tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36115060924980839712024-03-08T06:21:30.724-08:00One Review a WeekJust a bunch of rough drafts here...Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.comBlogger70125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-1425861736834547252013-04-13T11:05:00.001-07:002013-04-13T11:05:07.867-07:00Dead Pixels<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/Dead-Pixels-v121-OUTLAWS_zps59222d94.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/Dead-Pixels-v121-OUTLAWS_zps59222d94.jpg" width="266" /></a></div>
Please note that this is the rough draft for a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please check out <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2013/04/04/reviews-of-zombie-related-things/dead-pixels-review/" target="_blank">the final draft of the review here</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
Dead Pixels is an interesting little game for Xbox Live or on the PC. It's a retro sidescroller with a pixel art style, which makes its name more than just a simple pun. More than just the art style is retro, however. It's a fairly classic side-scroller, much as you would often find back in the days of the old-school Nintendo Entertainment System, and much of the storyline fluff has a <i>seriously</i> groovy 70s vibe to it.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>So, what you get is several gameplay options, but most of them are some variation of the main story campaign. You're in a city teeming with toxic undead and there's an escape vehicle leaving soon. If you want to get the hell out of Dodge, you've got to wade through a ton of ever thougher zombies, while looting buildings for supplies in order to cross the city and reach the safe point. You have a handful of stats with varying uses, from getting lower prices at the stores you run across to running faster to doing more damage with either weapons or melee attacks and more. As you kill more zombies you get XP and collect coins. Quite similar to River City Ransom, if I remember that game correctly. Actually, what this game reminds me of more than anything is an old-ish shareware game series called Zombie Smashers X, classics, but those games focused more on beat-em-up style gameplay. Not this game. While you will need to use your melee attack, you are not a Kung Fu killing machine in this game and can be killed surprisingly easy if you're not paying attention. While that is still somewhat frustrating, it's not nearly as frustrating as in a lot of games, because in this game most of the time if you get surrounded and killed you can usually tell how it was your own dang fault for getting into that position in the first place. The game is challenging, but not unfairly so. Expect to die a few times before you figure out what works for you. What skills to level up, when to run and when to fight, etc. <br />
Like I said, there are other stories and game types as well, but they're mostly variations. You'll definitely want to check them out, but don't expect anything groundbreakingly different from them.<br />
As with most games, though, it's the little things that make this game. There are tons of background references to all sorts of zombie-related movies and video games. The guy who made this game is a zombie nut to rival the best of them. In other words, one of us. The soundtrack is pretty darn cool too. It's perfect to pump you up to get to killing zombies.You can snag it as <a href="http://deadpixelsthegame.com/#Soundtrack" target="_blank">a free download from the game's webpage</a>, which is downright neighborly of them. Are you listening, major publishers? I know you need to make a buck, but this is a great way to inspire customer loyalty.<br />
My biggest issue is that I'm mostly a PC gamer, and the game is definitely meant to be played on the Xbox. Don't get me wrong, it's a great port to the PC, but the game really needs to be played with friends. You see there is local co-op multiplayer. You see that? LOCAL. I kind of understand that an indie developer doesn't have a ton of time or money to sink into doing multiplayer at all, so I should be thankful for that much, but as a PC gamer, I haven't been to a LAN party in ages, let alone sitting multiple people in front of the same screen with console-style game pads in hand. However local co-op makes perfect sense for a console system since it's still very common for four friends to get together in the same room and play the same game together.<br />
<br />
Bottom Line: The game is not extensive, but for the ridiculously low price of three American dollars, you really have no excuse to not go out and buy this game. It's fun and loaded with zombie references that you should enjoy. My only caveat is that if you own an Xbox, buy this game on that instead of the PC. That doesn't mean that PC gamers should pass it over, however, it's not as optimal, but it's still a fun game despite that.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-28308703103940197562013-04-07T08:34:00.000-07:002013-04-07T08:34:13.948-07:00NewsWell, I suppose it wouldn't kill me to give a state of the blog post. (For all zero of you regular readers.) I have been meaning to return to a once a week schedule, but money troubles have been getting int he way. It's a bit hard to worry about writing up a silly review on a personal, non-professional blog when you're having trouble making ends meet and pay the bills, despite having a full-time job + benefits. Freelancing has been slow. I have to find a way to promote myself better, and I am working on that. In the meantime, I'm debating whether or not I should try to resurrect the blog, or let it die. If I do resurrect it, should I keep it as it's been, or try and find a way to monetize it? I'd prefer not to do the latter, I hate ads, but I may have no choice. It's surprisingly hard to find a part-time job when you've got a full-time job and are looking for freelance work at the same time.<br />
I've got a lot of thinking to do, but either way, expect to see changes around here soon. Hopefully for the better, but...<br />
<br />Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-58182682081631860942013-04-07T08:21:00.001-07:002013-04-07T08:21:32.604-07:00Dead Anyway<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/deadanyway_zps962a411b.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/deadanyway_zps962a411b.jpeg" /></a></div>
Please note that this is the rough draft for a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please check out <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2013/03/21/reviews-of-zombie-related-things/dead-anyway/" target="_blank">the final draft of the review here</a>. <br />
<br />
Dead Anyway: Stories From the Zombie Apocalypse is a collection of short zombie-themed stories in comic form. I believe the most apt word to apply to this book would be "potpourri." Fifteen artists contributed to this work, and each contribution is about as different from the rest as you can get.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>The artwork is easily the biggest draw for this book. It's quite varied and most of it is highly stylized, which I like. I mean, I'm no artist, and I've never taken a dedicated art appreciation course, so I'm in no position to give any real critique of the artwork and can only talk about it in the most general terms... But I like almost all of it. There's cartooney stuff, infographics, somewhat realistic art in grayscale, stuff that looks like it was made while the artist was dropping acid, and all sorts of other artwork.<br />
The actual stories themselves, which is what I normally look at, are actually kind of weak, for the most part. (At least, in the chapters that actually have stories, not all of them do.) This is mostly because they're all so short. Some of them manage to get away with it and are pretty entertaining despite their brevity. But those are the exception. Normally this would be a killing blow for me and I wouldn't recommend this book, but I have to take this book in the proper context and that context is the art. The book was put together by two artists with a bunch of their artist friends. It's an art showcase more than a storybook, and because of that, I can forgive the relative weakness of the stories. Also, I have to admit that which stories are considered good will probably vary from person to person, much like how which art styles are considered good will vary from person to person. But again, the
art is the main reason you would want to read this book. I only enjoyed
some of the stories, but I enjoyed almost all of the chapters. <br />
<br />
Bottom Line: Whether you like the stories themselves or not, the artwork alone makes this one worth getting. It would make for some nice light reading on your iPad or a great coffee table book for any zombie enthusiast.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-47323868084839034812013-03-08T07:43:00.002-08:002013-03-08T08:19:47.661-08:00Containment: The Zombie Puzzler<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/Containment_The_Zombie_Puzzler-_zps41b77055.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="195" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/Containment_The_Zombie_Puzzler-_zps41b77055.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
Please note that this is the rough draft for a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please check out <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2013/02/27/reviews-of-zombie-related-things/containment-the-zombie-puzzler/" target="_blank">the final draft of the review here</a>. <br />
<br />
I never know what to do with self-explanitory titles. I mean, how do I explain it any further? "Containment: The Zombie Puzzler (on iPad and PC) is a puzzle game with zombies that you must contain." It's great for the developer/publisher, because they don't have to spend any extra time explaining the concept of the game. But reviewers like me who have delusions of cleverness no longer have anything to work with. Won't anyone think of the poor reviewers?<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
So, yeah. Containment is a drop-down puzzler, a la Bejeweled, but with several significant twists. First off, this is not a match-three game. No, instead you must "contain" any zombies in the field by surrounding them entirely (minus corners) with one of four different survivor types: Cop, Punk, Soldier, and Nurse. Once you do that all basic zombies disappear, along with the containers, and you get more survivors. There are special zombies, however that make things harder, such as the mutated zombies which have to be contained twice to be killed. Also, since these are zombies, you have to be careful of spreading. Every so often, a zombie will bite a nearby survivor, turning them into a zombie too. This turns each puzzle into a race against time instead of a race against the timer. The focus on containment is nice because it means that this game is more strategic than your usual Bejeweled clone. This is a mixed blessing, since while it's nice to have a game that tries to be different and succeeds, those same attributes can also be very frustrating.<br />
<br />
For example, I quite enjoy the visuals. While they're probably not going to be winning any awards, they do a amazing job of conveying the mood the game is trying to set. The problem is that it directly interferes with the gameplay. You see, rather than a strict top-down view, containment uses an isometric view, which, while it allows you to appreciate the visuals better, makes it a little bit harder to grab the survivor you want. I found that I would often accidentally grab the survivor just below the one I was going for, because I thought I was grabbing its legs but was instead grabbing the other's head. And since the game forces you to go as fast as you can to avoid getting bogged down by too many zombies, you're not often afforded the luxury of being able to take your time to make sure you're grabbing the right one. Another problem is that the game is very dark. Again, this is a part of setting the mood but it makes it more difficult than it should be to distinguish the various units from each other. It's surprisingly hard to tell where exactly the holes in your containment cell are and where the survivors that can fill those holes are. Again, I understand why they made such artistic decisions, I just wish they could have made those decisions interfere less with the gameplay.<br />
<br />
Overall it's hard for me to want to be angry at the game because the people at Bootsnake are doing something different with drop-down puzzle games, and we should encourage innovation. However, I still found the gameplay to be rather frustrating. I often had to try puzzles out several times in order to beat them, which wouldn't be bad, if I felt that there were a legitimate reason for having failed. All too often, however, it just seemed that the game itself was screwing with me. Still, it wasn't so frustrating that I stopped playing altogether.<br />
<br />
Bottom Line: If you're really into drop-down puzzle games or are looking for a challenge, then Containment is probably for you and you should consider checking it out, it's not expensive. If, however, you get frustrated easily, you should definitely avoid this game, lest you end up smashing your mouse and keyboard against the nearest cinder block.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-51626340483709495092013-02-12T21:08:00.002-08:002013-02-12T21:08:48.576-08:00Zombie Bowl-O-Rama<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/zombiebowlorama_intro_zps37e0b6b4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/zombiebowlorama_intro_zps37e0b6b4.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
