Mine's better, it's all I can afford.

In the mood for some light reading?  After this blog, may I suggest that you go to IGN and select an article on the PS3 or the Xbox 360, ignore the article then scroll down to the comments.  Chances are, the comments section is full of bile.  Pre, Post, and anything in-between pubescent boys go at each other like King Kong and Godzilla.  Actually, that's a terrible metaphor, because King Kong fighting Godzilla is at least cool.  Instead, these Pre, Post and anything in-between pubescent boys go at each other like whiny little bitches with an insecurity complex.

Of course, I am talking of the timeless argument of 'Your console is shit, mine is incredible'.  An act of nerdish discrimination and preposterous almost-but-nowhere-near gang violence that has plagued gaming for as long as I can remember .  As a child, I bore witness to the legendary feud between Nintendo and Sega, as they fought for generations!  I of course, like any nerdy, young hermit at the time took sides, my allegiance with Sega.  Sonic held far more appeal to me as an anthropomorphic blue hedgehog who goes around beating the shit out of robots and fat, moustached men than Nintendo, where I got to play as a fat, moustached man.  But I, like any right minded child of the time looked on at Nintendo yearning to try Mario out.  The fact is Mario looked just as fun as Sonic, in his own fat, moustached way.  And coincidently, it was everything I expected.

Taken out of context, that last sentence implies many a things wrong with me.

Sadly, as present day proves, I was sided with the losing team.  After the Playstation asserted itself as Nintendo's biggest threat, and Sega released another (Perceived, I shan't have this argument now!) Turkey in the form of the Dreamcast; Sega's console fate was decided.  Well, that and the fact that every Sonic game in recent memory has been the equivilant of sticking your balls in a super-heated vice.  

Nintendo then lost some footing in the console war with the Gamecube, a good console that was only beaten because it's competition was better.  The PS2 was a beautiful machine, and one that looked as if it were to monopolise it's current generation of gaming.  Until a giant black and green behemoth emerged from the dark shadows of Bill Gates's wallet.  The Xbox.

The only thing the xbox had for it at the time was marketing, but with someone as ridiculously rich as Bill 'Oh I fancy living in Taiwan this week' Gates behind you, you can't go wrong in that regard.  Coupled with stellar Online capabilities, the Xbox cemented itself as one to watch.  And did it deliver; the 360 was the first console out of the newer generation gates; the first incite into the next gen.  Followed by the Wii, and then followed cumbersomely by Playstation 3.  All chasing the golden rabbit of success.  Why success is a golden rabbit, I can not say.

The fact is, this generation is the best yet.  And it harks back to the days of Sega versus Nintendo, when two really good consoles with really good games fought it out.  I own an Xbox 360, mainly for it's Online capabilities and some of the gaming franchises that were becoming available.  Also because I was sick of waiting for the PS3 to come out.  But the fact is, as an exclusive 360 owner, and as an avid gamer this isn't something to be proud of.

And here's why.

By backing yourself into a corner, hugging your console like it's the first woman that ever talked to you, all the while boarding up your house with 'Keep out Gaystation 3' and 'Nintendo is wee', you are stopping yourself from trying out varieties of different games, all of which offer different, and (for the most part) fun experiences.   You're basically some absolute nerd who honestly DOES believe Halo Reach is the best looking game ever, because you never took the effort to notice that the PS3 can make your eyes ORGASM.

And the reverse is true enough, PS3 owners like to go on and on how this will be the year that the Playstation kills the 360, which it never does.  Ever.  Why?  Because the 360 adapts a hell of a lot better than the Playstation, who often dismiss most hardware innovations as a gimmick.  And what's even more baffling is how the most successful console of the 3, the Nintendo Wii, is looked at with disgust and hypocritical elitism. The console that makes everything horribly casual and is ruining the games industry, and not say, attracting a lot of POSITIVE attention to the damn market.

