This is my second attempt at making a good video review (emphasis on good) and this time I review the PC version of Mirror's Edge. My voice is the real challenge with making these. Editing and capturing specific footage takes awhile, but they're not particulary hard to do. Trying to sound sexier is, though. I'm also trying to sound consistent, but I don't do all my voice recording in one day, so maybe I should next time.

And I watched roughly 15 episodes of Powerpuff Girls today, because Cartoon Network was celebrating its 10th anniversary. Wow, I love that show. Most of the episodes were the old ones, too, which made the marathon even more awesome. And Speed Demon is my favorite PPG episode. And I'm going to stop sounding weird now.

Anyway, you might like it.

Just last Saturday, I went to my friend's birthday party. First, we headed to Cheesecake Factory, which was ridiculously overpriced, but it was the fun that we had that mattered. Being together in the same table, talking about the same things and just generally having fun.

I know this is sounding really fruity, but bear with me, I'm getting somewhere this. And for the record, there were a lot of girls, because it was a birthday girl. I'm not really sure why I should mention that, but I felt compelled to.

We go back to the birthday girl's house and my friend jacks the 360 he brought in and we decide to play Call of Duty 4 -- split-screen. Yeah, you know, that thing when around a quarter of the screen is given to you when you're playing with four friends. An ancient relic of the past, right?

Well, let me tell you, it's been a long time since I've had that much fun with a shooter. I specifically mention shooter, because Rock Band is admittedly a mile or two ahead in the same-room-multi-player action. We were hollering, laughing and sometimes cussing each other out. Some thought the P90 spam was ridiculous, others could've sworn they shot first, and so on. The best part was that I could see their expressions, ranging from furious anger to revengful satisfaction. I went through the same motions, too, and I bet they relished every moment of it also.

And that was the best part, we were physically there in the same room. It's not the same as hearing a disembodied voice through the sometimes-shoddy mic, it really isn't the same. Can you high-five your teammate in a team deathmatch after blowing your opponents away with a 100+ points landslide? Can you? Can you physically do that online? Can you see their faces of dismay and total, utter shock because of how badly they lost? Can you physically point and ridicule at the cocky bastards? Maybe do a little dance? Make a little love? Get down tonight? All right, I'll prevent anymore mental anguish by stopping right there.

So, going back to my first paragraph (see, I told you I was getting somewhere), the core reason why we enjoyed both the dinner and the game was because we were physically there. You could yell about throwing a flashbang or how stupidly high the gratuity was over online (it was around 60 bucks), but it's different when you're there, face-to-face. It's just really something to join hands and wing some random-ass dance routine after an overwhelming victory that probably looked a lot better in idea. This is one of the reasons why I admire the Halo games. Sure, there are a lot of people with a range of personal opinions about Bungie's work, but at least they're considerate.

Now, I'm not saying split-screen is superior, as contradictory as it might sound at this point. For one, you can't level via split-screen, and there are better players out in this great grand world of ours, so there's a lot of fun and reward in the taking them down. But please, developers, split-screen isn't irrelevant to a lot of us. I'm dismayed at the total lack of the split-screen in Turok; it could've been some good, mindless knifing fun. Sometime I just want to gather around a TV, gather around the same vicinity of other people and do everything we can to boost our own egos while knifing someone in the gonads, so we can see the anguish the knife-to-gonad recipient feels by just looking at his pained expression. It's priceless.

So, you're telling me that Oblivion has real choices and consequences? Right. You're telling me the decisions I make in Mass Effect will dramatically alter the galatical landscape? Uh huh. Now, I have to admit, there are choices in both games to a certain extent, but the problem is that they're all superficial. They don't really do anything in the grand scheme of things. Oblivion's dialogue trees eventually led down to a combat situation, no matter how great your charisma skill was. Mass Effect's consequences were practically all short-term and you'd get some paragon and renegade points to go along with it (which really didn't change the course of the storyline).