Please note that this is the rough draft for a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please check out <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2013/01/11/reviews-of-zombie-related-things/zombie-bowl-o-rama/" target="_blank">the final draft of the review here</a>.<br />
<br />
Zombie Bowl-O-Rama... It's a casual game by Mumbo Jumbo about bowling. With zombies. That's not normally what you would consider two great tastes that taste great together. It's really quite... random. The "story" (such as it is) is that an asteroid FROM OUTER SPACE crashes into a graveyard and then suddenly zombies! The opening intro video and the main menu are actually probably my favorite parts of the game. They've got this great cheesy 50s sci-fi horror vibe that I quite dig.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
Unfortunately the rest of the game lacks the 50s vibe. You start with story mode which explains that you have to fight against the zombie hoard by defeating them in bowling. You and the zombie hoard take turns throwing bowling balls at... zombies. Yeah, it seems a bit strange that the zombie hoard would willingly knock down its own members. There's a lot in the game like that. You really have to just have to repeat the <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MST3KMantra" target="_blank">MST3K mantra</a> to yourself and let it go. In the end, the nonsensical plot is just an excuse to bowl over some zombies. So the real question is "is the bowling any good?" Well, yes and no. It's very simplistic. You decide how fast you want to throw the ball, and in what initial direction, but after that, you simply move your mouse to guide the ball. This is a game where you bow over zombies in order to send a meteor back into space, physics have no business here. If that's all it were, the bowling would be very unsatisfying indeed. However, as you bowl, you can pick up various power-ups for yourself (such as making your ball huge or encasing the zombies in ice) and power-downs to play against your opponent (such as making the lane slick or turning their ball into a head of lettuce). Almost all of these are quite overpowered, and so it often turns into a game of luck-based rock-paper-scissors. Do you have the power-up that cancels the power-down that your opponent just played on you?<br />
The production values aren't bad. For a game that's several years old it still looks decent. Keep in mind that this is still a casual game, so you're not going to get photo-realistic graphics or anything. It's got good graphics... for a budget game. The zombies have several swappable parts to create variety, so there are businessmen zombies, punk zombies, construction worker zombies or any mix thereof. It's kind of funny to see a zombie in a business suit with punk hair, sunglasses, holding a drill. There are also several animations that are actually kind of funny, ranging from the zombies making fun of you for missing to covering their crotches, soccer-style, in anticipation of getting knocked over. There are lots of other little touches that make the game slightly more interesting, such as the zombies yelling "brains" when you use the power-up that turns the bowling ball into a brain or how when you get a strike, the end of the lane will burp the zombie parts back at you. It's all kind of silly and kind of immature, but at least it shows that the developers put real thought into the game.<br />
It may sound like I'm ragging on the game, and I'm not trying to, really. It's just that it helps a lot to play the game if you're a kid. Honestly. In most ways this is a game intended for children. From the simplistic game mechanics to the sometimes juvenile humor, this is a game that kids will probably get a big kick out of, but most adults won't care too much for. My two-year-old absolutely adores the game, and so I'll play it with him for bonding time. The best part is that I don't mind playing it with him because it's not a bad game at all. It's just that it's not something I would play on my own.<br />
<br />
Bottom Line: There's not much here that an adult would be entertained by, but there's plenty for kids. If you've got kids who like zombies, check it out. Otherwise, you'll probably want to give it a pass.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-173774956510284802013-01-04T19:05:00.002-08:002013-01-04T19:05:49.472-08:00The Walking Dead Episode 5.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/TWDTT.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/TWDTT.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
Please note that this is the rough draft for a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please check out <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2012/12/20/video-games/telltales-the-walking-dead-episode-five-review/" target="_blank">the final draft of the review here</a>. <br />
<br />
I'm just going to stay it right off the bat: The Walking Dead is my personal pick for game of the year, no contest. It is simply, in my opinion, easily one of the greatest adventure games ever made and one of the best games ever told by a video game. Episode five was the very satisfying conclusion to what has been one heck of an emotional trip into Robert Kirkman's world.<br />
This will be my spoiler free-ish review. I may or may not write a spoiler-filled reflection on the game in a while, but for now, rest assured that if you haven't played the game yet, I will keep the spoilers to a minimum. Though I will say, right off the bat, that my severe <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrophobia">acrophobia</a> did not make playing this last episode any easier.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
<br />
So, Lee doesn't have much time left to rescue Clem from her mysterious abductor, and as he tries to find out who it is and where they are, things just keep going from worst to worsterer. (I know that's grammatically incorrect, my not-so-inner editor just died a little, but there's really no other way to describe it.) I was honestly surprised by how this game could still manage to throw me for a loop several times, even though I was expecting it. I knew certain things might or would happen and yet it was still like a punch to the gut when they did. Things kept falling apart, and yet you move on.<br />
I was also constantly surprised by just how expert Telltale has become at manipulating my emotions. Man I hated Clem's kidnapper with a passion, right up until right before I met him and suddenly I was having second thoughts, even though it was too late. It's even worse since right before then you have a pretty awesome
zombie-killing scene with some brilliant music that just pumps you up
and gets you ready to take on the whole world, forget about some two-bit
human chump. But then you see one thing on your way to meet him and it's like popping a balloon. "Oh!" You think to yourself, "Oh, wow. This can't be happening. I suddenly, and still without knowing almost anything about this unknown kidnapper, feel very sorry for him, and wish it didn't have to come to this." Or something like that. That's pretty much went through my head. This showdown, if you can call it that, is probably one of the parts of the episode, nay, the series. It forces you to face the many sadistic choices you've been forced to make one last time and either own up or express regret. It's a simply brilliant scene.<br />
And in the end, everything leads up to what it now seems to me that the game was always inevitably leading up to. Again, I won't spoil, but I will say that as a parent, I very much appreciated the end, and was surprised at how much pride I felt at what was happening, even though I probably should have been crying. And yes, I can honestly say this series never made my cry, but I will admit it came pretty close several time. I will not make fun of anyone who admits that they did cry at this game. It's that emotional<br />
<br />
Bottom Line: I've seen that The Walking Dead has already been winning Game of the Year awards. It deserves each and every one. If we here at Buy Zombie gave out a Game of the Year award, TWD by Telltale would have my enthusiastic and wholehearted vote. I would dare venture into what some may consider blasphemous territory and say it's even better than the comics themselves. Is the game perfect? Of course not. It has plenty of flaws, but almost all of them are technical issues related to the medium it's presented in. But I'm a story guy and I'm usually far more interested in a game's story than anything else. The Walking Dead has a story that is so powerful and emotional, and how it's told is so immersive, that I have no problems overlooking those technical issues and declaring Telltale's The Walking Dead one of the greatest video games ever made.<br />
More than that though, when it comes to what I consider "the zombie apocalypse" I have a very small "canon" of stories/movies/whatever that I feel anyone interested in the genre <i>must</i> read/watch/experience. The original book, I Am Legend, by Richard Matheson, for being the source of the genre; The original Night of the Living Dead and Dawn of the Dead, for being the sources from which most of the tropes and cliches we all know and love come from; World War Z, for being able to show the global scale of the apocalypse while keeping it incredibly personal and human; Left 4 Dead, for being a masterpiece of subtle storytelling. Sure there are plenty of other works that I suggest that people check out, but the canon is what you have to check out. I am very particular about what I add to it. The Walking Dead comics have been on my apocrypha list since I first read them, but I've been on the fence about including them for just as long. The Walking Dead by Telltale Games however, won me during the fourth episode. I was just waiting to make sure they didn't flub the finale, and they didn't. This game is a classic, and if you consider yourself a fan of the zombie apocalypse or even just zombies in general, then you must play this game. Play it the way it was meant to be played, look past the limitations of the medium and focus on the story. Let yourself care about the characters, form your own opinions about them and play accordingly. You won't be disappointed.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-14061119886940592042012-12-21T14:47:00.000-08:002012-12-21T14:47:03.050-08:00City of Horror<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/cityofhorror.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="281" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/cityofhorror.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
Please note that this is the rough draft for a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please check out <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2012/12/12/video-games/city-of-horror-review/" target="_blank">the final draft of the review here</a>. <br />
<br />
Regular readers will remember that the first game review I did for Buy Zombie was <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2012/03/05/reviews-of-zombie-related-things/mall-of-horror-review/">Mall of Horror</a>. I recall having positive things to say about it. It was fun and strategic, though somewhat friendship-destroying. City of Horror is the... well, I'm not sure what to call it. It's its own game, so it's not an expansion or reprinting. Is it a sequel? Can board games even have sequels? The website boardgamegeek.com classifies it as a "reimplementation". I suppose that works better than anything I can think of.<br />
Whatever it is, it takes the rules of Mall of Horror and then refines them, expands on them, and tweaks them in a few areas. This creates an experience that if you've played Mall of Horror will feel familiar, yet wholly distinct. If you've never played Mall of Horror, but you think you'd enjoy the kind of game where you feed your friends to zombies for fun and profit, then you're in for a special treat.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
City of Horror takes place a month after the dead first started rising. The few remaining inhabitants of this unnamed city have managed to band together somewhat and bunker down. But hordes of zombies have been seen coming towards the city. The army is coming to rescue them, but they won't arrive for another four hours and the zombie horde is arriving right now. Not everybody is going to make it out alive.<br />
So, first of we have the contents. The first thing about the components you need to keep in mind is that I received an advance review copy, which was complete, however, there were some imperfections with the game boards that they were working on getting rid of for the final release copies. So that means you should take what I say here with a grain of salt, because any imperfections <i>should</i> have been removed in the final copies. Now, having said that, I have seen complaints on various forums and other locations on the internet that the imperfections were not in fact fixed. Let me address this. Some of the game boards tend to bend in the middle, just a little bit. This makes it a little awkward to put the boards together the way you're supposed to. I've seen some people complain that it totally ruined their experience, however, the bending in my copy was very minimal and I hardly noticed the bending at all. Though I also have to admit some of the pictures I've seen have had worse warping than what I have in my copy. On the flip side, I have a couple other games with this same imperfection (in some cases far more noticeable than in my copy of City of Horror), and I still never found it to be severe enough to get in the way of either playing or enjoying those games. So whether or not this is going to be a problem for you comes down to a couple of issues. The biggest issue is how severe the warping is. From what I can tell, it's a gamble. Your copy may have little to no warping, or it may have quite noticeable warping. After that, the next biggest question is if the warping will bother or not. Personally I don't find it to be that big of a problem, but it may be for you. After that it's mostly a question of if you can fix it and how easy that is. This isn't something I've looked into, because as I've said, it doesn't bother me. However, it might be something you will want to look into if your copy does turn out to be warped.<br />
