UPDATE -- I got the PS4

The reason for posting this update so late, is quite simple. I got the PS4. I got it. Holy h#ll YES i got it. Now i wanna go back to gaming, and testing out the system, and i’ll have a review up shortly, hopefully by tuesday. Additionally, i’ll post my review of Resogun, Contrast and Battlefield 4 (next-gen). Those are the only 7 PS4 games i have right now and most of them are free-to-play. It’ll probably be a week though, before i get done writing all of those reviews though. I’ll need to spend some time in those games before i feel comfortable reviewing them.

Quick update (added post writing this article):
I am well on my way with my review of PS4. I'm going away this weekend though. This means that either i'll be able to write a lot, or almost nothing at all. I'll try to work my way to publish the PS4 review before leaving, and hopefully i can have my BF4 review up shortly after but i need to finish the singleplayer campaign first. Until now i have barely started it; having only played a few missions. My time has been put into the multiplayer. For now, you can follow me on Twitch, where i livestream gameplay. It's mainly Battlefield 4 and Resogun but i'll probably play some Contrast as well. My twitch account is

 http://www.twitch.tv/mr16thprestige

My main audience on Twitch so far is norwegians though, so if you'r an international viewer please write a comment on twitch when you'r watching. I speak quite good english and i'm comfortable switching away from my native tounge if asked. Hope to see you viewing my streams

UPDATE -- PS4

This is not really a long, philosophical post. I’m just writing this to inform my readers of a very pleasant surprise i got today. See, i was a few weeks late in pre-ordering the PS4, and thusly not on the fast track to getting one today, when it launched in Norway. Not only wasn’t i gonna get it today, i was nr3 in line (aka so insanely f#cking close). However, at the end of last period on school, i got the most pleasant call. The guy asked me «on a scale of 1 to 100, how much do you want a PS4?». I replied «110». He then told me there’d been some cancelations, and i could come in and get it today. And so now i’m typing this. Why do i have time to write this? Because i still lack about $60, and another $97 to buy BF4 (in Norway, games cost roughly $100, depending on the exchange rate). My dad owes me some money, and was one the way home. I called him, saying i need it as fast as possible, and why i needed it. He said he’d be home around 2.30, yet still no sign of hime. That shiii….shiny rainbow of a sunshine had stopped for a haircut. Da fuq? da fuq? now, however, he’ll hopefully be here damn soon, give med the money and i’ll be on my way to get a PS4. I’m so fucking psyched i’m trembling. I can barely even write this because i keep having to go back to correct major misspellings. Thusly i’ll cut it here, and be back online with an update when i have the console

The Last of Us (2013) Review

The Last of Us

PS3 (exclusive)

Sony, Naughty Dog

Survival, Horror, Third-person action

ESRB Mature, Pegi 18+

Every now and then, a game comes along and re-shapes a genre or even the entire industry. It may not be the best. It may be a game testing out a new concept or approach method, laying the grounds for future games to provide incredible experiences, but the game itself fails in execution. This has never been a problem for Sony owned Naughty Dog studios. They have always been amongst the most acclaimed and respected developers in the entire world. In the PS2 days they created timeless classics, for instance the «Jack and Dexter»-series. After some time staying quiet, they rendered the world of video games speechless with Uncharted: Drakes Fortune. A game that became synonymous with the PS3. If you got the PS3, you got Uncharted. Since then, Naughty Dog has thru their most famous franchise, and whats very much became the Playstation 3’s flagship, twice shown us they are absolute masters of storytelling, visual esthetics and amazingly engaging characters. 3 Uncharted games have been released to raving reviews, always being scored at the very top of the scale. The franchise seemed unrivaled, until early summer 2013. That’s when i, as millions like me was literally mind blown. The Last of Us took storytelling, emotional depth and visuals to a whole new level, even surpassing many of the best looking PC games.

In The Last of Us you meet Joel. In the early hours of a apocalypse outbreak he suffers a great, personal loss. Years later, he is a hardened survivor with trust-issues and being afraid of losing a loved one again, he is determined in not letting anyone in on him. The US has been divided into quarantine zones, where brutal military forces rule with an iron fist, operating with lethal force and not letting anyone out of the quarantine zone. Life is difficult and dangerous. A rebel force known as the Fireflies are attempting to take control and fight the oppressive regime. Joel and his partner Trish have made a deal with the Fireflies. In exchange for a shipment of heavy weaponry, they’ll have to smuggle something out of the quarantine zone, to a location a few states away. The deal turns out to be the smuggling of a 14 year old girl, Ellie. When the Fireflies base turns out to be a lot further away than they thought, and very unwillingly Joel takes on the mission. You play as Joel, and in a short segment as Ellie, as they travel across a post-apocalyptic United States. 

