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.

PLATINUM REVIEW: Fallout: New Vegas

This is the first of my series of platinum reviews. These differ from traditional reviews in that I am not evaluating the games themselves (although my perception will certainly be influenced by the quality of the game), but the platinum trophy associated with each game.

In these reviews, I will discuss notably enjoyable, rewarding, annoying, or complicated trophies in each game. Then I will rank the platinum on scales of fun, difficulty, and time-wasting ridiculousness. Finally, I will ask, "If given the chance, would I plat it again?" In other words, if I could get credit for platting the game a second time, would I do it? Today's installment is my most recent platinum, Fallout: New Vegas.

Synopsis:

Fallout: New Vegas is a post-apocalyptic FPS/RPG taking place in the Mojave Desert during the year 2281. It is a follow-up to Fallout 3, one of the most lauded games of this generation. Though it does make some basic improvements to its predecessor's formula, this game is essentially Fallout 3.5. However, one does not need to have played Fallout 3 in order to enjoy New Vegas—the plots are related in only the slightest of ways. If you're looking for value in a game, this one provides it: you could easily get more than 100 hours of gameplay from this single disc. There are problems with slowdown, freezing, and other glitches, but none of that made me feel like the game was completely broken (although maybe a bit annoying). This is definitely worth a playthrough whether you are a fan of the Fallout series or have never had the pleasure to be introduced.

Most Rewarding Trophy:

Hardcore

This made an easy game slightly more difficult and I got a gold trophy in the process. And with bullets actually weighing something, it actually requires some semblance of strategy! The game becomes less about loot collection and more about resource allocation when you consider how much food and water to carry and what to do with the surplus. How many times did I sell some ammo or water and then curse myself an hour later? Way too many times. The only annoying part was that my companions died at the drop of a hat (especially whenever I fought a group of cazadors). Still, I think this is the way the game should be played.

Most Annoying Trophies:

All or Nothing

Eureka

No Gods, No Masters

Veni, Vidi, Vici

Doing the exact same things four different times is not at all my idea of varied gameplay. Hey, I'll do the NCR ending! 1. Boomers. 2. Brotherhood of Steel. 3. Great Khans. 4. End game! How about the Mr. House ending? 1. Boomers. 2. Brotherhood of Steel. 3. Great Khans. 4. End game! Ugh. Talk about an artificial extension of the gameplay time. It got to the point where I just killed the leaders of the different factions right away, since it was notably faster and I don't need any extra help in the final battle, anyway.

Most Fun Trophy:

Caravan Master

Caravan is awesome. The developers did a great job of creating a new game that I actually want to play. I do wish that more people in the Mojave Wasteland played it, since I ended up playing the game against the same guy several times in a row for the trophy (and by the end, he was bidding zero caps!). I will say that the computer's AI should have been better—the game was not very challenging. Caravan is fun enough that I intend to play it with real cards against actual human opponents.

Most Pointless Trophies:

Globe Trotter

Legend of the Star

No, seriously. I hate collection trophies. I cannot stress this enough. Globe Trotter wasn't too bad, since there were only seven items to collect and they were not at all hard to locate. Still, why do I need to bother? It's stupid and so are these trophies.

Best Game Expander:

Blast Mastery

Lead Dealer

Love The Bomb

New Vegas Samurai

Old-Tyme Brawler

On Fallout 3, I never used melee, unarmed, or explosive weapons at all (except for mini nukes to kill the super mutant behemoths, of course). Since I could carry unlimited ammo and had worked up my small guns and energy weapon skills, I used machine guns and plasma rifles pretty much exclusively. On Fallout: New Vegas, with ammo weighing something and the need to expand my damage sources, melee and unarmed weapons became my best friends. This actually added a lot to the gameplay, so I like these trophies. Except for Love The Bomb. I never get into explosive weapons.

Platinum Rankings:

Fun:

A good game (despite the constant crashing) and a fun platinum, even if there are several trophies that are a bit redundant.

Difficulty:

New Vegas is not difficult at all—in fact, it's a little too easy. Almost every trophy on this game requires more time than skill. I would have appreciated a little more struggle, honestly.

Needless Grinding:
I mentioned that the four faction endings result in some needless repetitive grinding. Other than those and the hated collection trophies, this game is pretty straight forward. Getting 10,000 health from food probably would have been really annoying, except for the fact that I began concentrating on it early and worked up my survival skill to make it happen.

(or maybe...)

If Given The Chance, Would I Plat It Again?

Absolutely not. Yes, it was fun. But to me, this isn't the type of game to inspire a replay, and especially not for a second platinum. While I can deal with the crashing during an initial playthrough, I would lose patience on any subsequent tries. I'm glad I played this, but now I'm done.

Overall:

An okay platinum for a good game, but not anything special.