Now, when you first open the box up you'll notice is that there are four rulebooks with accompanying quick reference guides. One each in English, Spanish, German, and French. As a polyglot and a translator, I love this. I love being able to read the rules in different languages and comparing them. In this case I assume they did it partially to make sure that the game components were as language independent as possible. This makes sense for several production and distribution reasons that I can think of, as well as making it simpler for people to learn the game, even if they don't speak any of those four languages. You see, the game components (all the various cards and boards) have relatively self-explanatory icons on them rather than text explanations of what they do. If you aren't sure what they do, then you can check the rules or the quick-reference guide. You'll need to at first, but it was pretty easy to figure out what they mean after a short while.<br />
After the rule books, the most interesting thing is the zombies. Instead of the neat plastic zombie figures in Mall of Horror you've got cardboard cutouts and plastic stands to put them on. Personally I liked the plastic zombies, but these are solid, in color, and there are a couple different poses to spice things up with, and there are plenty of zombies this time around instead of just barely enough. The characters are a step up. You get the same cardboard-on-plastic-stands, but it's better than the wooden tokens you had to apply stickers to. You've got more cardboard pieces representing the various tokens, the rest of the game board, including the water tower, (don't worry, only the five largest pieces have warping issues), cards that will act as your resource but also help you out during play, cards that will tell you where the zombies are arriving each turn, and last but not least... bags to put everything into! That's right, no need to pull out the Ziplocs, this game provides plenty of bags for you to put all of the tokens and whatnot in. They even have holes in them so you don't have to burp the bags as you close them. It's a small thing, to be sure, but overall it's a very nice consideration. Besides, as the saying goes, it's the small things that matter most.<br />
The artwork on everything is top-notch. The zombies look cool, the characters look cool, the cards look cool, and the game boards are fairly well-detailed. If I had one objection to the art it's that it's just a fraction too dark. I mean, the darkness adds a lot to the mood of the game, but there are just a few too many shades of black. It could have used a touch more color. <br />
The game plays very similarly to Mall of Horror in most respects, but where it differs makes a big different. You start by randomly dealing six action cards to each player as well as a certain number of unique survivors. That's right, unlike Mall of Horror, where everyone has the same team, just with different colors, there are 21 individual survivors with unique skills. (Though there are a few survivors with the same skill. The little boy and little girl, for instance, can both hide.) This makes each game you play slightly different. However, beware, not all skills are of equal value, so you could end up having a huge advantage, or get completely hosed. There's a difference between having three zombie slayers and having someone who can't vote, someone who can't move, and someone who attracts more zombies. Good luck. I've found, however, that while the survivor skills do make a difference, it's not an insurmountable difference. After setting the game boards up and placing survivors, shuffle the "hour" cards that decide where zombies are placed at the start of each turn. Pick one of each hour and make a new pile. Start with midnight (game start) and then at the start of each subsequent turn you turn over the next and place the zombies (and airdropped supplies) at the locations indicated. The person to go first is... I kid you not... the one who looks most like a zombie. It's such a crazy way of going first you can't help but love it. The most-zombie looking gets the First player token and at the start of each turn, whoever had a character die last gets the token. If no one died, they keep it.<br />
Much like Mall of Horror, each player has to decide a location they will move one of their characters to. Once everyone's decided where they're going to move, starting with the first player and moving clockwise, they choose a character to move to the location they chose. Normally you have to do this blindly, since you don't know if there are going to be extra zombies where you're moving to. However, if you have any characters on the water tower, then you get to look at the hour card showing what's going where, giving you and advantage. This is similar to, though not quite the same as being the security chief in MoH. Just like MoH, there is limited space at each location except for the middle of the board. So if you try to move a character to a full location, then they go immediately to the crossroads. There's food out there, for extra victory points, however, if there are any zombies there at all, somebody's getting eaten. In the other areas, certain conditions must be met before they break in, such as there being a certain number of zombies outside or more zombies outside than humans inside. Probably the biggest improvement over MoH is that between survivor skills and action cards, there are a lot more ways to kill zombies than MoH ever had. This is offset by the fact that zombies don't leave a location when they eat someone. On both accounts it makes a lot more sense to do it this way, and adds both a sense of greater danger but also greater control over the game.<br />
That's the game turn right there: Choose where to go, move there, zombies show up, maybe you vote people out of the building to be eaten, maybe you don't. Remember to use your resources sparingly, though. Each location on the board has a special ability, but in most cases you have to discard a card to use it. Most of the locations have useful abilities, but the hospital is a must-visit location, since it's the easiest way to get antidotes. Oh, yes, that's another difference. At the end of the game, you need antidote tokens for each of your survivors for them to be counted for victory points. And survivors have two states: Rested and exhausted. In order to use their skill you have to exhaust them. But survivors are worth fewer points while exhausted. So you might have more survivors than the next guy, but if yours are all exhausted and none of his are, then he just might beat you.<br />
That's probably the best part of the game that MoH was really lacking. In MoH, there was usually little reason to not to use your resources as soon as you had them. In CoH, you need to conserve everything you have for as long as you can. Every decision feels important, not just where you're going to run to next. You have to decide if you can risk losing a vote and having a survivor get eaten because you need to keep that action card that can kill two zombies for later in the game, or if you need to kill the zombies right away to keep your survivor safe. There are occasional "airdropped" items (which survivors at the lucky location vote over), but generally there just isn't much in the way of replenishing cards in your hand. Which, again, makes sense, since you're in a ruined city, just trying to wait it out for just a couple hours so the army can rescue you. <br />
<br />
<br />
Bottom Line: As follow-up of Mall of Horror, City of Horror improves on the original in almost every way. It basically is everything I wished Mall of Horror had been. It's not quite as cutthroat, but it's still pretty vicious. But even forgetting Mall of Horror and taking City of Horror all by itself, it's a fun, strategic game with a mean streak that manages to maintain a good sense of the dangers of the zombie apocalypse. It's got a great premise, good atmosphere, and rules that fit both perfectly. It's definitely among the better zombie-themed board games out there, and it just might be the best one released this year. If you can look past a few cosmetic flaws, then you should definitely check it out.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-45401770351711384212012-11-24T18:11:00.000-08:002013-01-04T19:07:39.857-08:00The Walking Dead: Episode 4<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/TWDTT.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/TWDTT.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
Please note that this is the rough draft for a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please check out <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2012/11/13/reviews-of-zombie-related-things/telltales-the-walking-dead-episode-4/" target="_blank">the final draft of the review here</a>. <br />
<br />
Episode four can be summed up in a single word: Tension.<br />
I'll be honest, after the emotional beatdown that was episode 3, I was a little scared to play episode 4. If it messed with my emotions as viscerally as episode 3 then I would probably end up as a little puddle of goo on the floor that my wife wouldn't appreciate having to clean up. Fortunately, while episode continued the trend of a strong emotional impact, there wasn't as much in the way of sucker punches as episode 3 gave us. In essence, it's the perfect follow-up since it gives you just enough room to breath without letting up entirely.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
So, Episode 4 takes place immediately after episode 3, and the group has reached Savannah, but as you can expect, things aren't going to be nearly as easy as they would hope them to be. It seems that every step forward is met by another walker who forces them one step back There are still large hordes of walkers in the city, there are no boats left at the dock, apparently the only large community of people left is made up of social Darwinists who throw out anyone not deemed to be physically fit enough to survive, and someone keeps ringing bells around the town, attracting the zombies. It's not quite out of the frying pan and into the fire, but it's at least out of the frying pan and into a different frying pan. <br />
Much akin to the previous episodes, we explore some new themes and we're treated to a lot of difficult choices. A few new characters are introduce, and some characters are killed, though some of who dies depends on your choices. While this episode isn't quite the roller coaster that episode 3 is, there are some incredibly touching and possibly disturbing moments. Heck, there was one scene where I just told myself, <i>Gary Whitta, this is incredibly touching. At the same time you are one sick S.O.B. for even thinking this up</i>. In case you didn't know, Gary Whitta is the story consultant for The Walking Dead, and he personally wrote episode 4. He also let's a bit of his nerd hang out for this episode since there are some rather obvious references to Star Wars, Back to the Future, and other classic movies. They may have been gratuitous, but they actually fit rather well. But where this episode really shines, as I said at the beginning of this review, is the tension. At few points in the episode do you not feel tense. Heck, the few action parts of the episode are almost a relief since the tension is broken and the adrenaline rushing through your body suddenly has a purpose. There are a few jump scares that actually scared me, when they might not otherwise have if I hadn't already been wound up so tightly. At one point I had to pause the game and take a five minute break in order to calm down before I could continue. Sure, I admit I'm a bit of a wuss in the first place, but I have never had to do that before.<br />
I can't say much more because I'm trying to avoid spoilers. Suffice to say, as far as the story goes, everything that happens is pretty much believable within the context of what's happened so far. Promises made in earlier episodes have either been fulfilled or are shaping up to be fulfilled, new promises have been made, and the episode ends with three twists that you may or may not see coming. (I guessed two of them back in episode 3, but the third totally blindsided me.) Episode 5 promises to be an amazing and emotional climax to what has been an amazing and emotional series. Telltale keeps teasing us by saying that it's going to be out sooner than we think without giving a date, but it should definitely be out before year's end. I literally cannot wait.<br />
<br />
Bottom Line: Each episode has gotten better and better. If the trend continues (and there is every indication that it will) then The Walking Dead will be my personal Game of the Year. Despite a few technical flaws, it is easily one of the best video game narratives I have ever seen. If you have any interest in The Walking Dead, or the zombie apocalypse in general, then you owe it to yourself to go out and play this game if you haven't already. I guarantee that it is better than most zombie movies you could be watching instead. In fact, I'm tempted to say that the game is better than the comics that spawned it. If episode 5 is anywhere near as good as I anticipate it to be, than I will give in to that temptation and just say it outright.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-62661261548035065542012-11-02T17:02:00.001-07:002012-11-11T15:02:45.427-08:00All Things Zombie<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/ATZombie.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/ATZombie.jpg" width="245" /></a></div>