Basically, it's a feud that's built off of shear narrow mindedness, and cheapness.  Instead of trying to justify the fact they can only afford one console, why not embrace the fact that theirs is good in it's own way, all the while acknowledging exactly the same about the others.  But then again, that requires too much thought, and considering that about 60% of the gaming market are people that go on shooting games, hide amongst a lot of rocks with a long range gun, I believe this lesson will be ignored and possibly spat on.  

Of course, I could have mentioned the PC and they'd all be fucked.

Shiny Shiny

So, my mood has improved which means two things.

1)  I am not really in the mood for berating awful things like Transformers, Twilight and Avatar.

B) Therefore my blog will undoubtedly suffer for it.

But fear not!  I'm a person who can talk about anything and make it interesting.  So this blog shall be dedicated to Butter.  That's right!  That creamy sweet substance you spread on bread and other such stuff.  Where to start?  Of course, we could talk about how Butter has gone through a metamorphosis, and what was once perceived as a heart attack spread has since-

Oh fuck this lets insult the idea of remastering games.

Yes, going back to my very first blog, games are trying their damned hardest to impersonate films.  To the degree they now treat the old games like people with Blu-Rays treat DVDs.  

'Why should I have to play my beloved classic with it's awful graphics while the youth of today gets to play their favourite games in glorious HD?"  says the spiteful, graphics are more important than game-play moron.

'It gives us a chance to see the game how it was supposed to look' says the naive cock-end

'Why not?' says the smartest, least pretentious of the 3.

Now, I want to first say that I own both Pokemon Fire-red and Pokemon Soul-Silver.  Both are remakes of the Red and Silver respectively.  And I love them.  More than I love cake.  And sleeping.  And my girlfriend.  But the reason I love them so much is because Nintendo did what they did best.  They kept the formula exactly the same and changed NOTHING but the graphics.  Of course, they incorporated the new Pokemon in there, post Elite 4.  And tweaked the battling to match the Diamond/Pearl system.  All very, very, very boring.

But the fact is, it felt like Pokemon.  Exactly the way I remembered it.  Looking down at all those midget people as they harassed you with their enslaved monsters.  Approaching you with ABSURD dialogue before starting a battle ('Do you like to wear shorts?').  Consistently beating your rival, then being dumbfounded as he returned even more arrogant.  Meeting Mewtwo.  Getting a Charizard.

The list goes on and on.

But now the console franchises are getting in on the action.  To compliment the release of God of War 3, Kratos popped his zits, put on some make up and got heavy on the pixels as the first two games were remastered.  Lara Croft is returning in remastered versions of the original Tomb Raider games, probably to show off her high definition breasts.  And then every sad-act and their mother is getting wet over the prospect of a remastered Final Fantasy 7.

Now, here is where I talk negatively for a good paragraph or two.

But not yet.  You see, God of War 3 was a really big deal; and it's irritating to have the final instalment on an entirely different platform.  Especially the graphical behemoth that is the PS3, in comparison to it's modest PS2 daddy.  So it would be nice to have consistent graphics in the entire series.  I sympathise with this because of my disturbed and perverted relationship with the Halo franchise.  After playing Reach, I immediately went to play Halo 1, for an actual story (HOOO).  My jaw dropped when I realised that it wasn't as pretty as Reach.  The Elite's faces were melded into their armour, Master Chief looked as if he was dunked in metallic green paint.  And the environments in general looked as if they were made of Lego.  This doesn't detract from how good the game is; but going between those two extremes can really take you out the immersion for a little bit.

What I'm trying to say is, if you're wanting to keep a sense of consistency with graphics in your stories, then go ahead; it makes sense.

So now! The abuse!  Does Lara Croft really need remastering?  Do her games being remastered add anything to the Lara Croft franchise?  To me, it looks as if it's just a gimmick to attract those older, hardcore fans that have since moved on to the likes of Nathan Drake for platforming, tomb robbing fun.  But the kicker is that Lara's graphical update isn't overseen by her original creators, but rather her new pimps Crystal Dynamics.  Yes, people who had nothing to do with the Original games are remastering the original games.  Crystal Dynamics, a developer whose most critically acclaimed Lara Croft outing was the recently released xbox live arcade game.  The same developer who haven't hit the nail on the head yet in regards to her traditional platforming, endangered species murdering romps?  Why?