Don't get me wrong, I love WRPGs, more so than JRPGs, but when journalists blab on about how games like Oblivion and Mass Effect have moral choices stringed with long-lasting consequences, it's utter nonsense. Utter. Nonsense. Let's give Oblivion a hard, menacing look. At face value, it looks like you could do anything you want, until you actually sit down and play. I personally enjoyed Oblivion greatly; the guild quests were compelling for the most part, and I'm a gigantic graphics whore, so I digged the sexy foilage in the sunset. What bothered me a lot however, was that anything I did didn't have a meaningful impact on the world or the people inhabiting it. That mostly had to do with the fact that I wasn't given a lot of leeway in doing what I wanted to do. I couldn't do something like, betray Martin Septim and defect. I couldn't even act like a gigantic douchebag because the game never gave me the option. Oblivion simply wasn't flexible enough. It's a big, massive game, but in retrospect, it's a largely linear one in how everything progressed.

Mass Effect, on the other hand, has choices, but its consequences were largely short-term and obvious. You choose the "bad guy" option or the "good guy" option and depending on what you do, you'll elicit a response from the NPC and then some paragon or renegade points will be added to your morality chart. Sure, the consequences are short-term, but the even bigger problem is how obvious the good and evil choices are. Moral ambiguity is clearly not BioWare's forte, as they make the decisions you make very cut and dry. I mean, the game even catergorizes the bad and good choices so that you can tell what's a good thing to say and what's a bad one. It's a little silly if you ask me. And what's true is that Mass Effect is the first in a trilogy, so dramatically altering the storyline would've screwed up the story (which is a great tale) that BioWare is crafting, but my issue with the lack of moral ambiguity still stands.

"Then Mr. 5000, what kind of WRPGs have the kind of moral ambiguity and choices with meaningful consequences that you desperately desire?"

I am so glad you asked. And unfortunately, there isn't much of that out on the market today, but the ones that are out are excellent pieces of entertainment, and quench my thirst for said desire. The most recent and obvious example would have to be The Witcher. Towards the end of the first chapter, you're given a decision to either trust a witch or the townsfolk. The townsfolk claim she's a terrible evil, while the witch claims that the townfolk want to get rid of her because she knows scandalous details of the townsfolk. Who do you trust? If you go with the witch, the townsfolk will rally against both of you. Going against the witch might mean you've killed an inoccent life. You're asked to choose without enough information to make an obvious choice. There's an uncertainty in what kind of consequences will follow after my decision, and The Witcher's stock full of that. And there's more. If you play your cards right (or incorrectly), some NPCs will refuse to talk with you anymore, which makes things harder on yourself and so, the choices you make carry that much more weight.

Another one is the highly overlooked Neverwinter Nights 2 expansion, Mask of the Betrayer. Firstly, not all your party members are permanent, and some you might not even encounter at all on your first play-through. What's crazier is how your party members can totally bone out on you, if you keep disagreeing with what they have to say about a situation. That's aboslutely insane, isn't it? But wait, there's more. You can kill a party member for your own personal gain, if you're that cold-hearted. Zany! Wild! And depending on how you go about in the game, you might miss certain locations if you happen to make certain choices. There's a moral choice in every corner, and just like The Witcher. You're not entirely sure the things you say or do will bring about the consequences you think they'd bring.

And that's key; the ambiguity of what you're doing. Not being entirely sure of what is right or wrong, you make a choice and you can't really expect what'll happen. I'm not sure why WRPGs have stopped playing around with this idea anymore, other than the two games I mentioned. It encourages multiple play-throughs, and that's always a good thing. It makes you think, which is always great. And most of all, it's very engaging and ultimately fun. It's sorta funny when you think about it. The more technologically advanced WRPGs get, the less they have in the way of flexibity in terms of carving your own path. And then Obsidian builds a fantastic RPG with a myriad of choices/consequences with considerably older tech. CD Projeckt builds a WRPG (not western in the sense that it's from the West, western in the sense that it's a western-type) using Neverwinter Nights 1's engine, and it contains more moral flexibility than something like Mass Effect. It's crazy. And then there's this:

I know that's neigh impossible to read, but the option highlighted says "[Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]". If more RPGs let you set people on fire because you're losing in a lute-off, then that'd be fantastic.