Please note that this is the rough draft for a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please check out <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2012/10/26/reviews-of-zombie-related-things/all-things-zombie-a-board-game/" target="_blank">the final draft of the review here</a>.<br />
<br />
All Things Zombie. Well, if any game ever gave itself a difficult name to live up to it's certainly this one. No reliance on another work's title like a licensed game, and no simple title that explains the basic concept of the game. No, ATZ wants it all. But can it live up to the standard it sets for itself?<br />
Okay, maybe I'm being unfairly silly. It's a bad habit I need to break. Putting that aside for now: All Things Zombie, by Lock 'n Load publishing, is an award-winning board game that, obviously, takes place during the zombie apocalypse. It's also one of the most unique war games I've ever played.<br />
Granted, I have to admit that I'm not the most avid wargamer out there by any stretch, but I have dabbled in it a little. While I can see the appeal of the genre, most of the time it's just not for me. I usually lack the patience for those kinds of a games. That just makes it all the more surprising at how pleasantly surprised I was by this game.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
First off: the components: There are two double-sided game boards. Both are really solid, I'd hesitate to even call them cardboard, though I believe that's what they are. I don't think they're actually any thicker than your usual boards, but they seem to be a little sturdier. The maps fit together, shot sides to short sides or long sides to long sides, to allow for larger maps. However, with a total of only four maps one two boards the modularity is somewhat limited, and you'll soon become very familiar with all of them. Next, you've got a some cards in a nice solid card stock Keep 'em away from your eyes though, the corners are sharp. There are some large character cards, also made from card stock, and finally all of the other game components are small cardboard counters. Nice and thick considering how small they are. Keep a lot of small sandwich bags on hand; not only are there a lot of counters, there is a huge variety of counters for different parts of the game, from the zombies and characters to weapons to other necessary components. You don't want to have to unnecessarily dig through a big pile figuring out which is what. My one complaint with the weapons and other tokens is that I'm calling BS on how many weapons there are to find. You have to search buildings, like homes and restaurants and other public buildings, and yet pistols and assault rifles are relatively plenty, but there's only one baseball bat to be found? I mean, sure it takes place in America, but I'm pretty sure that baseball bats are a lot more common than assault rifles and P-90s. You can even find a grenade for crying out loud. I'm sorry, but it's a weird town that has as many privately-owned hand grenades as baseball bats. Having played the game, I definitely understand the need for the guns. I can maybe even understand the need to keep bats scarce for balance issues. But it's a little difficult for me to suspend my disbelief with so few. Just sayin'.<br />
The art for this game runs from average to amazing. The art on all of the tokens, the portraits, the weapons, the items, etc. is all fairly average. It's nothing amazing, but it's far from ugly and it more than gets the job done. The game boards however, are simply beautiful. They're clear, crisp, and very easy to figure out what's supposed to be what. It's not fancy, yet it still has an incredible attention to detail I wouldn't think you could get from a top-down bird's eye view. The hexes are clearly marked and highly visible, yet they don't get in the way of the rest of the visuals and you hardly notice them until you need to. I'm impressed.<br />
Now here is when I would normally try to give a fairly in-depth look at the basics of the rules. With ATZ though... I'm going to have to just barely skim over the rules, because otherwise I might as well just re-print the rulebook, which I don't think would be covered by fair use. The rules are fairly complex. You see, as I stated before, this isn't just any old board game: this is a war game. No, you're not controlling armies or tanks or anything, but the way the game plays out feels a lot like a war game. Initiative (called "reputation" in this game for some reason), line of sight, terrain type, and combat bonuses all play a huge part in the strategy and tactics you'll use.<br />
The rulebook itself is very well laid out. It's has a nice, well-labeled numbering system based on the rules rather than page number, to allow easier cross-referencing. That is, if you need to look up a rule, and you know it's in section 4, it's much easier to find out that the rule is under 4.3 than having to re-read all of page 10 over again. People who aren't used to looking things up this way might find it a bit strange at first, but you'll soon learn to appreciate it because you will be looking things up often.<br />
Now, the first thing you need to understand is that ATZ is actually pretty flexible. The rules are for the most part just a skeleton that you wrap different scenarios and campaigns around. While the rulebook does include a pre-generated campaign (a pretty good one, I might add) the game is set up so that you can easily create your own scenarios with whatever goals and challenges you want. The game can be played solo, co-op, or competitively. There is no specific goal for every game, no particular way things must be set up every time... It all depends on the scenario.<br />
Now, three paragraphs into talking about the rules, I'm finally going to describe the rules. Well, the most basic and important ones at least. There are three things you will need to understand in order to play the game. Once you get these the rest should be pretty easy. First is the character and weapon statistics. All characters, zombies included, have three stats: Movement, reputation, and number of melee attacks. Movement and number of melee attacks are self explanatory. Reputation is essentially initiative; it helps decide who gets to move first. Also, some characters are special, if they have a star that means they are a... well... a Star character. They get to do special things that I will cover later.<br />
The next thing you need to know is that ATZ has a very unique system for choosing turn order. At the beginning of each turn you roll a die for each player and one for the zombies (zombies are always controlled by the game, so someone needs to roll for them). The person to roll highest goes first, however, any characters you have with a rep lower than the number you rolled don't get to go. So, much like The Price is Right, you want to get closest to the target number without going over. This does mean that it's possible for someone or even everyone, including the zombies, to miss a turn. Believe me when I say, it really, really sucks when you miss your turn and the zombies don't. Now, Stars generally have a pretty high rep, which means that they don't miss their turn often. An added bonus is that if a Star takes their turn, any of your non-Star characters who begin the turn next to that Star also get to take a turn, even if they normally wouldn't. Now, taking a turn is called getting your "impulse" phase, which consists of being able to move and take one of several different actions. I assume they call it an impulse phase because it is possible for your characters to take certain actions without getting an impulse. This leads us into...<br />
...the third thing that you must know about. Reactions tests. Much of the action in the game revolves around taking reaction tests. Whenever you have a character who 1. Wants to charge into melee combat; 2. Gets charged by zombies or a character; 3. Gets shot at; or 4. Has an enemy character com into their line-of-sight, they must take the respective reaction test. Roll two dice and compare them against the character's rep. Then follow what the table says. (Don't worry, there's a very handy player aid card that spells it out for you. The other side even has everything you need to know about rolling for ranged and melee combat.) With the exception of in-sight reaction tests, Stars will be able to do pick and choose what they want to do, while other survivors will always have to follow the table. Zombies never roll for reactions tests.<br />
Now, keep in mind, like I said earlier, these are the three things you <i>must</i> know, but still read the rule book because there is a <i>lot</i> more to the game.<br />
So, how does it play? First let me say, this game is actually fun to play solo. With most games that include a solo option, I find that they usually seem kind of tacked-on and they don't really add anything to the game. With ATZ, it's almost as if the game was intended to originally be a single player/co-op game and then they figured that people might like some competitive play as well, so they then worked on including that too. Solo, co-op, and competitive are all equally fun, which really surprised and impressed me. However, you need to know that ATZ is hard. You'll find out rather quickly that it pays to be patient in this game. It took me three games of trying to rush the objectives of the first scenario to find out that that's a pretty quick way of spawning a lot of zombies fast. Looking around a few forums, I've noticed that's the same mistake a lot of newbies make. You see, when you enter a building, there are always a random number of zombies inside. Sure, it could be zero, but it could also be five or six, which is a lot for a survivor to take on alone. You can get swarmed very fast if you're not paying attention. This is compounded by the fact that the only reliable way of killing zombies in large enough numbers to matter is the use your guns, which have a chance of spawning more zombies since they make noise.<br />
Beyond that, it's hard to say anything beyond "it's a fun game." I mean, the variability from game to game means it's somewhat different each time you play. A simple scenario can be played in half an hour or less, while a more
complicated one with two or more players could potentially take a couple
hours. You can have something as simple as "search X number of houses and then escape to this place" or "kill all of the enemy survivors" to things as complex as "survive X number of waves of zombie attacks" and "get from point A to point B, rescue the trapped survivor, escort them to safety, all the while searching buildings for a specific item." You're really only limited by your imagination. I seriously suggest playing the campaign included in the rule book to get a taste for just how flexible the scenario creation can be.<br />
I will say that if you dislike too much dice rolling, you'll probably end up fatigued after a while. You roll for turn order, you roll for reaction tests, you roll for combat, you roll to see if you spawned more zombies, and so on... You draw cards to see how many zombies are inside a building instead of rolling dice, and that helps a little, but int he end there is a lot of rolling dice. Which is no problem for wargamers, but more casual gamers might not be used to it. Also, the game seems to be a bit sparse in terms of what's in the box. While I would say it's sufficient overall, I kind of would like to have some more pre-generated characters, as well as more tokens for the weapons (especially melee weapons) or even more kinds of weapons. I understand why there aren't more weapons, most of that ones they already include have at least one special rule unique to it, and it can't be easy to come up with a bunch of balanced, unique rules. But still... variety is the spice of life, and especially in a game like this, you're going to want more variety.<br />
<br />
Bottom Line: I cautiously recommend this game. It is definitely not for the casual gamer. The complex mechanics will be very off-putting to anyone not expecting them. However, wargamers and other hardcore gamers will most definitely get more than their money's worth. If you're more than a casual gamer but not quite a hardcore gamer... well... that's when it's a tough call. If you like zombies, (and why would you be at this website if you don't?) then it's probably a safe call and you just might like this game. Just know that's it's a bit more complicated than most of the games you're used to. I like this game; it's fun. While I don't think the game is perfect, in the end my biggest complaint is that I want more of the game than what comes in the box. And that's not really a bad complaint to have. To my knowledge Lock N Load Publishing doesn't have any expansions for the game planned, which is a shame. But hopefully they'll come out with some in the future.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-83004320941758052512012-10-19T14:32:00.000-07:002012-11-11T15:02:57.221-08:00The Walking Dead: The Board Game<div style="margin-bottom: 0pc;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/pic997647_md.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/pic997647_md.jpg" width="232" /></a></div>
Please note that this is the rough draft for a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please check out <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2012/10/08/video-games/the-walking-dead-the-board-game/" target="_blank">the final draft of the review here</a>.<br />
<br />
Now, if you're a regular reader, you
may be confused that I am reviewing The Walking Dead: The Board Game.