The main gameplay consists of stealth, combat and solving puzzles. In the world you face a mix of infected and humans. Originally enough is that for once you’re not facing zombies gone brainless from some unknown, fictions virus. The virus in play here is one that is very real. So called Fungus, a virus witch takes over the brain, very much like a zombie-virus. In todays world however, this is «exclusive» to flies. In this alternate future, the disease has jumped species, something witch is not unheard of, and people infected become violent, unstable and unable to control themselves. It all feels very similar to a zombie outbreak, but at least here it comes with a much more believable backstory. In addition to infected you face humans. Groups of survivors who have escaped the quarantine zone and shoots on sight to protect themselves. This provides good variety to combat. Your strategy when fighting the infected compared to when your fighting humans, have got to be very different if you are to stand a chance. The puzzles works as more of a distraction though. They’re never much more than «how do we get up there», «how do we get across here» kind of stuff. They all make sense, and aren’t overused, but there are a few of them that i deem slighlyt unescessary. In most games, stuff like that would need to be there, to fill in with additional gameplay, but in The Last of Us, there is no need for this. The combat, crafting and the story is plenty. Sometimes i even felt slightly frustrated because puzzles where stalling my progress. I was so excited to get to progress the story and learn what happened. Unlike the puzzles though, the previously mentioned crafting works as a very well implemented RPG element. You gather supplies of many different kinds, and use them to create makeshift weapons, ammunition for the various weapons you pick up, medicine and painkillers. You also need to upgrade your weapons. The supplies are very scarce. Especially if playing on the harder difficulties. This means you’ll never have enough to upgrade everything, even if you collect every last supply, thusly you’ll have to carefully choose what you want to upgrade. This adds to the already exceptionally immersive survival-theme in the game.

In the end though, what really makes The Last of Us stand out as a truly unique experience isn’t the engaging combat or the gathering of supplies, nor is it the visuals. It’s the story. It’s the way Joel and Ellie interact with each other. How Joel refuses to grow affection for Ellie, and she seems unable to understand why. You feel great sympathy with her because after all she is just a little child. One born after the outbreak. She has lived her short life knowing nothing but the suffering of the post-apocalypse. You feel genuinely sad for her, because she is hungry for recognition and love, as is any child, and Joel stays ice cold. At the same time however, you never feel like Joel is a douche bag. You know what he’s been trough. I almost genuinely cried with him when he suffered his loss. You understand why he’s become what he’s become. The real story here, is how Joel gradually warms up to Ellie. From where he started out, wanting nothing to do with her, to eventually being willing to do anything for her. Loving her like a daughter. Another stroke of genius is how the people you fight are given a face. In most other games, despite it having a great story, there is one flaw they all have in common. You go trough the campaign, fighting countless faceless enemies who are only there to fill the void of gameplay. Without spoiling it, i’ll say that In The Last of Us, later on in the campaign, you get to more deeply meet a group of survivors. You hear them speak of their friends, who some time ago was sent on a supply run to a location you’ve just cleared of enemies and raided. There is more to this, but i won’t spoil it. All you really need to know is what you learn here, and the way it’s presented, gives you a feeling like each and every person you killed in the game is something more than just another disposable body. It humanizes them. Beyond this, there is humor deriving from Ellie’s inability to understand a world she’s never known. Stuff like she not knowing what a job is, or never having read a comic book. How she doesn’t know what it used to look like. There are also several very emotional moments, but you’ll have to play the game. The Last of Us is all about the story, and i don’t want to ruin you’r playthrough of what is without a doubt the greatest, most emotionally deep story i’ve ever been told. And that includes not only video games, but movies, music and books.

As a first on this blog, I will award The Last of Us with 100/100.

Top 10 - video game sequels

So what’s a great sequel? I mean in general. Well, a great sequel would be something that not only learns from it’s predecessors mistakes, but fixes them. So what’s a great video game sequel? Well, it’s a game that has duly noted the phrase «if i ain’t broke, don’t try to fix it». A lot of follow-up games today have this notion that they need to change up just about everything, just for the sake of changing it up. For this, i blame reviewers and the community alike. If a game is too much like it’s predecessor, they all scream out in rage against it, saying it’s a bad deal and lacks innovation. If they try to innovate, and change stuff, people nitpick to find any kind of flaw with the new, and blame it on the developers for not keeping the good old stuff. However, we do have a selection of games that don’t get this poor treatment, simply because there is no way anyone could ignore their superiority. I’m talking about the truly great sequels. The ones that takes everything people loved about previous entries in the series, fixes (most of) it’s predecessors problems, and adds enough new stuff to keep it fresh. With that in mind, i’d like to tell you witch games i believe fits this criteria the best, and of course, why. So here’s my top 10 video game sequels. Keep in mind that this is not a «top 10 games of all time». Although all the games on this list are great games, not too far from my top 10 list, the ones here are first and foremost judged on how much they improved upon it’s predecessors, not on how great of a game they are.

NR. 10

Battlefield 3

So Battlefield 3 was released to spectacular reviews after winning tons of best-of-the-show awards and similar. Though it’s not a direct sequel, it’s a entry in a franchise, and the spiritual successor to it’s preceding games. It’s main steps forward lied in multiplayer. Though the game wasn’t huge on innovation, it’s still a great sequel. This because although, yes, it didn’t bring a huge list of entirely new stuff, it so massively improved upon everything that was already there. Much less clunky menu’s and UI. Much better balance between vehicles and infantry. Much more interesting and different-feeling weapons, huge improvements to map design and of course, the stunning visuals and beautiful destruction. In a game that focuses so much on realism as Battlefield does, the graphics are very important and in Battlefield 3, they are quite top-notch.