It's like me remastering the Beatles.  By playing all their parts.

It's remastering because it sounds good.  And because the graphics argument wins over 60% of the fucktards in the gaming market.

So now, on to Final Fantasy 7.  I have a friend named Sean, who goes on about the possible Final Fantasy 7 remakes, and every time he does he needs a pants change.  Online, you can't go to a single gaming website and not hear about people wanting Square Enix to announce the remake.

Ask most Final Fantasy fans and they'll tell you that either 6,7 or 10 was their favourite.  All coincidently were made by Square SOFT before they were eaten by the metaphorical business whale that was Something-something Enix.  And thus Square Enix was created!  A company that was Square in name only; and thus the Final Fantasy games that are never as good as the old days are born!

Sean, my friend, describes Final Fantasy 13 as a good game, just not as good as the older games.  IGN, describe Final Fantasy 13 as the most disappointing game of 2010.  What both Sean and IGN have in common is that they both want a remastered version of Final Fantasy 7 ASAP.  That's right.  They want a remastered version of their favourite Final Fantasy game made by the people who make mediocre Final Fantasy games.

This is not how things should be remade, ladies and gentlemen.

Now, Sean said to me a while back that the original creative force behind Final Fantasy 7 was interested in the remake.  Now, were Square Enix to take them on and let them have complete control in the remake, then why not?  Let them.  But honestly, if this game is going to be shat out by the people who have no idea what made Final Fantasy one of the biggest gaming powerhouses of 90s, then why would you want it?  Why would you want a game that is likely only going to disappoint? and shit on your memories? or just make you go and play the original, thus DESTROYING the point of remastering it in the first place?

I believe remastering is a necessary evil, especially with most big games publishers preferring to stick to what sells, as opposed to taking risks on new ideas.  I don't malign the idea of a Final Fantasy remake because it's mostly fan demand, my issue is that the people that remaster these games don't really give a shit about what it is they're playing with.  Pokemon was remastered brilliantly, because Nintendo knew their franchise the only way Nintendo could.  They didn't approach it as some obese 40 year old fan-boy living in his mums basement  looking at it in a way only he could.  No, Nintendo looked at Pokemon the same way they did at the end of the 90s, and that's why it worked.  The same can be said for God Of War, the same creative force remastering the graphics and adding consistency beyond the series.  A remastered Lara Croft is just going to be a nicer looking Tomb Raider with outdated gameplay, and were Crystal Dynamics to make their own adjustments, they'd likely be crap.

Final Fantasy 7 remake is hard to say.  The story will be the same and the graphics will no doubt make my eyes wet their pants in joy.  But chances are that if it's made without those who made it what it was, Enix will balls it up somehow.

And as funny as that would be, it'll make the people's pleas for a remastering of Final Fantasy 10 all the more unbearable.

It r gd

I won't lie, I'm not in the best of moods.  A combination of low energy, no motivation and some utterly detestable people on Halo: Reach multiplayer have merged together to create a horrible troll like creature.

Well, more so horrible.

So what better mood to be in when talking about one of my favourite topics.  Shit films that everyone loves!

To begin, Transformers.  From the Michael Bay school of characterless shite that has about as much depth of a teaspoon of nothing.  Transformers returns with its next, and hopefully last incarnation of machines that pride themselves in turning into vehicles.  Because apparently, just being a humanoid machine with giant Gatling guns, heat seeking rockets and giant feet is overrated and needless.  Of course, you could claim the 'robots in disguise' line, but lets be honest, in the last 2 films, they've done a generally poor job of being 'subtle'.  Anyway, the teaser implies that the yanks sent Neil Armstrong to the moon, not to beat the Russians so they could go 'nerr nerr nerr Communism sucks' but rather to go to the dark side of the moon and inspect a massive alien wreckage.  Which brings me to the first major complaint of the new Transformers film.

It's title.