"Didn't he just review that game not too long ago?" you're asking yourself right now. Such confusion is
normal, since what I reviewed before was not The Walking Dead: The
Board Game, but rather, The Walking Dead Board Game. You see? The other one didn't have the extra ": the". Totally not confusing at all. All right, all sarcasm aside, because the names are so similar, for ease of understanding and the sake of brevity, from here on out I will refer to "The Walking Dead: The Board Game" as "this game" and to "The Walking Dead Board Game" as "the other game". I don't know if it will help you keep things strait, but it does help me.<br />
Similarities in the name aside, the
other game was based on the TV show, while this game is based on the
comics, and while there are some superficial similarities between the
games, (like their names) they are in fact very different. </div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0pc;">
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0pc;">
Like the other game, the broader point of this game is to gather resources and find a safe place to stay. However that's where the similarities end, really. The game board in this game is a much more open map with hexagram tiles, contrasted with the simpler map that the other game had which is basically a square with a plus through it. Another difference is that the resources you gather in this game are there to help you in your quest, rather than being the goals, and the encounters are much more varied. While there is plenty of zombie-slaying, there is a lot more human interaction with the other players.<br />
First off, the components. The components are pretty solid. There aren't any gimmicks like the mousepad/board of the other game. Just good ol' quality cardboard for the board and tokens. Please note: There are a LOT of tokens. Keep some sandwich bags on hand... you're going to need them. The cards are a solid plastic, though a bit too glossy for my preference. They're not annoyingly glossy, though. In fact, I seemed to be the only person to even note it, so I'm probably in the minority there. Finally there are the dice. I'm no expert on dice materials, but they seem fairly standard. All in all, like I said, the components are solid.<br />
The game is played with two to six players, each taking the role of one of the major characters from the comic. You start with your starting survivor, another random survivor, and one of each resource, (gas, ammunition, and food). Each survivor has one to three dice icons at the bottom of their card, these show how many dice, and of what color you add to your dice pool whenever you need to make a roll. There are four colors of dice, one is best for killing zombies, one is best for non-zombie-killing encounters, one is good for both, and one can generally only be rolled when you use up an ammo resource. This die will always kill one to three zombies, but you have a fifty-fifty chance of making so much noise that you then have to put a zombie counter on every hex surrounding the one your one. It's definitely a double-edged sword. Using up a food at the beginning of your turn heals one of your survivors of a fatigue (essentially damage/wounds), and using up a gas token allows you to either move an extra space, or move through a hex with a zombie token in it without stopping to fight. <br />
On your turn, you can move up to three spaces away (Though using up a gas token will let you move an extra space). When you move, you put a zombie token on the hex you ended your last turn on, and if you run into a zombie token, you stop moving and must fight the zombies (unless you use a gas token to move past it without stopping). If you end your move on an empty hex, your turn ends. If you end on a hex with one of the resource icons, then you draw an encounter for each icon and resolve them in order.<br />
Like with the other game, encounters are where the real meat in the game is. However, there is a lot more variety. In the other game, the encounters were by and large, just fighting zombies. Here zombies are only about half of the encounters. Don't think you can't worry about them though, if you don't have much in the way of fighting in your dice pool, you can very quickly accrue fatigue. Each of your survivors can take two fatigue without dying, but are goners on their third fatigue. Whenever you face zombies (either in encounters or as tokens) you roll your dice pool and if the number of zombies is greater than the number of "kill a zombie" icons that show up, your group takes the difference in fatigue.<br />
The rest of the encounters contain a decent variety of challenges. While some are simple, such as needing to roll a certain number of specific symbols with your dice pool, or having/not having certain amounts of certain resources, others are more complex and require a certain amount of player interaction. Some, for example, require you to pick another player, and that player may then choose to voluntarily discard resources (or not) in order to force you to also discard resources. Hopefully you haven't pissed them off, because it can easily become a question of "do you hate me enough to spite me by hurting yourself?" More complicated, however, are the cards which essentially force the prisoner's dilemma on some or all of the players.<br />
If you're not sure what <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma">the prisoner's dilemma</a> is, well, it's somewhat complicated and hard to explain in a short amount of time. Basically, it deals with game theory and uncertainty in decision making. It's never a fun decision to have to make, and it will come up several times in a game. You'd better hope you can trust the other players. (And they'd better hope they can trust you.) You might just find something out about your friends. For example, I've learned from playing this game that my wife is never to be trusted with my personal safety. She's leaving me for zombie food the first chance she gets.<br />
The interesting thing about encounters is that unless the encounter says otherwise, you still get the resources, even if you fail. That doesn't mean you won't suffer any ill effects, but it is a nice touch. Each encounter is very different, providing a huge variety of situations. heck, there are even a few encounters that are more beneficial to fail at. Not many, but a few.<br />
Once you've gathered enough resources (and hopefully a couple more survivors, you can try scouting out locations. There are three public locations that anyone can scout out and everyone is also given a secret location that they may also scout out. Keep in mind though, there are multiple copies of each location, so it's possible to scout out a location more than once. You win once you have scouted out three locations, and each
location you scout out makes the next location that much harder to scout. You scout a location out merely by entering that location and then attempting to fulfill its requirements. This often, but not always, requires you to succeed at a certain number of encounters, but just as often has different requirements, such as having no fatigue on your characters or having a certain amount of resources. This actually leads to some rather... interesting situations. For example, at one point I was scouting out a location that required me to succeed at an encounter and then have no fatigue on any of my survivors. I drew an encounter, and... the only way to succeed was by voluntarily adding fatigue to my survivors. The only way to succeed was by failing. In any other game it would have been incredibly frustrating. But for some reason it just seemed par for the course for the world of The Walking Dead.<br />
Obviously there's a little bit more to the game than that, so definitely read the rule book, especially for the rules on teaming up with other players.<br />
Well, I've provided a couple anecdotes, but how does it play? Very well. The rules are pretty easy to get down. The rules only look hard at first glance, but once you start playing, they're actually quite simple. A full game takes maybe an hour once everyone knows how it goes, so if time is an issue, you don't need to worry about that. But most importantly, it's fun. The variety of encounters and surprisingly large selection of survivors prevents the game from getting repetitive and keeps it fresh for longer. The game is very well designed and it fits The Walking Dead perfectly.<br />
<br />
Bottom line: This game is a much deeper game that the other The Walking Dead game and it manages to achieve that depth without being complex. You'll never feel entirely safe since zombies are plentiful, but you'll be keeping an eye on the other players too, never sure if you can trust them or not. In other words, it it really captures the essence of the zombie apocalypse in general and The Walking Dead specifically. This game is a must-have for any fan of the comics. If you're not a fan of the comics, I would still suggest this game to you if you're looking for a new board game to play.</div>
Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-65166125610093190642012-10-02T19:24:00.001-07:002012-11-11T15:04:57.194-08:00Telltale's The Walking Dead: Episode 3<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/TWDTT.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/TWDTT.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
Please note that this is the rough draft for a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please check out <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2012/09/18/reviews-of-zombie-related-things/telltales-the-walking-dead-episode-3/" target="_blank">the final draft of the review here</a>.<br />
<br />
Like many natural-born citizens of the U.S.A. I have a more than a few hedonistic tendencies. I know it's not good for me, physically or spiritually, but there you have it. Despite this, Telltale games is making wonder if I don't have some sort of hidden emotional masochism streak in me. That's because episode three of their take on The Walking Dead is out, and it will will test all but the most callous of gamers. And the worst part is, I can't even tell you why without giving away spoilers.<br />
<br />
Seriously, the only problem with a game like this one is that talking about it beyond the most general terms is treading on very spoiler-ish ground, and while it might not ruin the game for you if you do get spoiled, I'm the kind of guy who assumes that other people are like me and want to experience just what all the fuss is about. So, I will try and walk the fine line of giving necessary information without giving out spoilers. It'll be tough though.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
Episode one was the introduction to a great story and it forced some tough choices on you, but it wasn't anything that a regular person can't handle. Episode two kicked the decision-making up a notch, dropping genuinely difficult choices in your lap while showcasing the true horror of a zombie apocalypse by presenting us the depths of human depravity. If you'll pardon the cliche, episode three kicks it up another notch and forces some downright nasty choices on us and makes us deal with the consequences in ways that the game hasn't yet done. Then it does a good job at showing us just how far in-fighting and secrets can destroy a group when it needs unity the most. Then we get in some more action-y parts thrown in for good measure to shake things up. Some of what happens in this episode is downright senseless, and yet totally believable, given what's gone on up till now. And just like the previous episodes, the story gives us a couple of brief hope spots, but then nastily takes them away. Unlike the previous episodes, however, with all that happens, the hope spots never seem quite as hopeful as they should. Truly, this game captures the heart and essence of Kirkman's The Walking Dead.<br />
<br />
This episode takes place very soon after the events of episode two. It's implied to be just a few days, maybe a week or two at the most. You start out inside the nearby city to loot for supplies, and are presented with your first hard choice right off the bat. Choose one way and you won't be able to pick up very much, choose the other way, and if you have a heart inside that calloused exterior of yours, then you loose in a very different way altogether. Back at the hotel your group is staying at, things are falling apart quickly, as mistrust and paranoia start creeping into month-old power struggles and spill over into other areas as well.<br />
<br />
Then things get worse.<br />
<br />
I'm beginning to think that The Walking Dead game, indeed the entire TWD franchise could be summed up with: "It got worse. And then you kept reading/watching/playing."<br />
<br />
This isn't a game you play because it's fun or intellectually challenging. It's a game you play because it's one of the most compelling stories in video gaming history. At this point I'm simultaneously eager and frightened to find out if and how they plan on topping this one. Right now I don't think I would be surprised by anything they do, but I'm still making sure to look both ways before crossing the proverbial street, because I <i>am</i> expecting to get blindsided.<br />
<br />
Bottom Line: It's a very rare series indeed that can keep improving with each installment. So far, Telltale's The Walking Dead has been one as the latest episode has set the bar ever higher for the remaining two. If Telltale can keep this pace up, I just might be emotionally exhausted when they finish. It's kind of making me glad that they're taking longer than expected between each episode. It's giving me a chance to catch my breath.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-84531228626475383932012-09-20T15:30:00.003-07:002012-11-11T15:03:14.713-08:00Paranorman<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/ParaNorman-Poster-2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/ParaNorman-Poster-2.jpg" width="215" /></a></div>
Please note that this is the rough draft for a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please check out <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2012/09/10/zombie-movies/paranorman/" target="_blank">the final draft of the review here</a>.<br />