To Plat or Not to Plat: Pros and Cons of PS3 Trophy Hunting

I've had a PS3 for nearly a year, and I've grown to really love the sound that indicates that I have acquired a new trophy. Some part of me hates the fact that I care about these essentially meaningless awards, but I'm addicted. As Kevin Butler so eloquently put it, I regularly stay up until 3 AM to earn a trophy that isn't real…but is. It's totally real! That trophy will be forever associated with my user name. And of course, the pinnacle of trophy hunting is the all-powerful platinum.

Trophy hunting can also be a major pain. As much joy as I get from Sony's brand of positive reinforcement, there are times when I'm annoyed with the game developer, myself, and that stupid controller I just threw to the ground. And yet I find myself unable to play for more than half a game without a glance at the trophy list. Below, I will discuss some of the pros and cons of trophy hunting I've noted since I began regularly playing the PS3.

Pro: Trophies help you get the most out of your game.

The nice thing about trophies is that, if you earn them all, they will generally take you through every important aspect of a game. Take Heavy Rain, for example. If it hadn't been for trophies, I probably would have just played through it once, enjoyed the twist, and never seen any of the other endings. Instead, I saw every outcome, which is way more than I would have seen had there not been some incentive to play through again.

By platting Red Dead Redemption, I easily doubled, and perhaps tripled, my gameplay time. For a game as good as RDR, this is a great thing. Now, there's a chance that I would have done everything anyway—I've always been somewhat of a completionist—but through Sony's innovation, I got a reward for it. It may not be tangible, but it's real.

The last game I played before purchasing my PS3 was The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess on the Wii. On this last playthrough, I collected everything: all the heart pieces, poe souls, and extras there were to be found. Obviously playing a Zelda game is its own reward, but in retrospect, I can't believe I went through all that for nothing. Sure, I had some extra health in the final battle with Ganondorf, but I didn't need it. I can always say that I did it, but it's not recorded anywhere except in my mind. There's just something nice about being able to review what you did or didn't do in a given game. Trophies make that happen. I haven't yet reached the point of nerdiness where I keep a running log of everything I've done in every game I've played. I'm sure I'll get there eventually.

Con: Trophies can lead to game fatigue.

Let me give the flipside of the examples I used above. Heavy Rain was awesome. But by the time I got to the point of unlocking the last few endings, I couldn't wait to set it aside. The same goes for Red Dead Redemption. I spent so much time doing side quests and challenges that by the time I made it to Black Water I was exhausted…and then I had to get all the online trophies, which take forever. It's possible that my perception of these two games, even though they are among my favorite on the PS3, was soured because I ended up playing slightly past the point of absolute enjoyment.

One of my favorite games on any platform is an old standby, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. You know what I have never done on that game? Collected all 100 gold skulltulas. Do you know why? Because it's not fun. Collecting more than 50 doesn't really net you any great in-game rewards either, so there's not a great incentive to do so. In the six or seven times I've played OOT, I've gotten all the heart pieces just once and I've even skipped the Biggoron's Sword a couple of times. I guarantee that if there were trophies for this game, I would have gone for the platinum. And I wonder if it would still be my favorite if I had tracked down all of those gold skulltulas.

This leads to an important point: collectible trophies are really, really annoying. Finding all of the feathers on Assassin's Creed 2 sucked. But Infamous was downright painful, with a whopping 350 blast shards to find. Developers need to realize that we do not want to track these things down. People have been speaking out about fetch quests for a long time, but tasks that require you to find arbitrary collectibles are just as bad. Once you commit yourself to a game, you're going to look for these things, but you will hate every minute of it. And I'm pretty sure video games are not made to fulfill the public's need for masochistic behavior.

Pro: Trying to increase your trophy count leads to playing a wider variety of games.

I had a PS2 for more than five years and when I finally upgraded to the next generation, I had played about 50 games on it. By contrast, I've now had a PS3 for about ten months and have played around 25 games. Granted, I was a student when I had my PS2 and sometimes couldn't find time or money for gaming. Now I get to leave my work at work and therefore have more free time.

Besides the time and money issues, I attribute my playing an increased number of games to trophies. Why replay a game on which I've already achieved platinum when I could play a whole new game and get a brand new platinum? I played my PS2 games an average of four or five times each, whereas I don't generally revisit PS3 games I have already mastered. This helps me to be more familiar with the vast library of great games available, which makes me a better, more informed gamer. Or at least that's what I tell myself.

Con: Replay value of games is essentially ruined.

At the same time, I am essentially barring myself from replaying great games. Uncharted 2 and Assassin's Creed 2 are both utterly fantastic and well worth playing a second time. However, I have the platinum trophies for both of these titles. I just can't help but think of the opportunity cost of playing a game I've already mastered instead of a brand new game. In a sense, I really want to replay Uncharted, but can't bring myself to do it because I'm not getting any (totally real) trophies.