NR. 9

Hitman: Absolution

So you’ll find me to be quite the fan of the Hitman series. Though it had a slightly ill-faced attempt at hitting the big screen, Agent 47’s interactive tales have always been worth visiting, because we always get to see innovation, originality whilst the developers still manage to keep the feeling we all want. The feeling that you actually are a highly trained Hitman, picking your strategy, sneaking in on your target, wipe him out however you deem fit and then slip away unnoticed. The previous games all had the same, amazing core concept, with a few poor design choices. The main problem though, was always the lack of technology. In a game of this sort, responsive control-schemes, extreme realism as far as you’r freedom goes and a realistic AI, are all absolutely crucial. These are the main problems that plagued the previous titles. I’ve always been thinking «man, these games have these gaping problems, yet still i love them! What if they could keep the magical feel, but fix all of these problems, it’d be the best game ever, right?». Well, although i wouldn’t go as far as calling Absolution the best game ever, it’s actually not an outrageous statement. Because my dreams from early Hitman days came true. They gave us a great AI, wonderful realism and complimented it with absolutely gorgeous visuals. Also, i have to mention that the setup works a lot better this time around. They give us a slightly more traditional story-mode, allowing people who still wan’t the 47-experience, but would like to take part in a put-together story, rather than just hit after hit, can now do that. Then, for those who are purists, or wanna play both, there is Contracts mode. You get complete freedom to make you’r own hits and challenge others to beat you at them. In every way imaginable, Hitman: Absolution beat’s it’s preceding games at just about everything.

NR 8.

inFamous 2

There’s not a lot to say about inFamous 2, that hasn’t been said already. It takes the original’s wonderful, but roughly executed formula, and gives it the main thing the first inFamous game so sorely lacked. Polish. Fixed the rather major problem with pop-ins, added more powers to play with, a much more engaging and living, breathing city and above all, a tighter story with better, more flushed out characters.

NR 7.

Super Mario Galaxy 2

Let’s be honest. We all know why this game is here. Super Mario Galaxy took platforming to whole new level that’s been attempted copied countless times since, but never been outdid by anything, except it’s sequel. SMG2 nailed everything about it’s predecessor, and added so many new features as far as level-design, challenging puzzles and a funny, cute and riveting storyline. It did everything SMG did, but better, bigger and more colorful.

NR 6.

Assassin’s Creed 2

Often hailed as the popular series’ highpoint, the sequel to the original game really hit the world like a bomb. The original Assassins Creed was one of the most anticipated games of all time, but ended up being a huge disappointment for many. Not that it was a bad game, it had originality, charm and a whole new way of approaching gameplay, introducing the now famous climbing mechanics. The reason for the disappointment would be that it was massively built up, but ended up having a few almost game-breaking core flaws. The excellent climbing mechanics where severely underused, because of the fact that so little of the map had a city you could actively climb. So much of your playtrough was spent walking, riding a horse and having less than engaging conversations. In Assassin’s Creed 2 however, all these game-breaking flaws where flipped on their head. The high majority of the map is covered by one of the several well-design cities. Laid out in such a manner that climbing them, navigating from roof-top to roof-top is a genuine joy. Beyond that, the renaissance Italy setting is far more interesting than the middle-ages Jerusalem of the original. You also meet much more engaging characters. Hell, you even become a close friend, and invention-test-subject for Leonardo Da Vinci. It outdoes the original Assassin’s Creed in just about everything, without taking away any of the stuff that was actually good about the first game

NR 5.

Grand Theft Auto V (five)

When i gave my definition of a great sequel, that’s pretty much the very definition of GTA V. I’d also like to, in order to avoid repeating myself too much, have you read the part about inFamous 2 again, seeing how it very much applies to GTA V as well. If you read my review of the game, you’ll also hear me talking about why it’s such a great sequel. It captures the magical feel of San Andreas, the innovation of GTA 3, the gorgeous, riveting map of Vice City and much of the humor from the entire series. It brings us a deeper story than any previous GTA game. Although the story in itself isn’t the most epic, the screenplay is absolutely amazing and top of line, making for some of the beast and the funniest dialogue ever in a video game.

NR 4. 

Uncharted 2: Among Thieves

So the first Uncharted game was pretty much «the one». If there was a console-war going on, you could be 110% certain a playstation owner would almost immediately jump to exclusives, and from there right onto Uncharted. If you owned a playstation 3, you owned Uncharted. That was kind of just the way it was. And with good reason. It brought and entirely new style to the table. Although it was clearly inspired by games such as Tomb Raider and movies like Indiana Jones, it had a very unique and distinct feel. Beyond that, it came from extremely skilled, Sony-owned developer-team Naughty Dog, know for always pushing the playstation-systems to their very limit, always creating games remained the best-looking title on any console for years after it’s release. Luckily though, it wasn’t all about the graphics. Naughty Dog just so happens to be absolutely masters of story-telling, and this was brought out clearer than ever in Uncharted. Therefore, when a sequel was announced, everybody, quite naturally, flipped. They where right to. U2: Among Thieves improved upon the original in most ways imaginable. First of all, they spread it’s reach. Where as in the original game, you where after the prologue, tied to the same island trough out the entire story, in Uncharted 2 you where sent on a globe-trotting adventure that was both longer, deeper, more exiting and epic than the original. It also took huge steps forward as far as cinematics goes, executing this better than the original, where it felt slightly less polished, simply because it had never been done that way before.

NR 3. 

Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare

We all know this game, and you can’t even pretend not to. Even the most sincere haters of the COD-series have to admit this game created a unprecedented revolution to change the FPS genre forever. Although today the series has gotten into a rut, with little innovation and quite a lot of repetition has led to many haters of the franchise, it wasn’t always like that. When Call of Duty 4: Modern warfare was released, not only COD, but the entire genre of online shooters would never, ever be the same again. Perks, complete customization of your combat equipment, killstreaks, and above all, the insanely addictive leveling system. All stuff that have influenced literally every single multiplayer FPS-game released since. But this is a list of best sequels, so let’s talk early COD. The first COD games themselves where industry leaders. They revolutionized the genre, and changed what people expect from a shooter. I might as well have picked Call of Duty 2 for this list, and believe me, i was close to do so. However right now you’r reading about COD4, for one simple reason. It made drastic, radical changes to the formula laid down by it’s predecessor’s, but not because of just being able to say they changed things…because it was all for the better. And massively so.