So, because the (assumed) villain was found on the dark side of the moon, the screenwriters decided to go 'full retard' (presumably like the plot) and name the film 'Transformers 3: the Dark of the Moon'.  It sound's like Pink Floyd but with part of their brain missing.  In fact, Pink Floyd is likely the reason that it's cursed with such a wank name.  Rather than simply pay the copyright costs, which would be roughly 0.00000000001% of the budget, they'd rather save a good few hundred dollars and make the title as intelligent as their audience.  Like they care right?  Because as long as they have Megan Fox they'll pay for anythi- Oh right.

Yeah, Megan Fox isn't in it.  Yes, the female lead who had men everywhere cutting holes into their pockets and making concerning grunting noises in cinemas across the western world has backed out.  After calling Michael Bay 'Hitler' and insulting the films by implying there is no acting talent (perish the thought), Megan left with Adolf Bay pissing and moaning.  She's now been replaced by a woman who looks as if she's soiling herself in every publicity stunt.  Then again that could just be because she's working with Shia LeBeoff.

Now I don't care if they spelt his name wrong because I don't care for SHEEAAA LEEEBUFFF.  The fact is, he's an actor who built a name for himself by being the bitch in everyone's films.  He was Will Smith's bitch in 'Irobot', he was Keanu Reeve's bitch in 'Constantine', he was Harrison's Ford's bitch/son hybrid in 'Indiana Jones and the Constant Flowing Teet of Money' and most recently he was Michael Douglas's bitch in 'Wall Street 2' .  But the fact is Sheep LeBeef must have a dazzling personality because he attracted the attention of one Steven Spielberg, who has since made it his mission to get Shya LeCough to be the most famous Jewish man since Jesus himself.  However, after establishing himself as an average actor in such (Spielberg produced) 'classics' like 'Disturbia' and 'Eagle Eye', he has since become living proof that you can not polish a turd.

Anyway, on to something else.

Now it's normally my tact to go into a full rant about such intellectual property like Twilight.  But the fact is I haven't seen it.  And apparently, on the internet when you make such judgements about something you haven't seen, you're a narrow minded imbecile.  So instead I'll focus, for the shortest of time, on how these this film franchise is sold, and why I perceive it as shit, but not necessarily saying that it IS shit (even though it is.  NO! my bad).

So, Twilight.  I have to be honest now, the first Twilight didn't irritate me in the slightest.  It came and went and I heard next to nothing other than it was 'good'; in the case of every pretentious book reader across the planet 'it wasn't as good as the books'.  Then 'New Moon' came around, and I was bombarded with uppity girls getting defensive over the mere mention of 'Why does he glitter?'.  I suddenly saw thousands of groups pop up on my Facebook, made by girls talking about what they would do to Edward Cullen, or Jacob Whats-his-face for those on 'Team Jacob'.  Then Eclipse showed up, selling out cinema's across the universe despite the fact that the CGI looked like it was drawn on with crayon and the acting was the equivilant of a visit to Madam Tuessauds.

So, the sequels are obviously the source of my pain and misery.  The first thing that catches my glance is the fact they stamp 'The Twilight Saga' on every film to date.  Now, I'm not sure about this but I thought Twilight was only the name of the first book? But now it's been stamped on every film just so we know that it is in fact part of a brand and that we must not forget what that brand is.  It's gotten so irritating that Stephanie Meyers herself has taken to stamping 'Twilight Saga' on books she's written that aren't even based in the Twilight saga.  My girlfriend has this book 'The Host' and under the cover art and title, in MASSIVE WRITING is 'FROM THE AUTHOR OF THE TWILIGHT SAGA'.

The worst bit is that blurb reads like a perverse sexual fantasy of a post pubescent girl.

The worst bit of news is that THE TWILIGHT SAGA'S 'Breaking Dawn' is to be split in to two films; not because Harry Potter did it, but because there are several powerful issues in the book that need to be addressed in ful- No, it's because Harry Potter did it.  Yes, Potter paved the way for the biggest new Hollywood trend since Rebooting every damn thing in existence, splitting things in half so people pay TWICE.    I don't care what any Twi-hard says, the decision to split THE TWILIGHT SAGA'S 'Breaking Dawn' in to two films was far too coincidental for my liking.  And while we're on the Potter/TWILIGHT SAGA thing, can I just state how much Cedric Diggory looks like Edward Cullen?