Now, as I've only had my PS3 for ten months, this could all change. Maybe in a year or two I'll be more inclined to revisit my favorite titles, but at this point I have no desire to play anything but games I haven't yet platinumed. And it's not like great new titles aren't coming out every month.

Pro: A sense of accomplishment after getting a particularly difficult platinum trophy.

I am proud to say that I have a Demon's Souls platinum trophy. This is regarded by some as one of the hardest platinum trophies to get, so it makes me feel like I've really accomplished something. I am among the few who have mastered an incredibly difficult game. Not only mastered it, but learned to enjoy it--it's one of my three favorite PS3 titles. I am pretty much a board certified badass.

Con: That sense of accomplishment is dashed when you realize how much time you lost.

It's not like I got the Demon's Souls plat in a week. I did it over the course of several months, but I still marathoned that game for obscene amounts of time. I'm surprised my wife still loves me after that ordeal. The worst part was obtaining certain crafting materials. I managed to sink a dozen hours into just grinding one portion of the game, waiting for that pure bladestone to drop.

Pro: You can compare yourself to friends and review your past gaming experiences.

Public trophy lists allow for competition among friends and I enjoy the opportunity to compare gaming experiences.

Con: You feel like a loser because no one else cares.

Yes, I am a self-loathing trophy hunter. But I can't stop.

Pro: Trophies are better than Microsoft's achievement system.

On the PS3, you get one of four types of trophies: bronze, silver, gold, or platinum. On the 360, you get an arbitrary number of points. Sony's system is more appealing to me as a gamer, as rather than just an ever-increasing number, I work toward advancing a level (in my case, I'm currently level 13). It's completely illogical, sure, but I would rather climb levels than just have a lump number of points. I can't explain why I feel this is better, it just is. Most importantly, the PS3 gives you some incentive to complete every challenge in the form of a platinum trophy.

Con: Sometimes completing that last trophy is a pain (AKA: Xbox envy).

Let's go back to Demon's Souls. If I didn't have a platinum at stake, I would give myself credit for doing as much as I did and forget all about several of the crafting item trophies, particularly the one involving the pure bladestone. But because I put so much time and effort into the game, there was no way I was going to give up. There are always a few trophies like that: Red Dead Redemption had several online ones, collectible trophies in all shapes and forms, and getting gold medals on the combat challenges in Batman: Arkham Asylum. Sometimes when I am down to the last one or two trophies, I work well past the point of having fun to finish up the last few challenges. I'm sometimes jealous of Xbox owners because they can just accept that they're not going to get those 25 gamer points. As a PS3 owner, I don't just stand to lose a random difficult bronze trophy-- I stand to lose a platinum.

Pro: Trophy lists provide guidance in huge games.

I'll probably platinum Fallout: New Vegas tonight. I am grateful that this does not mean that I've done everything there is to do in the game. Both Fallout games have been absolutely huge. There comes a point where the game fatigue hits hard and I just want the damn story to end. In both Fallout 3 and New Vegas, after playing sans spoilers for a while, you realize that there is far too much for any mortal man to do. Solution? Consult the trophy list. In most cases, the developers select the best side quests as being worthy of a trophy. This way I don't spend an hour exploring some cave where the ultimate reward is a trio of fission batteries and some duct tape. That's just infuriating. Some might argue that not having a huge reward in every area is more realistic. I argue that I play video games to escape from reality. I want awesome gear, not a wrench.

Con: Spoilers.

Sony and game developers do a pretty good job of protecting us from story spoilers with hidden trophies. Sometimes I'll look up what these hidden trophies are online, but for the most part I've only hurt myself with minor plot points. I didn't spoil the killer's identity in Heavy Rain, so clearly the video game gods were watching over me. But as a trophy enthusiast, I do risk spoiling things for myself. If a game doesn't run past 40 or 50 hours, I'll usually play through it one time without worrying about trophies at all--that's for the second time through--but for the occasional game that takes upwards of 100 hours, sometimes I don't relish the idea of playing through a second time.

Pro: I just like trophies!

Look, I can't explain why trophies are important to me. In thinking through all of this, I actually came up with more cons than pros. But that doesn't make me want to give up my platinum-seeking ways.

Some people just don't care about trophies and that's fine. I admit that there are times when I'm jealous of these people. If they want to replay God of War III, they just do it and don't worry about the fact that they're not getting trophies this time. If they want to play the first Modern Warfare or Valkyria Chronicles or The Orange Box, they just don't care about the fact that the trophy system had not yet been implemented when these games came out. They're playing for the love of gaming. How could I possibly fault them for that?

Does this mean I'm not playing for the love of gaming? No way! I've loved games since I was a kid playing Mario on the NES. But I'm at the height of my enthusiasm right now and I think that trophies have a lot to do with this. Maybe I'll become disenchanted with them one day, but for now I'm enjoying every one that pops up. I must now excuse myself. I've got a New Vegas platinum to get.