NR 2.

Team Fortress 2

Anyone who has played this game (on PC that is, the console version has extremely few of the features that makes this game stand so much out) knows it’s one of the best times you can possibly have. It feels very much like the spiritual successor though, rather than a direct sequel to the original Team Fortress classic. Pretty major things have been revised, but that’s more than fine, because just like with Call of Duty 4, it’s all for the better. It’s cartoonish visual style, combined with gorgeous level of detail, greatly written, hilarious humor and amazingly satisfying blood-splatter, really makes it stand out as a must buy. Or rather must-download. Seeing as Valve made the wonderful decision to make it free-to-play on Steam, without ruining it with a pressure for using micro-transactions.

…and now for my number one pick….

NR 1.

Portal 2

Was there ever any doubt? I’m sure many of you where expecting Half Life 2, so I feel i need to explain why it wasn’t here. Although HL2 is one of my favorite games, i don’t feel it really beats the games on this list, as far as improving on the original. It was a great upgrade, but i dunno what to tell you. I feel the games on this list made bigger, better improvements on previous titles, than Half Life 2 did. Portal 2, on the other hand, is THE very definition of a great sequel. The original was introduced to unanimous applause from critics and the community alike. The unique, never-before-seen concept captured the hearts of countless gamers, and even many non-gamers. the hilarious story and exceptional writing was the cause of extreme amounts of laughters and enjoyment throughout the short game. Expectations where therefore high for a sequel, and boy did Valve deliver. They Built a game with a story even more solid story than the one of the original with a devious and surprising twist. They added enough new stuff to the amazing and unique puzzle-solving mechanics from the original, to make the game interesting to play for a campaign more than 4 times longer than the original game, witch clocked in at just above 1 hour, maybe 2, depending on your puzzle-solving skills, because it was easy to get stuck if you started thinking «suitcase» and lost your ability to think freely and logically. Portal 2 also had the jokes coming more frequently, and more varied than the original. In both games, they’re disguised as not really being jokes. They’re just a character saying really funny things, and you genuinely believe the character actually has that personality. It never feels forced, and it’s never out of character. All in all, those are my reasons for why Portal 2 is the greatest sequel ever made. 

I hope you enjoyed this slightly longer-than-fortunate post. Feel free to post a list of you’r top 10 sequels, either in the comment section, or send it as a mail, using the contact form and the bottom of the page. If you have a top 10 list (top 10 funniest-, hardest-, all time best-games ETC) you would like to share with me, do the same. If there is a list you would like me to make, same rules apply. Send me an email, or place a comment. Have a good day and happy gaming

Why "Among the sleep" is among the greatest

A look at originality in video games


For those of you who don’t know. Some time ago, the international video game community was mind blown by a demo video coming from the little town of Hamar, in Norway. It was developer team «Krillbite Studios» who showed off their first large-scale indie-title; «Among the sleep». A first person horror adventure, in witch you play as a two year old child. After lots of international attention and several news-stories they took the project to Kickstarter, asking for $200 000 so that the core team-members could quit their part-time jobs, and work on the game full-time. In the project description they had quotes from big game personalities such as Cliff Bleszinski, saying the game looked interesting, and that they wanted people to support it. After the funding-period was over, they had raised over $248 000. A tremendous success.

Today, there has for some time been a public demo out, and countless have played it. The dev-team has also gotten their hands on a dev-kit for Oculus Rift (a virtual reality headset) and at the time of writing, they have incorporated it quite successfully into the game. I was lucky enough to go to Norwegian Game Expo, where i got to meet the team. Also, not only did i get to play the demo on a normal computer in a dark-room with sound-isolating headset, to aid the horror, but i also got to try out the game with Oculus Rift. I remember being blown away when i saw the first trailers and concept art for the game. I remember being rendered speechless when they published the public demo. When i played it with Oculus Rift, it was beyond my abilities to describe. But why is that? Why is «Among the sleep» such an amazing experience? I think it’s got to do with the fact that it’s just so unique. Do you remember back in the day? Games like Counter Strike, Doom, the early Super Mario games, Zelda and all the other classics where all hailed as incredible. Today, we have games in all those genres, that far surpass those old games in almost every way. Today, if a game came with the same clunky controls, short campaign and multiple poor design-choices, the title would be frowned upon. But back then, they were praised, and they still are today, because they had one thing games today doesn’t have. They had originality. They were unique. People hadn’t played anything like it before. Thus they were sucked into it. Consumed by it. What makes people still like those old classics better than many games today, are the fond memories, and not the classics superior quality. Star Fox 64 is one of the most iconic and praised games of all time, yet still, it had a campaign six times shorter than games that today get’s significant drawbacks on their review, because of a short singleplayer. So why was Star Fox able to pull of shipping such a short campaign, yet still be praised? Because of originality. We see the same today. Portal released with a 1 hour campaign, yet still it’s one of the most praised and beloved games of all time, by critics and community alike. Why? Most of the other games get’s ripped on for having a 6 hour campaign. Yet, because of originality, the ridiculously short campaigns of Star Fox and Portal are allowed to fly. People accept it, and they don’t care, because they’re having so much fun, playing something they haven’t played before.