<br />
Paranorman, made by the same people who made the excellent Coraline and the decent-but-not-great Corpse Bride, is a very interesting film, if for no other reason than it keeps shattering your expectations. Just when you think that you've figured the movie out, it takes a sharp turn and becomes something else entirely. In my experience, it's rare that you run across what is ostensibly a kid's movie that dares to be this smart without losing any of its accessibility.<br />
Paranorman is the story of Norman, a young boy who loves scary horror movies and talks to dead people. He lives in a small New England town with the sole claim to fame that they once had a good old-fashioned Puritan witch-trial, with a real witch that cursed her accusers to come back as the living dead and everything. Pretty much everything in the town is devoted to advertising that fact. The town also has ghosts all over the place. Not fake ghosts advertising the witch, but real ghosts that Norman talks to. In fact, they seem to be the only people to accept Norman for his ability. Naturally, since no one else can see the ghosts, he gets shunned by... everyone. His mother seems to be the only person to even try to understand him, and even she comes off as a bit distant. Then one day, Norman's crazy uncle, who apparently can also see dead people, comes to Norman to tell him that he must carry on the family legacy and keep the spirit of the witch at rest so as to prevent to curse from being fulfilled. Naturally, things don't go quite so well as planned.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
This is where things get interesting, not just in the story, but also in how the story is told. You see, the movie can be broken up into three acts, the first act introduces us to Norman, his life, and all of the minor characters. It's surprisingly slow-paced, but that's because it takes its time to flesh out the characters, especially Norman. It shows just how much his life must suck, since he has essentially no corporeal friends and even his own family, for the most part, treats him like a freak. If you went into the movie not knowing anything about it at all, you could almost think it was a re-make of The Sixth Sense, but without the Bruce Willis character.<br />
However, once Norman finally decides that he needs to stop the witch's curse, the movie shifts gears into a strait-up cheesy horror movie. Heck, it's pretty much "baby's first horror movie" during this act. It's presented in a child friendly manner, since there's no real gore, no swearing, etc. But you've still got all the regular horror tropes (like jump scares, an abandoned mansion in the woods, and a car chase where the zombie is clinging to the car rooftop,) and all the regular horror characters (like the protagonist with a supernatural gift, the cheerleader, the jock, the plucky but stupid sidekick, and the bully who turns out to be not so bad when the chips are down.)<br />
Then, once you've finally gotten used to this act, the movie shifts gears again gives you a huge reveal, and suddenly you're in a much deeper movie. Again, it's very kid-accessible, the movie doesn't simplify anything for children, but it starts presenting ideas you wouldn't expect. Fear of the unknown leading to anger and regrettable actions? Forgiving acts that are unforgivable? Puritan witch trials and the fact that people can believe themselves to be doing right while they did wrong? Herd behavior leading to mob violence and rioting? This is heavy stuff, man. One of my favorite scenes in the movie was when the angry mob mistakes the protagonists for the zombies, so they start trying to break into the building the protagonists are barricading. And from the point of view of the protagonists, the scene plays out exactly as if the angry mob of normal humans were in fact a hungry mob of ravenous zombies, trying to break through the barricades, grasping hands and all. Hmmm... I wonder what the movie is trying to tell us the real danger is?<br />
<br />
Bottom Line: Paranorman is a great family movie. It's accessible to kids, but it it's smart enough and enjoyable enough that parents, or really any adults, would still get a kick out of it. Plus, if you're into horror movies but you're scared that they'll traumatize your younger children, then this might be a good way to start your kids off without having to worry about them being exposed to anything too scary.<br />
<br />
P.S. I watched the movie in 3D because that's what was most convenient for my schedule. I'd say don't bother. Like most 3D versions of movies I've seen, it really didn't add anything to the experience, and having to wear the extra glasses was a little annoying since I already wear glasses. If you really insist of 3D, it's your call, but you're not missing out on anything.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-61840301994549618152012-08-31T14:55:00.004-07:002012-11-11T15:05:27.085-08:00Telltale's The Walking Dead: Episode 2<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/TWDTT.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/TWDTT.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
Please note that this is the rough draft for a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please check out <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2012/07/18/reviews-of-zombie-related-things/telltales-the-walking-dead-episode-2/" target="_blank">the published draft of the review here</a>. <br />
<br />
So, it took a month longer than expected, but Episode 2 of Telltale Games' The Walking Dead came out a couple weeks ago. Was the wait worth it? I'd like to make some sort of "in short" joke, but in all honesty, no single word or sentence, no matter how humorous, could do this episode justice. I mean, yes it's worth it, but what does that mean, really?<br />
<br />
Let's start at the beginning. Episode two (subtitled "Starved for Help") takes place about three months after episode one. It's winter, it's cold, and food is running dangerously short. Right off the bat, you're introduced to a new character. Apparently, the group saved his life and he reciprocated by sharing his food. However, you better catch your breath right off the bat, since it isn't very long before you're presented with some tough choices again. And boy, are they tough. I hesitate to even mention what kind of decisions it forces you to make, event he early ones, because it feels too much like giving up spoilers. Well, not too far in, you meet up with a couple of brothers from a dairy farm. They say they have food that they're willing to trade for fuel so they can keep their electric fence running. But along the way you also find out about raiders nearby who don't hesitate to kill for what they want. Your soon going to start asking if the dairy farm is really as safe as it appears and what you need to do to keep yourself and the group alive, and whether or not you can keep the group together.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
This episode really starts delving into some deep questions, but more than that, it makes you face what it might really mean to be in a zombie apocalypse. Oh, sure, we've all got our plans laid out and potential strongholds scouted out, but how many of us have asked ourselves what we would be willing to do to survive? Not just immediately, but long-term. The zombie apocalypse wouldn't be all scavenging and headshots. Remember, in a zombie apocalypse, the biggest danger is never the zombies, but other people. These questions of survival are what's always intrigued me about the zombie apocalypse, what Telltale's The Walking Dead is breaking ground in so well is not simply presenting these questions, but it's forcing you to answer them yourself, rather than answering them for you. It is amazing, and at the same time horrifying. Bravo Telltale. Please keep it up.<br />
<br />
I do have to mention one brief spoiler, just because I was kind of touched by it. Telltale keeps tabs on every choice that everyone makes, down to the dialog options you choose. One of the first major choices you're presented with is divvying up the rations. You have four food items to distribute to ten people. More than half of you are going hungry. Telltale released a while ago that more than 95% of people who have played episode two have opted to feed the two children at the expense of the adults. Honestly, it really warms my heart to know that in our modern internet, full of trolls and in this game full of reasons to replay, the vast, vast majority of people still have the simple human decency to feed the children when it counts.<br />
<br />
Bottom Line: Episode 2 is an excellent follow-up to the first episode. It's not perfect, and to be honest, it's imperfections really stick out, but only because the rest of the game is so polished and there's such an attention to detail, that the imperfections seems worse than they are by comparison. If you can look past those few minor flaws, you won't be disappointed by the experience you have.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-84631910592892103922012-06-17T16:02:00.000-07:002012-06-17T16:02:05.561-07:00Zombie! Run for your lives!<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/boardgame-zombie-box.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/boardgame-zombie-box.jpg" /></a></div>
Please note that this is the rough draft for a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please check out <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2012/05/29/reviews-of-zombie-related-things/zombie-run-for-your-lives-review/" target="_blank">the final draft of the review here</a>.<br />
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
You know the old saying that “If you
and your friend are being chased by a dangerous animal then you don’t
need to outrun the animal, you just need to outrun your friend? Well,
Zombie! Run for Your Lives!, by Russian company Right Games, plays
that adage to the hilt. You and up to six other players are all
running away from a zombie horde, and only one of you is going to
make it out with your brains intact.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The mechanics are simple. Everyone
starts with four cards. There are two types of cards: Item cards and
zombie cards. Each item card has a symbol on it and there is a
matching zombie card with the same symbol for each item card. You can
only have one item or one zombie of a specific icon in front of you
at a time, and if you have an item and zombie with matching symbols,
then you use the item to get rid of the zombie, and both are
discarded. There are also three zombie cards with no symbol at all,
so try to avoid getting those if you can since there’s no way to
get rid of them!</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
You pick the first player however you
want. The rules suggest that the last person to watch a zombie movie
go first, but that’s not necessary. On your turn you draw a card
and then you either play an item card in front of yourself or a
zombie card in front of somebody else. If you manage to accumulate
five item cards before anyone else, then you escape the zombie horde
and everyone else is eaten. If, however, you accumulate five zombie
cards, then the zombie horde catches you and eats your brains. If you
become a zombie, you still get to play, though. You have to discard
all of the cards in your hand and in front of you and no cards can be
played in front of you, but from now on, on your turn you draw a
card, and then play it in front of another player. That’s all, but
it doing it this way speeds the game up and prevents anyone who lost
from feeling left out. If everyone except for one person becomes a
zombie, than that person outruns the horde and wins, even if they
don’t have five items. Pretty simple.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
There is another rule, but it’s
completely optional. After you draw a card, but before you play a
card as normal, you can choose to play a zombie in front of yourself
or an item in front of another player and then draw another card. It
seems a bit weird, but I found in practice that it’s actually a
nice way of getting rid of cards that aren’t helping you for
another card that might. Sure, you’re hurting yourself by playing
it, but if all you’ve got in your hand is zombies and you’re just
one item away from winning, it could win you the game.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
So, you’re probably thinking, it’s
just a simple little party game, why should I spend my hard-earned
cash on it? Well, for one thing, it’s fun. Granted, you have to
play the game in the spirit it was meant to be played, i.e. fast and
cutthroat. You’re running from zombies, don’t stop to help each
other unless you have to! If you try and play the game nice, it can
take forever. The first game I played took over 20 minutes because we
were being nice. After that, we stopped being so nice and the games
were generally done in five to ten minutes, tops. Another good thing
is the quality of the product pretty high, especially the artwork.
it’s bright, cartoony, and delightfully macabre. Plus, the game is
just plain funny. A lot of the humor is subtle, but it’s definitely
there. For example, most of the items make sense concerning which
zombie they get rid of: A revolver gets rid of a single zombie; a
double-barreled shotgun gets rid of two zombies; etc. But what what
gets rid of the bikini zombie? Why, a mouse of course!</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
If there’s one thing I don’t like
about the game it’s the translation. It’s pretty obvious that the
translation was not done by a native English-speaker. While there’s
not a whole lot of the translation that’s outright <i>wrong</i>,
though there is some of that, like the “boots” that are quite
clearly a pair of running shoes, most of the rules read very
awkwardly. It’s surprisingly understandable despite the poor
translation, but be aware that it’s going to be a bit wonky to
read.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Bottom Line: Zombie! Run for Your
Lives! Is a fun little party game. No, really, it says so right on
the box, and it’s not false advertising. It really is a fun little
party game. It’s easy to learn, fast to play, and just plain funny.
