REVIEW: Magic: The Gathering -- Duels of the Planeswalkers 2012

During middle school, my life more or less revolved around Magic: The Gathering. Then my friends stopped playing, the comic book shop near my house closed, and I discovered girls. In the last decade, I haven't played the card game more than a dozen times. But sometimes I wistfully remember those days of non-stop Magic and wish that I had the opportunity to play again.

Enter Magic: The Gathering -- Duels of the Planeswalkers 2012. I always considered buying the first game, but I was skeptical that it could really provide a positive experience. When the sequel came out, however, I knew I had to try it. After watching a needless opening cut scene that sets up a story that is never revisited, I jumped right into the single player campaign on the hardest difficulty. And it's Magic. It's not as good as playing with actual cards, but for someone without the means to do so, it's a great alternative.

There are actually three parts to the single-player campaign. In the first portion, you play the owner of each of the game's decks in a head to head match. Each win unlocks the defeated deck for your use. In Archenemy, you and two other players (either A.I. or online) compete against a single opponent, the archenemy. In order to even the stakes, however, this opponent starts with 40 life points and gets a separate deck of "scheme" cards, which bestow one powerful effect to the owner per turn. Your team takes a joint turn, combining each phase in an attempt to defeat the archenemy. The final campaign, Revenge, again pits you in head to head matches, but this time the opponents' decks are upgraded with premium cards, making each match that much harder. Also available are several "challenges," where you are placed into a specific game scenario and must use the resources at your disposal to defeat an opponent before he can defeat you.

The gameplay mimics that of the card game quite well. As far as I can tell, no concessions were made in the process of programming the card game's complex rule system into a video game. Even better, the computer A.I. is fantastic. The vast majority of the time, the computer makes decisions that a very good human player would make. I have not found any exploits that make competing against the computer easier than competing against a live player.

My primary complaints about the game have to do with processing time. Especially in Archenemy mode, the processing time can make these games last for as long as an hour. As you get further into the match and the computer has more options, even just revealing which scheme card is in effect during a given turn can take upwards of thirty seconds. I realize there are millions of variables the computer is processing, but it doesn't change the fact that all the waiting detracts from the experience.

The cards are the real star of Magic: The Gathering, and this game does not disappoint with its deck selection. There is at least one deck of each color, in addition to several dual-colored and one tri-colored deck with a focus on artifacts. Themes (e.g. vampires, dragons, elves, etc.), direct-damage, and sweet combos all make an appearance. One of my favorite selections is Ancient Depths, a blue and green deck that focuses on supplying lands quickly in order to summon huge creatures early in the game.

Some deck-building tools would have been great, but these were not provided. However, the game does allow for some deck customization. Each time you win a match with a deck, you unlock one or more cards for use with that deck, with a maximum of sixteen additional cards. The deck manager allows you to remove any non-land cards from your deck, as long as you do not fall below the minimum of 60 cards. It's not perfect, but it's something. Short of complete freedom to build decks, I would appreciate the opportunity to transfer cards from one deck to another or to duplicate certain cards. The ability to adjust the number of lands in my deck would also be nice.

The trophies available for this game are somewhat of a disappointment. The game has twenty trophies, which is high for a downloadable title, but all twenty trophies are of the bronze variety. They also do not encompass everything one can do in the game—getting 100% on the trophy list does not mean you have unlocked or beaten every portion of Magic 2012. For example, one of the trophies is rewarded for collecting twelve additional cards for any one deck. Even though it would take much more time, I would prefer a gold trophy for unlocking twelve or even sixteen cards for every deck. Trophies should encompass a whole game, not just a portion of it.

Nonetheless, collecting all the trophies for this game will take at least ten to fifteen hours. If you want to collect every card in every deck, you'll spend several dozen hours completing the task. And then there's multiplayer! The multiplayer offers free for all matches with up to four players, two-headed giant matches, and archenemy matches, although you won't be able to play as the archenemy (very disappointing). For some reason I was unable to join games, but had no problem getting players in the games I created. The online gameplay was as seamless as that of the single player. My only other complaint regarding the multiplayer is the lack of a stat-tracking system. That would have been very nice. However, with so much to do and at a price tag of only $10, this game is a fantastic value, and I recommend purchase for anyone interested in Magic: The Gathering.

Summary

The good:
-Excellent replication of classic Magic gameplay.
-Good deck selection.
-Challenging A.I. makes even the single player campaign rewarding.
-Great value for the price.

The bad:
-Processing time is aggravating.
-No deck-building tools.
-No gold or silver trophies.
-No stat-tracking system in multiplayer.

My grade: B

Breaking Up Is Hard to Do

Dear First-Person Shooter,

We've had some awesome times together, haven't we? Remember those long nights of Duke Nukem 3D? The number of times I played through Dark Forces? And Goldeneye. Oh, Goldeneye. Yes, we sure have had some great times, but I'm writing to tell you that I've moved on. I just don't love you anymore.

Finally getting that off my chest is absolutely invigorating. Doubtless this news comes to you as a shock, but should you really be so surprised? Gaming is quickly becoming a story-telling tool to rival movies, television, and literature, and your genre is lagging way behind. Think about it. Whose story is more interesting: Master Chief's or Nathan Drake's? Sev Sevchenko's or Alan Wake's? Even Mario and anthropomorphic sacks have more personality than you.

Okay, that's a bit harsh. I know that you have fans that deeply care about the characters involved in the Halo and Killzone franchises, but I'm just not one of them, FPS. For some reason, your genre just no longer holds my interest where plot is concerned. I get so emotionally invested in games like Heavy Rain and Red Dead Redemption, but I don't even feel partiality toward characters in your genre. What's up with that?

Maybe I'm just missing the point, though. Since 80% of my gaming is single player, maybe I should realize that FPS games are not built to satisfy my niche in the gaming world. You're all about online play now, which is fun occasionally, but I don't want to spend my time playing the same death match over and over while there are tons of great titles I have yet to play. You and I just have different visions of what gaming should accomplish, FPS.

There's one thing I have to admit: I really like what you're doing with the RPG elements the last several years. Call of Duty is the mammoth franchise it is today because of Infinity Ward's inclusion of RPG elements in the multiplayer portion of Modern Warfare. I wish there was more of that in the campaign mode, but there are always games like Bioshock and Borderlands, both of which offer a robust single-player experience through heavy use of RPG elements. But these are outliers, FPS. Your developers keep releasing generic games that fail to compel me in any significant way. I know you have a lot of fans, but I can't imagine I'm the only one that feels this way. There's just such a disparity between the best FPS games and the best games of other genres.

Make no mistake, I'm breaking up with you, but please realize that I still want to be friends. When I want to hang out, you'll still be on my list…but you'll be at the bottom of that list, FPS. Did you know that I have been absolutely lusting over games like Uncharted 3 and Dark Souls? And yet, when Killzone 3 was released I just said, "Meh, I'll play it in six months or so." I'm so indifferent to you, FPS. And I think I deserve to be with a genre that makes me happy.

Let me be frank: I can't afford to pay $60 every time I want to take you home. You just don't offer the full package that a game like Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood does. How many times have I excitedly purchased a game of your genre, only to finish the campaign mode the next day? You don't give enough time to story or character development; you just put all your effort into the multiplayer. And that's fine for you, but it's not okay for me, FPS.

Look, I'll always remember the good times we had. We'll see each other occasionally and we'll probably even hook up every once in a while. But I just can't continue with this commitment, FPS. We've just grown too far apart. I wish you the best and hope you understand.