I talked about this in my review of GTA V. A big part of why It’s such a success, is because it dared take risks and it was never afraid to innovate and try new things. This is why i’m so much in love with Among the sleep. Though in the sense of graphics, smoothness in gameplay and content it may not be at the very top (although it’s certainly shaping up to be fantastic in those aspects as well), it doesn’t really need to be. It’s got the best weapon of them all. It’s unique. Just think about it. Have you ever played a first-person game, from the perspective of a toddler? We’ve all seen everything in our house, but we’re looking down on it. Sure, maybe you crawled on the floor to do push-ups, lie down on a soft carpet or pick up something that rolled under the table, but you can move a chair that’s in the way. You can reach up and open a door, you can get back up again right away. The days when you couldn’t are long forgotten. This is what makes the concept so unique. Sure other games throw puzzles and challenges at you. Get 6 headshots. Kill 50 guys within the time limit. Find away on top of that building. Don’t break stealth. All stuff we’ve done a billion times, in a billion different games. As a toddler, something as simple as opening a door becomes a challenge. All in all, you get puzzles and challenges that you’ve never had to face. They may have much of the same structure, but it’s an entirely different feel. I’ve never felt so handicapped as when i played. But at the same time, i’ve never felt so empowered. You can hide under a table or in a kitchen closet. As a toddler, it’s the world from a whole new perspective and things you never deemed possible in you’r state and mind of adulthood, suddenly becomes a reality. You have to throw away everything you know and start fresh. Thinking in an entirely different way. 

At the same time there’s the horror aspect. Anybody who has played a horror game today, or seen a horror movie is used to getting scared by bloody corpses, ghosts jumping out at you or a big guy wearing a scary mask, carying a chainsaw or a pickaxe, but would you ever dream of being scared of thunder? Are you scared of going to the bathroom late at night, because the house is empty and dark? Most likely not. But all of those things are stuff that could genuinely scare a little child. When you’r little, there’s completely different things that scare you. And thats a big part of what Among the sleep plays on. The ambience. The unknown. You don’t know what dangers lurk in the shadows. You get thrown into, and completely immersed in this little child’s world. You find yourself running from things, yet you don’t know why. It doesn’t rely on direct graphical violence or horror, of the kind that most games and movies do. It relies on the unknown. The fears of little, scared child so far, far away from his warm, cozy bed and a loving, protecting mothers goodnight kiss.

Are video games a waste of time? My thoughts

ARE VIDEO GAMES AND ESPORT A WASTE OF TIME? IF SO, THEN ISN’T EQUALLY WASTEFUL TO PLAY CHESS?

So i talked to you’r standard, slightly conservative 40+ parent today. A lady of the kind that’s not a religious nut-job, but of the kind that’s none to pleased with people saying video games are any more than a waste of time, or that they’re good for anything other than a recreational activity you can do every once in a while. I was telling them about My trip to Norwegian Games Expo last weekend, my venture into blogging about video games, and about E-Sport. When i said «at Games Expo you got to play against pros, meaning people who make money playing video games», I saw her shaking her head. I pointed it out, and she said she was simply baffled that anyone could spend their time just playing games all day. I told her it’s getting quite big, and that the pro’s can really make millions on it. I then went on to explain more detailed how it worked, how/why sponsors pay them, tournaments etc. She still said she couldn’t understand how anyone would wanna spend so much time on video games. «Why not do something with their lives», she said. I confronted her, saying «what about a soccer player?» (or the player of any other sports for that matter). «He spends an equal amount of time on practicing soccer, being paid by a club, witch in turn is paid for by sponsors, and then participating in tournaments, playing his sport». To witch she replied: «Well, at least a soccer player is doing something with his body. Moving around. He’s not sitting down playing games all day» i pointed out that E-Sport pros have both strict diets and workout schedules, to keep them in good shape, and focused. She still wouldn’t bow. I marked myself this, because earlier, before the topic got onto video games, she’d clearly stated her fondness for chess, and the excitement surrounding the Chess World Championship (and our own Norwegian participant, Magnus Carlsen, in the finals). Anyone with her beliefs about what’s a waste of time, and what isn’t, should surely also think that Chess is a waste of time. Many people do it for a living. The sit there all day, just playing chess. They’r actually a lot more passive than a guy playing video games. I can’t image the amount of calories a professional Starcraft player burns of when tapping the keyboard 300 times pr minute, compared to moving one tiny chess-piece an inch or two, every 5 minutes.

Now, if you wanna go off saying «well, chess is a game of the mind. It’s insanely complicated and really gives you benefits as far as training your intelligence», then I’m gonna say «doesn’t video games»? All research ever done on the subject confirms, undeniably that video games improves motor skills, the ability to solve puzzles, the ability to think on your feet (reaction time, witch in itself leads to improvement in a billion other fields) and strengthen your abilities related to creative thinking. In fact, i’ve seen far more research proving the values of video games, than i’ve seen research proving the value of chess. Now to be clear, i’m not saying chess is a waste of time, I’m just putting it into perspective. If you don’t consider Chess to be a waste of time, then there is no way you could ever say differently about E-Sports.

I’ve learned, thru far too many rounds with people just like the lady with whom i had the discussion preliminary to this article, that there is no sense in arguing with people like that. It’s a generation, on witch the wonders of video games is lost, and for most of them, will never be found. I’ll simply let the facts prove me right. Wether they like it or not, E-Sport is a thing, and it’s growing fast. Wether they like it or not, we’ll keep improving our minds and getting told amazing stories thru an exiting new medium that’s just barely getting started. We’ll pas it onto our children, and we’ll know the value of it, for we grew up with it. 