Check it out.</div>Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-12614490775858278752012-06-17T15:59:00.000-07:002012-06-17T15:59:34.624-07:00Telltale Games' The Walking Dead<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/TWDTT.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/TWDTT.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
Please note that this is the rough draft for a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please check out <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2012/05/25/reviews-of-zombie-related-things/another-the-walking-dead-episode-1-review/" target="_blank">the final draft of the review here</a>.<br />
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0pc;">
I have been a huge adventure games fan
ever since I first played The Curse of Monkey Island waaaay back in
the 90s. Yes, I understand that that's not that long ago for some
people who have been playing since before graphics, but I was just a
kid back in the 90s. Anyway, I loved the story-driven aspect of it
all. The puzzles could be fun, too, but the story is what grabbed me.
Games like the Monkey Island series because they were funny, games
like Grim Fandango because they were funny and serious at the same
time, and games like The Longest Journey because they were simply
amazing. And yet, despite critics saying that adventure games have
been dead for decades, companies like Telltale are still around,
doing nothing but adventure games, and they aren't going anywhere,
especially if they keep making games like The Walking Dead.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0pc;">
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0pc;">
Let's get something strait, I am a fan
of Telltale Games. I already admit that I have a positive opinion of them as a company and I like their games, but I am also aware of their flaws. To be entirely
honest, Telltale has the deserved reputation of making solid,
episodic adventure games. Not bad, not great, but solid. They are the
vanilla of adventure games. They have their
ups and downs, but overall they're just reliably and consistently
good. Nothing too special. Until now, at least.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0pc;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0pc;">
I'm sure you've heard a lot about The
Walking Dead, heck, there's already been one review here at Buy
Zombie. So I'll skip the overview of how to play and the basic plot
outline that I would normally do and skip strait to the review: The
Walking Dead isn't just Telltale's best game yet. So far it's shaping up to be one of
the best adventure games ever made. Now I say that with a couple
caveats. It's not a perfect game. There are a couple of plot
continuity errors that clash with the comics, so if you're a purist
they might upset you. The episodic nature of the game means that at
the time I wrote this article, you still have to wait a month in between
the release of each chapter, and being forced to wait will kill you, trust me. These are minor things, really, though. The biggest problem is much more
fundamental. You see, this game is entirely about choice. You make
decisions, and then you live with the consequences. The problem is
that so far, while there are plenty of choices you have to make that
do affect small things, after several playthroughs, they start
feeling artificial, since the plot still follows the same basic
track. Up until the end of the first chapter, very few choices seem
all that important.I should point out, though, that this criticism should be tempered by the fact that there are four more chapters, and that we are promised that our choices in the game will have a longer lasting effect on what happens later in the game as well, so it very well could be that by the time the fifth chapter rolls around, the different choices will actually end up creating a story that feels different with each playthrough.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0pc;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0pc;">
That aside, the rest of the game is simply incredible. The characters, especially Lee and Clementine, are believable. You really come to feel attached to Lee and Clem, more than in most games I've ever played. The tension is palpable. After the first 10 minutes or so of the game, right after the first encounter with the zombies, I had to pause the game because I was shaking so bad from an adrenaline rush. Granted, I'm more than a bit of a weenie when it comes to watching horror movies, but that scene was really very well-done. I wasn't expecting that level of suspense from the game, at all. The dialog is interesting, the story is compelling, the visuals are incredibly pleasing, despite the limitations of the game engine, and there are some surprisingly funny moments thrown into all of the drama and horror. And the emotional moments... wow, the emotional moments. There are a couple scenes that are simply incredible, especially when you're in the pharmacy office with Clem... it's hard to describe, and I don't want to spoil it for anyone, suffice to say that you'd never think that a scene in a video game about putting a band-aide on a finger could ever make you choke up with emotion. The setting, the content of what's being talked about, the background music... To whomever wrote that scene I say bravo, sir or ma'am... bravo.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0pc;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0pc;">
Bottom Line: Everyone's already talking about this game, and it lives up to the hype. I don't know if Telltale can keep the momentum up for this game, since the first episode set a pretty high standard. But I hope they can, because if they do, then The Walking Dead will go down as one of the greatest adventure games of all time.</div>Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-58472138327287195142012-06-17T15:54:00.005-07:002012-06-17T15:54:50.617-07:00The Walking Dead Board Game<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/thewalkingdeadgamecomponent.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/thewalkingdeadgamecomponent.jpg" /></a></div>
Please note that this is the rough draft for a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please check out <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2012/05/15/reviews-of-zombie-related-things/the-walking-dead-board-game-review/" target="_blank">the final draft of the review here</a>.<br />
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Given how popular AMC’s The Walking
Dead has become, it’s no surprise that it would branch out into
various forms of merchandising. This of the series what you will, you can't deny that it's become hugely popular. A board game based on the property was
inevitable, really. So it is that Cryptozoic Entertainment (most well-known for their Trading Card Game version of World of Warcraft) has brought us this game. But is it worth it? Let's find out.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
So the first thing you’ll notice when
you open the box is the smell. It’s not a bad smell, <i>per se</i>, but it
smells much more chemical than any other board game I’ve played.
That’s probably because of the board itself. Instead of the normal
cardboard that most board game boards are made out of, TWD has what
is essentially a giant mouse pad for its board. This was an
interesting choice. It has some advantages, such as not having to
worry about it sliding around on your table at any given moment. But
it also has some disadvantages, such as needing to be rolled up
tightly to be put back in the box, which leads to one end of the
board being curved in just a little bit. It’s not a big thing, but
it is a little annoying. All in all, I’d say the pros and cons
of this design choice balance each other out. It’s definitely worth noting, but it’s
not really a reason to buy or not buy the game. The rest of the
game components are far more traditional. You have one die, three
decks of cards, several plastic clip stands for the player markers,
and cardboard pieces for everything else. It seems pretty high-quality, all of it. Nice pictures, sturdy cardboard. It should last quite a while under normal use.<br />
There are six character cards and corresponding player markers. Each is one of the main characters from the show, and each has a unique ability that can be used once during the game. While the abilities are supposed to differentiate the different characters from each other, their limited use and, frankly, limited usefulness don't do much to make playing the game any different with the different characters. My group rarely even used the powers. They had so little effect on the game that it was easy to forget about them. Though I guess it is nice that there are six options to choose from with a maximum of four players. At least that way you're unlikely to get stuck with a character you don't like. (Please no jokes about not liking any of the characters. If that's the case, why are you playing this game?)<br />
The point of the game is to be the first survivor to visit all four corners of the board, collect a token at each corner, and get back to base camp alive. Sounds easy, but as things are in TWD, it's a lot harder than it sounds </div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Most of the time, you’ll only be
using two of the decks of cards: the scrounge deck and the encounter deck.
