a pedastal and the rest has been marginalized a lot more, and that makes a more balanced game (sans the Akimbo '87's). I ♥ the new perks except for Scrambler (wtf), and yes i did do the ♥ for this game. It means that much to me.

Finally, on to Modern Warfare 3, which just writing makes me have a mini freakout. First off, single player: Soap and Price will still be fugitives on the run, and the only way to clear their names is to take down Makharov, who is still at large. This will make the third one even more "off the grid" ala Splinter Cell. The Rangers are headed to Moscow and won't come back till it's over over there, so be prepared for a helicopter dropping you off in Red Square eventually. And hopefully, we'll get more info on Price. He was so damn cryptic in the game it was hard to tell what his deal was. If Shepard returns with an eyepatch and a grudge, I'll be pretty disappointed about it. These writers are better than that. Time to come up with a new character (they did a great job with Shepard in this game) to fill the void. Might I suggest Captain MacMillan returning in some way, shape or form? Make for a great nerdgasm amongnst the fanbase...

Anyway, that's my take. Hope you enjoyed and that you're glad I'm back. Stay tuned for my NFL week 14 blog coming soon!