I like to compare originals and sequels a lot, and I guess I'll get into the habit of doing so from now on. Today, we've Golden Sun and its sequel, The Lost Age. How do they stack up when put next to each other? Dunno, that's why I'm here. Thank me later, like by leaving a comment! Anyway, what I'm basically doing is pretending that someone's pointing a gun at my head with the intention to kill, asking me if Golden Sun or the sequel, The Lost Age, is better. I'll be using GameSpot's old scoring system, because I have an obsession with numbers. I won't average it out however, I'll just hand down whatever damn number I like.

Golden Sun (GBA)

Golden Sun's a throwback to the old JRPGs of the past. The story follows the typical "Save the world on your own... with complete strangers (who will soon be your friends) and gain some life-long lessons to boot!". The characters aren't that memorable and the story isn't all that gripping to be honest, but the combat, boner-inducing visuals and music are distinct and impressive enough that it separates itself and becomes its own unique entity.

Sure, this looks nice, but seeing this is in real-life is a whole different story.

The first thing you'll probably notice is how good the graphics are. The second thing you'll notice is how stunning the graphics are and how awesome the soundtrack is. Seriously, the first battle will blow your mind away. It looks absolutely amazing. But enough about that (for now). The third thing you'll notice is that the actual combat's great and miraculously stays fresh throughout the entire game, unlike most (if not all) JRPGs. It's a combination of things. First, it's fast. Input your commands and the game will determine who goes first and all you do is watch quick snippets of visually dazzling battle scenes. Second, the summoning system is pretty cool. You'll find djinnis throughout the game, and they're little helper dudes who you can use to dish out damage, hinder the enemy or heal yourself. Combining djinnis together will grant you FF-scale summons. They're laughably epic and excessive -- exactly how they should be all the time.

You've got a massive overworld, party members somehow dive into your body to become one, a variety of towns, and scenes of extensive dialogue (A little too long for anyone's tastes. I mean really, they don't know when to shut up). It's a JRPG in every sense of the word. You can use psyenergy (see: magic) for spells and whatnot in battle, but you also have to use them outside of battle to solve puzzles. That does give the dungeons some actual depth, instead of it being a random encounter kill-a-thon. And oh yeah, let me reiterate: The graphics and the soundtrack are amazing. It's hard to choose which is actually better, the graphics are hands-down the best on the GBA and the soundtrack is sweeping, epic and memorable. Just know they both rock. The game should take around 20 hours, and it does end on a lame cliffhanger (this is before games went cliffhanger crazy, consider Golden Sun a precursor to that treasonous act), but what you've got here is one stellar game. That's just it. It's a stellar game by any standard. And on another note, I think WRPGs are vastly superior, so the fact that I love this game should give you some perspective.

Gameplay - 9
Graphics - 10
Sound - 10
Value - 9
Tilt - 10

9.5/10 (not an average)

Golden Sun: The Lost Age (GBA)

The Lost Age is the follow-up to the handled stunner, and it's a lot like the original in the sense that basic gameplay template's the same -- it's just about a million times harder. If you have data from the last game, you'll be able to transfer your data via link cable (and obviously need two GBAs) or through a horrendously long password feature. Anyway, Lost Age starts off right when the original ended, but you play through a different character introduced in the last game. It's not a spin-off or anything, no, it's a direct continuation and you'll cross paths with the characters you leveled so long ago.

GET THIS AND THANK ME LATER. Or use GameFAQs if you can handle picture-less, text-filled guides (which you should be able to). Oh and you won't need the first-half if you buy the guide. Just rip that part out and use it on a cozy fireplace or something.

But getting there's going to grind your brain into nothing. Saying the dungeons are hard is a grandiose understatement. These things are nigh impossible; it's easy to doubt if the actual developers even know the solution to these brain-rapers. Just be a sissy, give up and get a guide. Besides the the dick of a difficulty that penetrates your anus in a furious manner, it's basically Golden Sun, but expanded and more free-form. It's not nearly as linear as the original, and you're going to cover a lot of square miles getting lost, beat down, lost and then sucking up and reading a guide to get to your next destination. It's that hard. I can't overstate this. The Lost Age is one of the hardest games I've ever had the pleasure of playing.