The best thing is, the die hard fans inevitably do more harm than good.  Not only do the rest of the world assume they're all in need of psychological help, but they cause actors like Robert Patterson to be typecast; because no matter what he does, all they will think of is Edward.

It's sort of like what I did to Chuck Norris.

Lastly, Avatar.  Please, let me say that I don't dislike this film out of some huge desire to be different and an elitist twat.  The fact is, Avatar is shallow, to the point where you can see the thought process behind James Cameron's imagining of Pandora.  Let me explain:

1)  The aliens:  'Ok, the Na'vi, they have to be different but the same, else when Jake Sully fucks one, people are going to be sick.  Ok, so we'll make them blue, not green, green is too obvious.  Right, cool, now, because the message in the film is harmony with the universe and shit, we must make them tree huggers.  So they wear loads of hippy shit and ride animals.  Cool, Oh, and they look like cats, I've always wanted to see a man fuck a cat'   OK, so I added that last bit.  'Ok, so, every other animal must have six limbs instead of the normal 4, because they're aliens and have to be different man.  I don't care if it means the Na'vi should logically have 6 limbs based off of the idea of evolution in a similar environment leads to similar evolutionary adaptation. 6 LIMBS!  Oh, and have it so the Na'vi can stick their things in them.  Oh baby!'

2) Pandora:  'Right, basically, I want everything to glow.  Because that's pretty.  Also, when it's night, I want loads of fucking fireflies, because they're pretty too.  And I want floating rocks, because it's an alien world I can say it's some geological shit which makes Pandora even more beautiful.  Oh, and waterfalls, LOADS OF WATERFALLS, running water implies FREEDOM, which is what the Na'vi are ,man, FREE.  and colourful plants, coz it's pretty'

3)  Unobtainium:  'IT'S AN ELEMENT THAT SHOULD NEVER BE OBTAINED!

4)  The story:  'I don't give a shit just rip one off.  Make it like Titanic, I love Oscars man, they're fucking cool!'

Of course, It's likely I'm wrong and the Avatar masses are right.  And James Cameron is a genius and I'm just a cynical, pessimistic, joyless wanker who can't find happiness in anything he sees.

Doesn't mean I'm any less right though!

By the power of Asgard!

So, it's interesting to note that they are making a film about everyone's favourite God of Thunder, Thor.  Granted, it's his Marvel incarnation and not the proper mythological variety, but the Viking sentiment is still present.  Marvel Thor's exploits generally centralise between him and his half brother Loki (the God of Mischief) slap fighting until Thor inevitably wins because he isn't fuck ugly and has a much cooler power than 'Mischief'.  Thrown into the mix is Thor's egocentric dad Odin (God of everything), Heimdall (The God of Light) and Kratos (God of W- NO! that's not right.

So why am I talking about a superhero based around Norse mythology?  To anyone it sounds like the world's most expensive fan fiction.  In truth, it's because Thor has come under attack by the ignorant white men across the planet! Why? Because Heimdall is black.

Yes, the god of light is black.  OUTRAGEOUS! How dare they change Norse mythology to suit their own ends! The cads!  Especially given how relevant Norse mythology is in today's standard affair of things.  Also, because it is considered one of the big religions along with Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Stupid Idiotism and Scientology!

Basically, what my sarcasm implies is that this is absolutely ridiculous.  In fact, it's worse than ridiculous, it's hypocritically ridiculous.  These people are annoyed that the God of Light is depicted as Black, but not by the fact that Norse Mythology has been chronicled into a comic book form?

These people use such eloquent phrases such as 'Some things shouldn't be tampered with' and 'Oh you can't escape political correctness these days!'.  The fact is, people believe that the Norse God's appear the way they do because that's how the Vikings perceived them.  And the Vikings believe the Norse God's looked the way they did because like any stupid religious person for the time, they assumed that their Gods looked like them.  And coincidently, there were no black Vikings.