So don’t waste you’r time arguing with that kind of people. They have their attitudes, and you can bet your bottom dollar their not gonna change one bit, no matter what. But «They», the old generation, the ones who don’t understand this, they’ll die out. Sooner or later, they’ll be gone, whilst video games will still live on. Wether they accept it or not. So don’t spend you’r time preaching why video games are in fact not a waste of time, because the real waste of time is trying to impact the opinions of that kind of people. Instead, just don’t give a damn, and go enjoy a good game.

Battlefield 3 (2011) review

Battlefield 3

PS3, Xbox 360, PC

EA, Dice

FPS, Action

Rated: ESRB Mature, Pegi 16+ 

Battlefield has always been a blockbuster franchise with a very dedicated fanbase. It started out, much like it’s today archenemy Call of Duty, on PC, and has later made the move onto consoles. But unlike COD, Battlefield has always had it’s core group of followers on the PC, and that’s where most of the players today are. The reason for this would probably be that again, unlike Call of Duty, Battlefield has always pushed the boundaries of technical limitations. Always going for the most spectacular moments and the most epic battles. These have always come together in the online world, making the singleplayer the underdog of the series. Whilst this is also true for Battlefield 3, i’ll have to give them credit for making a game in todays media where you can also greatly enjoy it’s offline portion, and thus feel like you’r getting more for your money.

As mentioned, the multiplayer is the main event for Battlefield 3, same as it is in all it’s predecessors. That being said, the singleplayer, despite not being particularly original, does have it’s charm. yes, it features a terrorists-scheme involving a nuke, being plotted by a russian extremist, targeting the US, but that being said, the story really doesn’t feel like the main event. When you’r playing thru, it feels like it’s just about taking the most epic moments from the past decade of shooters, and compiling them into a 6-hour epic with amazing visuals, great level-design and the fantastic gun-feel the battlefield games are known for. I can’t with clean conscience say the Campaign is good, from a critics point of view, but as a player, you don’t really care. The game has such breathtaking visuals, amazing feel, fast-paced epic sequences and the incredibly adrenaline-inducing battlefield music, that you don’t can’t help but enjoy it, despite it having cheesy dialog, generic, unoriginal story and uninspiring voice-work combined with dull characters.

The multiplayer on the other hand, is an entirely different story. It has the same incredible feel, visuals and music as the campaign, but it doesn’t feature poor voice-overs or a bad story, and neither is it a streamline-choreographed setup just feeding you the battle. You yourself create the battle. You and your teammates/opponents are put on a huge map, given a set of tools and then set free. The most epic battles imaginable can occur, and no game is ever alike another one. You’r constantly either the witness or the participant in an absolutely epic moment. A jet gets shot down fifty feet infront of you, the airplane body comes burning, rushing and whilst constantly shedding scrap-parts flying towards you, and just barely cleares your head and hits the hill behind you. You plant C4 on a tank, run off, and just as you’r about to hit the detonator, you see a tank-shell fly just above you’r shoulder. You bring down a wall with your rocketlauncher, jump thru the hole with you’r SMG equipped, take out two guys, switch to you’r pistol just in time to take out a guy coming thru the doorway. The game is just full og absolutely incredible moments, witch is what sets it apart from so many other shooters. Take for instance Call of Duty. It’s always got you’r pulse in «medium-gear». You’r heartrate is always elevated. Though this is great, it also means that you can never get a really epic moment. There’s never something that truly stands out. In battlefield however, it’s often slightly slower than that, but when it does kick up (witch is quite often) you get taken to such unbelievable heights, that you’ll think you’r in heaven. This keeps you in a constant suspense, making it impossible to let your guard down. Then, all of the sudden, a rush of adrenaline more potent than anything. It's because of this that, when at it’s best, Battlefield 3 multiplayer is better than most any other shooter out there.

As far as upgrades goes, Battlefield 3 features a far more weapons, attachments and gadgets than any previous BF-title. The selection is really topnotch. It also packs quite userfriendly UI, allowing you to easily manage you’r squad and equip/customize you’r weapons whilst in-game. As a sweet little touch, you can also, on the class-customization, press a button to get up a info box, with facts and the short-story of the weapon, gadget or attachment you’ve selected. You can read and learn about the claymore or see witch special-force first perfected the iconic Red-dot sight. The fact that they have a quick summary of information not only about each weapon, but about every last attachment, is both interesting and impressive.

There is also a Co-op section to BF3, and it’s worth mentioning. It has a sets of missions, separate from the campaign, that you can play thru with a friend online. They’re all fun, and offer a good variety. It’s greatly entertaining to tactically move thru the missions with something other than you’r less than hyper-intelligent AI buddies in the singleplayer. The only real complaint i have about co-op is that it doesn’t feature a split-screen, or the abillity to play with more than two players. 4 would’ve been a very significant upgrade, simply because you would feel more like a special task-force, tactically and cleanly sweeping thru missions. I’ll have to say it’s hard to say wether the co-op or the campaign is the weakest part of the game, because they’r both equally fun. When it breaks down to i though, I’ll still say the campaign is slightly stronger than the co-op part, quite simply because the co-op could’ve much more easily been flushed out. Also, i would have wished for them to add more missions thru DLC, but this was never done.