I say pleasure because the end experience is still really fun (IF YOU SUCK UP AND READ A GUIDE). The graphics don't have the same wow-factor as before and it feels like the composer used up all his ideas for the first game, but the soundtrack's still a winner. And unlike the original, the ending is insanely satisfying. You'll be more than pleased after you set this game down.

Gameplay - 9
Graphics - 9
Sound - 9
Value - 9
Tilt - 9

9.0/10 (not an average)

So, there you have it. I'll keep on doing this until I run out of games, which is impossible. So expect more unless I cease to exist.

Oh, and I guess you're wondering which I thought was better. If it isn't obvious already, I prefer The Lost Age. And by "The Lost Age" I meant "the original Golden Sun". There's not much to say other than that the difficulty is what did me in. I'm a weak man, sue me.

Remember when we all thought the PS3 was going to be this unstoppable behemoth? Remember when it seemed like Mircosoft's console was going to remain in that number two spot? And Nintendo well... we weren't sure what the hell Nintendo was doing. And then came E3 '06. It changed everything. Sony was receiving flak from all sides, Microsoft just kept shooting out news and games at a machine gun pace and the Wii line was the longest line ever in the history of the universe. Then came launch day. Sony had like what, 7 PS3s for sale? It seemed like it anyway. And the Wii sold like hotcakes, too. A couple months after, the Wii kept selling and you could see PS3s on the shelves. But, the PS2 had launch troubles too so just like the PS2, the PS3 should kick into full gear soon, right? I was thinking the same thing but the play field is different now.

When the PS2 hit our shores, it had a whole year to itself. No other competition, just the PS2. It had a year to build up its fanbase, a year to get games ready. A year to essentially rule the market. Then came the Xbox. Then came the GameCube. By then, great games started coming out for the PS2 and it was in full swing. And it had an entire year by itself to do it.

For the PS3, it's way, way different. It jumped into the competition with a competitor already in it (360) and the Wii was right behind it. It didn't have a year for itself. It didn't have a year to build up the base all by itself. Now, in the midst of the all the competition, the Wii is still selling at an insane rate (Wii outsold the PS3 in Japan by 6:1? Day-um.) and Microsoft is still doing really well with some big games coming down the pipeline. Not only that but I don't think Sony's consoles have ever been hit by so much bad press. It's like every other day it's something while they sing praises for the Wii at the same time.

And the exclusives. Ace Combat 6 -- exclusive for the time being. VF5 -- coming to the 360 with online support. Burn. GTA IV -- 360's getting episodic exclusives. Who would've thought Sony would let that go? Sony still has some aces up its sleeve but it's such a different play field than before I don't know how Sony's going to climb back up. There's just too many great games for the 360 to pass up on and the Wii has struck a cord with the casual audience (which, to be honest, thought I'd never ever see). MGS4 can't come soon enough. FFXIII can't come soon enough. But I wonder if it'll be too late by then. MGS4 probably isn't going to make it by the end of this year and FFXIII isn't coming out until Spring, at the earliest.

GDC '07 did spark some hope for Sony and this E3 they have to hit a grand slam. Killzone 2 has to blow everyone's minds. Heavenly Sword has to show that it's more than the greatest demo ever made. And LittleBigPlanet has to inspire the world to come together and make up. The price drop is a step in the right direction, though. It used to be that Sony didn't need to pull so many punches to try to draw in an audience. Now, however? Dang.

It's just different.

Seems like it's been shelved, for just a bit atleast.

Doesn't seem fair, does it? You violently kill people, is that the reason? Well, that's a bit hypocritical. In shooters, you shoot people. Shoot them enough and they die. You've killed rather violently. In F.E.A.R., soldiers can explode into a bloody mist of gore, so why is it any different here? In Jedi Knight, you can slice off limbs. In Oblivion, you can smash that enchanted daedric warhammer of yours into their dead, lifeless faces for as long as you like. In Call of Duty 2, you can let that Nazi attempt crawl to some cover as you shoot around him for laughs. In Postal 2, you can light someone on fire and watch them as they crawl aimlessly on the ground.

By ESRB's logic, none of these games should've hit retail. This is confusing and totally not fair.