Now, were there black Vikings, brown Vikings, Blue Vikings, Purple Vikings; chances are the Gods wouldn't be exclusively white.  But people don't like to think outside of their comfort zone about such things, and would much rather assume that all Norse Gods were white, because fate dictates that it be so.  And clearly this credible logic is so profound and accepted because Norse mythology is still so relevant today!  It's not like Marvel made comics and films about Thor because the idea of a super powered Viking wielding a giant Hammer and Thunder was fucking cool.

On an unrelated note, I'm going to pen a new comic series based off the events of the Bible.  But I'm going to draw Jesus as white and not Jewish.

The Art of tacking on Sequels and Prequels

Imagine every form of Media living in a metaphorical house.  Books are of course, the Grandfather, going on and on, discussing many thousands of issues that can sometimes go on for a needlessly long time.  Film, the father of the house is in the garden mowing the lawn while Radio, the mother is making dinner.  Television, the irritating uncle who goes about vomiting reality TV every other step is in the lounge, pissed.

That leaves their children.  Graphic novels and Blockbuster Video Games.

Graphic novels is the older brother, a young version of books made more colourful with the addition of pictures. Video games on the other hand is the gushing child, looking up at Daddy film and tries to emulate him in every way.  Even when his dad has a horrible habit of pissing himself and falling over.

Where I'm trying to go with the metaphor (which has clearly outstayed it's welcome) is that blockbuster games need to stop copying films.  Because blockbuster films are generally crap.  Other than that, they have this horrible habit of tacking on sequels which generally ruin the entirety of the continuity established in the previous films, and therefore make everything seem like a parallel universe.  Hell, at least Star trek was up front about it!

Of course, I have a few specific games in mind when thinking of this horrid act of ill thought out tacking.  So fasten your seatbelts and get ready to enter a ranting shit storm.  Incidently, it's full of spoilers, so when a spoiler is imminent.  THIS will appear:

*****SPOILER! IT'S A SPOILER! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!*****

when the spoiler ends, this will be what you see:

*****IT'S GONE! SO THIS MISLEADING TEXT HAS YOU BELIEVE!*****

So, to resume.

FIRST! on my agenda is Mass Effect 2, a game I adore and love; but at one point raised an eyebrow which MUST be addressed. Of course, what I'm talking about is-

*****SPOILER! IT'S A SPOILER! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!*****

...*cough* The Human-Reaper.  As cool as it was to see that Shepard's interstellar nemesiseseseses find their way into Mass Effect 2, everything about the Human- Reaper is silly.  Firstly, it was being designed as a Human shaped super space craft.  Which would looking bloody hilarious flying through space wouldn't it?  How would it fly?  Like Superman? with one arm sticking out?  Or would it favour the arms at the side of approach; therefore looking as if it's going to torpedo into the nearest planet.  The reason the Human-Reaper is Human shaped, is because it's being made up of liquidised people; which is the straw that broke the continuity back.  If you've played Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2, you'll notice that pretty much every reaper is shaped like a giant cuttlefish.  So what?  Was every civilisation before Mass Effect CUTTLEFISH!? it explains why they were so easy to wipe out...

But that's not the irritating thing ladies and gentleman. In Mass Effect 1 you mean Sovereign, a Cuttlefi- I MEAN REAPER! who tells you that organic life is a weakness BLAH BLAH BLAH I'M A BIG SCARY MACHINE! but then in Mass Effect 2 it turns out that reapers are half organic.  So what? Was Sovereign just retarded or lying?  He doesn't seem like the type.

*****IT'S GONE! SO THIS MISLEADING TEXT HAS YOU BELIEVE!*****

For those of you who had to skip that section, you're idiots.  Why haven't you played Mass Effect 2 yet?

MOVING RIGHT ALONG! and into prequel territory now.

Halo: Reach.  Yes, Halo Reach.  I love Halo, well, I love Halo and Halo 2.  And maybe ODST.  Halo: Reach is a massive irritating tacking on.  And while I'm prone to sympathise with Bungie; who had to make a story that works next to a book (Fall of Reach), there's still no excuse for some of this blatantly awful tacking on of things.