All of this being said, Battlefield 3 is, just like it’s predecessors, all about the multiplayer. I feel i can’t really give a game negative points, seeing as it’s main component is by far well worth the retail-price, and the side-orders are just few fun bonuses. If the MP had been weaker, and the game had been dependent on the 

co-op and campaign to be worth the $60, i would have to draw the verdict-score down, but seeing as this is necessary here, and you don’t ever feel cheated because of a weak story, i’ll give Battlefield 3 a final score of 91/100. Excellent.

Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 (2012) review

Call of Duty: Black Ops 2

PS3, Xbox 360, PC
Activision, Treyarch

FPS, Action

Rated: ESRB Mature, Pegi 18+ 

For many, Black Ops 2 was highly anticipated, as it marked the popular COD-series return, after the generally negatively received MW3. MW3 was troubled with a very short development time, and an inexperienced dev-team. Thus, it ended up harvesting an unusual amount of negativity from the online community. Many others think the franchise has run it's course, and believe that Black Ops 2 will just be more of the same. I'm happy to announce that, though it's a little to familiar to give you the hundreds of hours you got out of COD4, there's still enough here to make this a very worthy buy.

Let me get i clear. Black Ops 2 is the best of the COD-series. If you had to play only one COD-game for the rest of your life, it should be this one. Now for it's time, it can't compare to COD4 in innovation, because it does feel very much like you've played this game before, but there is a reason why COD is popular. Quite simply, because the formula works, and Black Ops 2 does it better than ever.

Though most all of you buy COD for the online experience, i have to mention the single player. In the COD franchises latest entry, it's very much like it's been before. A globe spanning adventure with epic action-sequences, dull characters and little to no depth. That's not to say it isn't worth playing though. It's like a tightly choreographed Hollywood-blockbuster movie, where you get to play the part of the epic hero who shoots everybody and saves the world. I know asking for depth in a COD-campaign is way more than can be expected, but it shouldn't be. I really wish that, despite the fact that most people only want the multiplayer, they would put just a little bit of effort into making the single-player more interesting. The reason why the interest for the SP is reduced every year, is because the quality is reduced every year. If they put just a little bit more effort into it, more people would feel they got more for their money. For the first time in COD though, the campaign offer choices. What you do in certain scenes, can have a significant impact on the story's outcome. This is a very welcome addition, but it's not perfectly implemented. In fact, in most cases you don't even know you have a choice. The only way to know about the choice, is to either fail at the objective on-screen and se the game progress rather than respawning you at you'r previous checkpoint, or to look at the mission-select screen. The feature become little more than a novelty, seeing as there is no subtle indicators letting you know you have a choice.

In World at War, Treyarch introduced Call of Duty: Zombies. A survivalist game-mode where you fought of never-ending hordes of the undead, trying to survive as long as you could. Thru map-packs and the release of COD: Black Ops, they have greatly expanded it, since it's modest first beginnings, and made it a fan-favoritt and critically acclaimed epic. The problem is that they feel a need to constantly innovate, or rather make changes; for better or for worse. With Black Ops 2, they removed the traditional Zombie mode in the standard release of the game, and instead added a transit-mode. It's hard to explain, but it's basically many small maps, and you go between them on a bus, witch can be upgraded. It's a cool concept, but it needs more consideration, and final adjustments. Luckily, they later, thru map packs, have added more traditional Zombie-maps, witch innovate, without making an entirely new, unrecognizable game mode. Thus, everybody gets served, and i'll say it worked out for the better.

And now, finally on to the main event. The multiplayer. In Black Ops 2, the main new features are the pick-10 system, and score-streaks. Beyond that, there's all the usual stuff. New guns, new maps, new menus, new kill-streak (now entitled score-streaks) rewards  and such. The pick-10 system is basically a new way to create-a-class. Instead of getting a set of perks, set of primary- and secondary weapons and their attachments, you get 10 "points" pr class. A perk takes 1 point. One lethal grenade takes one, as does each weapon and each individual attachment. The system, also introduces "wild cards". One takes up one point in you'r class, and gives you the option to for instance have to perks in slot 2, two primary weapons or a third weapon attachment. It creates a great variety and a much deeper and more meaningful system. Score-streaks, witch replaces the killstreaks, is probably the most genius feature added to the series, since COD4. The problem with the killstreak system, is that it encourages camping, lone-wolf and egoistic gameplay. Score-streaks on the other hand, as the name suggest, counts score pr life, rather than amount of kills. Seeing as kills gives you score, it means you can still get get rewards like K9-unit (attack dogs), Gunship and similar, by getting consecutive kills, but now you also build towards your rewards by capturing flags, doing objectives or being more precise. For example headshots, double-kills etc. This at the very least gives some level of reward for playing the objective and being a team-player. With advantage, they could've made this even more distinct, as in given even less score for kills, and even more for objectives.

Beyond what mentioned above, i've gotta say that the multiplayer does deserve props for having amazing gun-balance, and having been supported with the best set of DLC's ever delivered in the COD-franchise. They provide maps that almost always surpass the once that shipped with the original game, something witch is quite rare.

I'm quite sad that todays blockbuster games have resorted to such safe-play. They may not have lost the desire to innovate, but money-hungry publishers behind just keep placing the same order every year. It's a formula they know they earn a lot of money on, and they aren't willing to risk anything in innovation. I'm therefor so glad that Treyarch did the best they could here, and made it the most innovative COD in years. As a quick reminder though, let me say; that does not mean all too much. It's a solid entry in a franchise, witch i would be all over if it was the first of it's kind. But, despite it being the best in the series, i was tired of it after a very short time, quite simply because it's still Call of Duty, and i've already played it countless hours. If you've never played COD, i definitely recommend this game. If you'r a series veteran, you should still get it, especially now, as it's dropped in price, but don't expect spending too much time in it.

