I've always thought Half-Life 2's music was interesting. Far Cry 2 has some genius tracks on it. Makes it feel like there's all coiled enemies gonna shoot you up in your HUD. Even out of combat music is nice- but it does get repetitive after a few hours. Fallout 3 has some nice ambient music, once you turn the radio off (but the 50's inspired layout is a nice touch to that title), makes it feel.... Like you're in a wasteland. Oh. World of Warcraft's soundtrack isn't bad neither.
Halo: Reach looks to be pretty good. Medal of Honor... Meh. Those games were good at the start- Frontline was alright, I guess (and others since have been awful- Pacific Assault anyone? Rising Sun maybe?) But giving it a modern reboot? I'm not even going to compare to Call of Duty. (Oh wait.) People won't fall for that obvious corporate schill. Been there, done that. They should go one better than the folks at Infinity Ward, show a little originality and set it during the American Civil War (actually, that may cause upset in America... Rednecks and what have you... And multiple endings would just be WRONG...) or in India during the days of the British Empire. But then again, it is EA and I doubt they would show anything other than corporate spreadsheets, let alone originality.
London, mid-19th century. I always thought that it would make a good background for a sandbox-style game. Kind of like Oliver Twist, but more stabby. In fact, any game set in London at all would be welcome- There's only been one memorable game in that location, The Getaway.
There was a time when kids would crowd around an Arcade Box, eager to see the challenger trying to knock the heavyweight topscorer off his perch. That was... Very basic pro-gaming. It's just evolved over time into something more marketable, into an event. It's good that people are so involved in the challenge of a game, that they study the ins-and-outs of it to improve their results (much like in real sports), but I think it's ridiculous that they're getting paid for it. I know it kind of counteracts what I've just said, comparing it to real sports etc, but... It's just wrong to get paid for being pro at a game. It's kinda weird. Too niche. Maybe in a few years, or decades, it'll be a bit more mainstream. Not only that- It's boring to watch.
I studied Game Development at College, wanted to be concept artist / game designer (everyone says that, right?). It was bloody hard work, and what started as something I was really into ended up being something I just couldn't be bothered with. Which is a shame. The reason being, the teacher was so... lethargic, and when I asked him questions about using 3DS Max or PhotoShop or something similar, he would often just stand there, and if anything look embarassed about the topic and possibly threw in a couple of shrugs. "Uhm.. yeah..... you might want to.." Then he would fiddle with some things on 3DS Max- "There you go." I didn't learn a thing! It was more like being shown things than being taught. In short he didn't give a toss about his job, I wasn't getting the education / help I needed so I quit. I think all my workbooks / art are still there too. That was about a year ago. So, the future I would most like for games is for educators to take the damn thing seriously, and teach rather than preach (you can have that one for free). I still would like a future in games, don't get me wrong- I'm always coming up with plots / characters / game mechanics even a year on, it's just a shame that in the UK people seem to think its a soft subject, that it's pointless to study it. In the US it seems there's a better approach to it.
Log in to comment