You're Noble team, a bunch of generally characterless Spartan's who go from point A to point B several times, occasionally stopping to defend evac points.  When the plot does kick in, which is about the 8th mission of 9, you are tasked with - 

*****SPOILER! IT'S A SPOILER! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!*****

...Thank you.  You are tasked with taking a valuable package to the pillar of autumn (the ship that plays great importance in Halo).  Now,I appreciate Bungie wanted to make a game where you character inspires the Halo trilogy to unfold.  It's a great concept.  But the way it's done!  Basically, the valuable package is a fragment of Cortana, filled with precious information.  Which is fucking retarded, and clearly a loop hole designed to work around the fact Cortana accompanies Master Chief all through Reach's downfall; so she couldn't possibly be the package at the same time.  Bungie found a way...

As you deliver the package, Captain Keyes tells you that your fallen comrades will never be forgotton.  Then after you die, a narrator tells you that you will never be forgotten.  But if you play ANY other Halo game, you will hear NO mention of Noble Team.  They don't even show up on the remembrance memorial at the end of Halo 3.  Remembered my ARSE.  Noble Team you gullible bastards.

*****IT'S GONE! SO THIS MISLEADING TEXT HAS YOU BELIEVE!*****

One more point I want to make about Reach before I leave it.  How retarded is the military in that game?  The very first mission is where you encounter the covenant.  The aliens that are systematically going through every human colony and eradicating everything.  But the human military doesn't send reinforcements then, no. They don't send reinforcements when a ship starts bombing an important base either, Nope.  They don't send reinforcements when the Covenant has a full invasion force at the ready.  Nope.  NO! instead they send reinforcements once they're sure everything is fucked.  Way to go.  Apparently, it will take 2 days for a bulk of the forces to show up from when they're massively fucked.  Coincidently, the time between the first mission and the mission where everything is entirely fucked, is roughly about two days.

BUHHHRRRRR.

Anyway, on to the worst offender of the lot.  A game I hold with such contempt and hatred.  A game that takes tacking to a whole other level of crap.

Bioshock 2

This game, in my opinion (and by 'in my opinion' I mean 'by fact') is crap, story-wise at least.  Basically, the main antagonist of Bioshock 2 is a woman who loves to spend the entire game poking you with a stick made of 'shit dialogue'.  She was also, apparently, a big player in the city of Rapture.  Which makes sense considering she wasn't mentioned A SINGLE TIME in bioshock 1.  However, I was put to shame when I found the audio logs of one Andrew Ryan stating how important she was in Raptures society.  It was strange to note that his voice sounded different.  Clearly I've breathed in too much ADAM.

The game also does something which everyone loved, cept me.  Clearly I'm one of those none conformist dicks.  But there's a section where you-

*****SPOILER! IT'S A SPOILER! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!*****

I'm getting sick of you! Seriously, there is no need to INTERUPT!

*****LOL*****

...anyway, there is a section where you get to play as a little sister.  And you get to see Rapture how it was before it's famed downfall. 

Would have been FANTASTIC if it didn't imply that Rapture was basically made of bed sheets and duvets.

*****IT'S GONE! SO THIS MISLEADING TEXT HAS YOU BELIEVE!*****

I guess the basic jist of it is, instead of running the risks of trying to please your fans, why don't you grow some balls and go into some new territory in the same Universe?

All Reach had to do was not tie Noble Team's story directly into the Halo trilogy.  This means that the lack of mention of Noble Team ANYWHERE is entirely understandable.  It also means they don't have to twist and warp their own damn fiction to make something work.

If Mass Effect was honestly conceived as a trilogy before the sale of the first game, why not just have Sovereign acknowledge the value of organic life instead of just being a massive cuttlefish wanker

And all Bioshock 2 had to do was establish new characters, instead of trying to hopelessly piggyback off of the first.

That and not have you play as a Big Daddy

That and not exist.