My final score if it was the first of it's kind, or the first in a few years, i'd give it an 85. /100, and some people may think it's more fair to review as if it's a standalone, but seeing as i chose to not do it like that, but rather compare it to the rest of the series, and not only to other games, i'll give Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 a 72/100. Solid, but lacking innovation and a fresh new feel.

Grand Theft Auto V (2013) review

Gran Theft Auto V
PS3, Xbox 360
Rockstar, Rockstar North 
Open-world, Action 
Rated: ESRB Mature, Pegi 18+ 

It's hard to find somewhere to start when i'm supposed to, in short, explain just why GTA V is such an amazing game. It gathers the best elements from the long running, controversial and acclaimed franchise, into a title witch honors and celebrate the previous entries, without getting high on itself, and whilst still creating an experience that feels fresh and unique. Most importantly, GTA V is innovative. Today, most big franchises "safe" it, when they're putting out new releases. They stick to the same, old formula and that's that. GTA V doesn't have that problem. It's never afraid to take risks, and they almost always pay off. It feels fresh and new. It's not a 2.0 version of something you've played before; It's an entirely different generation.

For many GTA IV was a slight disappointment. Not because it was as a bad game by any means, it had great visuals, big map, funny, interesting and engaging characters and a great a story. It was a disappointment because it'd forgot what GTA was all about. Rockstar tried to make a more serious, gritty and dark experience. The series has always been very adult-oriented and themed, but GTA IV took a step further. Thus it ended up a great game, but one that took itself too serious to satisfy the need for craziness, that a lot of GTA fans had. The good news is, GTA V does not have that problem. 

 It is packed with insane, over-the-top action, slightly mentally insane humor, and crazy cheats. Not only is it back to the light, joking, crazy GTA spirit, but it does it better than any title in the past, in one of the most expansive open world game we've ever seen. The production value is absolutely huge, and boy does it show. The world is so varied you will be absolutely overwhelmed. And not only in the first few hours. The "woaw" moments will keep coming at you even after somewhat 20 hours of gameplay. You'll discover ned places, or see a place from a new angle, or maybe you just now figured out that if a bird fly into you'r helicopter rotor or airplane engine, they get splattered. And it's really the tiny details that make the game stand out in such a huge, and well-fed market. If you block traffic, drivers might very well flip you off. Stalk a girl around the city, and she'll start looking across her shoulder and switch to a light jog. If the light is about to turn green, people on foot will hurry up across the street so they don't block traffic. All of those things, and countless many more, are what really makes San Andreas and Blaine County feel alive. The world just feels so real. It's just that, witch makes the over-the-top humor feel plausible. In most other settings, it would just feel tacked on, forced. But in GTA V, because the world is so detailed and alive, it feels like a natural part of it. It also works excellent, because the humor is a part of the world. It's reflected in every detail. Every billboard. Every ad on TV or on the radio. 

When a world is as expansive as GTA V's, it needs expansive characters to fill it, and this game's got that in spades. For the first time ever in GTA, you play as 3 main characters, witch you can switch between at any time you wish, when you'r not on a mission. If you'r playing a mission where two or more of the characters are together, you can also switch back and forth, getting different view points, or taking control of the most valuable, or simply plain out fun position. Franklin, Michael and Trevor. Franklin is a hungry street-hustler with big ambitions. Michael is a man in the prime of his middle-crisis. Retired from a life of robbery and crime, living a miserable, alcohol-ridden life in Los Santos with a broken family. Trevor, well let's just say he's Trevor. Crazy, sadistic, cannibalistic, deeply psychologically damaged, deranged and did i mention, the most entertaining character to ever set foot in a GTA game. All around the 3 leads are beautifully acted with superb scripts and voice work. out of the bunch, i'll have to say Franklin is probably the least interesting one. Not because he's bad, but because both Michael and Trevor are so flushed out and unique. In comparison, Franklin just feels like CJ 2.0. That's not to say you'r bored around Franklin, so rather make of this that it's a compliment to the other two. The world is also packed with a good supporting cast, the standouts being Michaels family, his therapist and the hacker, Lester, who helps them setup heists, missions and other things. 

I'll do my best no to spoil anything, so you'll have to make due with this tiny introduction: The story is centered around Michael wanting out of his boring, insufferable retirement, whilst Franklin is trying his best to get out of the ghetto. Their paths cross, and they sort of balance each other out. Franklin gets pulled up from rags to riches by Michael, and Michael himself gets pulled out of his rut and broken family life. In the meantime, Trevor learns that Michael, a long lost and presumed dead friend, lives in LS, and thus he sets out to find him. Their worlds collide, their problems are added up and a story of epic scale and proportions is set in motion. 

If i'd have to say something bad about GTA V, it would be difficult. Simply because the long development time, skilled team and big budget has worked so much in the game's favor. It has pretty much lead to the devs having thought about almost everything. Also, more than impressive, is the extremely low amount of bugs. One thing i could say though, is i'd wish that the story sticked a little bit more together. It takes a long time before the "actual story", the one that reaches it's conclusion in the final chapter, is begun. In such a long game, they need a lot of sub-plot points, but they could've worked a little more in tying those into the main story. Additionally, though i realize there are technical limitations to the current generation of consoles, maybe the could've had a little more houses and stores you could enter. 

That being said, GTA V is such an amazing game that there is no doubt in my mind. My final score is 97/100. Jackpot baby.