Scrounge cards generally are useful items that help you fight off
zombies, while the Encounter cards are, for the most part, zombies that
you have to fight off. Combat is simple: You roll the die, if you roll equal to or above the power of the encounter card, you win. Rolling a 6 is always a win. If you fail, then you lose of of your ally tokens. (That is, they got bitten and turned into a walker.) If you have no ally tokens left, then you got bit and turn into a walker. Congratulations. The problem is that most walker cards are have at least a power six or higher. You can increase your odds by using the various weapons you can find in the scrounge pile, which you add to your die roll. But be careful. The encounter deck (and therefore the zombies) get reshuffled when it runs out, but the same is not true of the Scrounge deck, so once those cards have been used, they're probably gone for good.<br />
Oh, it might be good of me to mention that unless you land on one of the lucky "No Encounter" spaces on the board, you have at least one encounter every turn. It's possible that you might have two or even three, if you're really unlucky. At each corner, you always have two encounters before you can claim the token at that corner and move on to the next corner.<br />
That's the rules in a nutshell. Pretty simple, really. While you'll definitely want to read to rulebook to get all the finer points of the game, especially about the rules for when somebody turns into a walker, since that's not as straightforward as it seems at first. Overall, The Walking Dead Board Game really is a rather simplistic game. In terms of complexity, I'd say it falls somewhere between Candyland and Monopoly. Seriously, if it weren't for the fact that this is a Walking Dead licensed game with some decently gory pictures on the cards, I'd swear it was a Parker Brothers family game. Now that's not necessarily a bad thing. I mean I loved those games as a kid and I honestly don't mind playing most of them if that's what the rest of the group is up for, but personally I crave games that are a little more complicated.<br />
<br />
Bottom Line: Whether or not you'll like this game really comes down to what kind
of a game you’re looking for. If you’re looking for a more
hardcore or nerdy, or a more European-style board game, then this really isn’t
the game for you. If you want something a bit more casual and simple, something
that’s quick to learn, then you'll definitely want to check it out. </div>Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-23636154061895626152012-05-10T20:52:00.000-07:002012-05-10T20:52:35.800-07:00Zombie; [sic] a madness<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/SCAN0001.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="232" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/SCAN0001.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
Note, this is the rough draft for a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2012/03/19/reviews-of-zombie-related-things/zombie-madness-review/" target="_blank">go ahead and read the final draft over there</a>. It's a great website and source for zombie news.<br />
<br />
This book is difficult for me to explain. You see, I tend to find faults even with books I like, and I have to hold myself back sometimes to make sure I'm not criticizing something that really doesn't need to be criticized. Part of it is my training as an editor and part of it is me being a critical person in general. It really helps me a lot if I'm getting paid to help someone improve their work. Not so much when I'm reading a book for the sake of it. Before I talk about this book, I need to explain a few things about writing and publishing.<br />
<a name='more'></a></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
If you've ever worked at a slush pile for any sort of magazine, journal, or publisher, you know that you find all sorts of writing; from surprisingly good to the worst of the worst. A good slush pile (assuming it doesn't get too many submissions) has its reviewers give the author a quick review and a couple pointers on how to improve their work. That's why if you can't find or afford a good freelance editor, it's still a good idea to submit to various venues. If nothing else, you might at least get a few good pointers. If you feel that your work isn't ready for submission then at the very least you should have people who have a good grasp of grammar and who aren't close relations or friends look your manuscript over. That's writing groups are for. A good writing group includes people you know, but not too well, who will give you good, constructive advice. The worst writing there, generally, is written by people who don't understand how poor their writing is and only have family members and close friends check their book over. More often than not, they will just say that it's great because they either do not know better or they don't want to hurt your feelings.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
This book is one of those books where the writer went about the entire writing process wrong. He went so far as to self-publish his book well before it resembled anything even remotely publishable. There is simply so much wrong with the book that it's hard to know where to start, so I'll begin with the low-hanging fruit and work my way up.<br />
Punctuation: You know when you see that the title of a work introduces the sub-title with a semi-colon that you're in for an interesting ride. If nothing else, the author has already shown that they don't know their basic punctuation. I mean, sure, most people don't really know how to use a semi-colon. But most people should know that a sub-title is introduced by a colon. Semi-colons really shouldn't be in the picture. But that's only the beginning. The book is littered with semi-colons, and not a single one is used correctly. I could chalk this up to overzelousness on the part of the author, heavens knows that I've seen more than my share f people who want to use more obscure punctuation in an attempt to look more educated than they are, but the author shows a rather strong dedication to poor use of almost all punctuation. Commas, possessive apostrophes, whatever. You name it, he abuses it. About the only thing he does use correctly on a consistent basis is the period. Trust me, I wish I were joking or even exaggerating in the slightest about this.<br />
<br />
Next we have layout. Now here, we actually have something that is almost, but not quite, forgivable. The entire visual aspect of the book shows a lot of thought, creativity, and attention to detail. It's really obvious that he invested a lot of time to what the book was going to look like. There's a broken record motif, lots of dark and gory visuals that set the mood for the story and more. It should work. It should. But it doesn't. You see, most people don't realize this but there is a science to the layout of books, which for most books is all based around making the book both visually appealing but still easy to read. This book fails that second part mostly because 99% of the pictures are presented as a very strong watermark on every single page. Again, this wouldn't be quite as big of a problem if it weren't for the watermarks being so strong. I mean, if you were to make them just strong enough to see, but still transparent enough that they didn't overpower the text, then it wouldn't be such a big deal. But the watermarks <i>do</i> overpower the text. It's not impossible to read, but it is physically much more difficult to read than it should be. This is why most books are black text on a white background. It's much easier for people to read that way. There is a clear contrast between text and background. When the text is nearly the same color as that of the background, it gets pretty hard to read. Then there's the width of the book. I don't mean how many pages thick the book is, but the the actual width of the book in inches. You see, most books tend to be a uniform size with fairly uniform fonts. This is because it's easiest for people to read around 14 words (more or less) to a line. This book either breaks that rule by having more words per line than that, or by stretching the words across the page, breaking the connection by proximity. Then we have the page numbers. Or, more specifically, the lack thereof. I sincerely wonder how someone can you put that much thought into the visual aspect of a book and forget to include the page numbers. It's a pretty important design choice. In the end, I almost think that the book would have done much better as a comic book or graphic novel of sorts, since it would then eliminate almost all of the mistakes made in designing the layout. What stops me from saying that this book should have been a graphic novel is... well... the writing itself.<br />
<br />
The writing is... *sigh* To be honest, I tell people, without hyperbole, that this is quite possibly the worst book ever to be published. I'm sure that there are plenty of books out there that are just as bad if not far worse than this book, but I can't say that very many of those people went the self-publishing route that this guy did. This book doesn't even have the saving grace of being hilariously terrible, like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_argon" target="_blank">The Eye of Argon</a> or Twilight. No, this book is just poorly written all around. I have to admit that the ideas behind the book are interesting. It's about a hard-boiled, film noir-style P.I. who accidentally gets involved in a Cthulhuesque pact with some eldritch powers and may or may not be involved in starting the zombie apocalypse. It's actually kind of a cool idea. But the execution...? Not so cool.<br />
<br />
So, the book takes place in the 1920s and is presented as a series of letters and transcriptions from one psychologist to a friend of his. He presents it as a clear case of some form of insanity on the part of the protagonist. What else could you call the testimony of a man who claims to experience strange magics and flesh-eating corpses? I mean, the psychologist himself talks about how his hometown was overrun by insane cannibals and that the army's greatest weapons were useless against these madmen who would continue to attack soldiers with their bare hands despite having been shot dozens of times with large caliber bullets. I mean... Crazy men who can't die = totally cool since I saw it myself. But a man claiming to come back from the dead because of strange Chinese magic = Totally insane and everything he says is suspect. I'm just sayin'... if you saw with your own eyes that there were cannibal maniacs that would not lie down dead after taking more damage than a PCP junkie on a bender could... You should start re-thinking what you consider "within the realm of possibility." Anyway. The psychologist's "observations" are probably the least annoying part of the book. The transcriptions are where the poor writing really shines.<br />
<br />
I... I honestly don't know where to start. I mean, I can kind of get what's happening in the book, but it's not easy. Half of it is written in such a way that I have to re-read the page several times to get what happened, and the rest of it is written so that I'm not sure who certain people are or why they're there. Like the one guy and his boat. So the protagonist is in New York City running away from a giant horde of zombies. He manages to get away from them by jumping over a fence and running to the dock. Apparently the only available boat has some guy there, just standing on the dock next to it. I guess that he owns the boat and then the protagonist and this guy leave together. The way the event plays out, though, asks so many questions that ARE NEVER ANSWERED. Who is this guy? Why is he waiting there? Was he waiting for the protagonist? If not, why hadn't he left with everyone else? It seems fairly clear that the entire city had been overrun with zombies, so how did this guy survive? Why hadn't he left when he had the chance? Did he just happen to still be there and took the protagonist with him because the protagonist had a gun? I don't know, and neither will you. Later on, the protagonist and a woman they picked up leave the boat to check out a house on shore. And then they leave for somewhere else by car. Now, they told the guy who owned the boat to wait for them, but they never went back to tell him they were leaving. What happens to him? I don't know, and frankly I don't care. Not because I'm a cruel, uncaring person, but because I was never given any reason to care about him. Or anyone else in the book, for that matter.<br />
<br />
As if this weren't confusing enough, the "action" scenes are even worse. In addition to being confusing to the extreme, they make no fraking sense, no matter how you cut it. How bad do you have to work at it to break me out my willing suspension of disbelief? I mean, I've already decided to accept dark powers from beyond resurrecting a bland and useless P.I. from the dead and giving him incredible, otherworldly powers while causing a hive-mind zombie apocalypse. I'm letting the book get away with quite a lot, and yet, even then, it can't seem to stay within acceptable breaks from "reality." So, I'm going out on a limb and assuming a lot about the author. First off, I'm assuming he's never used a gun, even for target practice. He may not have done ever more than seen them on TV or the movies. Why do I make this assumption? Well, for one thing, in the aforementioned "running away from a horde of zombies in NYC" incident he is able to shoot his revolver behind him (while running at top speed, keep in mind) and shoot some of the zombies' legs off at the knees. It's implied, though not explicitly stated, that each bullet takes off one leg. Not only is that targeting highly improbable... but shooting their legs clean off? With one bullet per leg? Really? Even worse than that is the fight scene between the protagonist and fat zombie chef and flying boomerang zombie girl.<br />
<br />
Oh, my goodness. I could write a book about everything that is wrong with these three to five pages, but I'll be as brief as I can. So, skipping past the first part of the fight, we'll move straight to the really weird part: So they've left the house and are standing in grass that goes up to the protagonist's hip. Let's say three feet tall, for the sake of argument. The chef chops his cleaver into the protagonist's shoulder and cleaves his left collarbone clean in two. That's all right, since he's got a shotgun in the other arm. While holding the shotgun in his other hand, he somehow manages to pull the cleaver out of his shoulder and throw it away... All right, whatever, I suppose it's not impossible. Then the chef zombie starts strangling him. So he takes the shotgun, shoves the barrel in the Chef zombie's face, and fires. All one-handed. Okay. Then the zombie's head explodes like a ripe melon. Whatever. So the chef zombie's headless body, which is apparently very, very fat, starts falling "slowly backwards". All right, that fight stretches belief a little bit, but not too much. That is until we add the little zombie girl who was attacking our protagonist synchronously.<br />
<br />
That's right, not "at the same time" but rather "synchronously." Now this is a big problem that many, many writers have. So please, if I could give one piece of advice to any budding writers out there and one piece only (besides "know grammar and punctuation rules" because, really, that should be a given), it would be "put your thesaurus down". Seriously, stick to words that you actually know unless you have a very good reason for using a less common word.<br />
<br />
Anyway, while all that is happening, a little zombie girl who can't be more than eight or ten years old is also attacking him. Specifically, she is digging her fingers into his left hip. In order to dislodge her he kicks her "square in the sternum" and she "le[aves] the grass, soar[ing] through the rain." Keep in mind, this is grass that's probably about three feet tall. And if she is "soaring" that means she's going some distance. Now, if you've been following this mentally and you think something might be amiss, you are right. I actually had to act this out with a couple friends to see what this looked like. Let me tell you, it makes absolutely no sense. To be able to kick a little girl who is digging her fingers into your hip "square in the sternum" with any amount of force is pretty dang hard, let alone doing that with enough force to send her "soaring" several feet into the air. Keeping in mind that while you're doing this you are also dealing with a broken collarbone and one-handedly shooting a large zombie in the face with a shotgun while said zombie is strangling you. And that's not the best part. Remember how I called her "boomerang zombie girl"? Well, you see, not only does she go "soaring" but she also manages to magically land directly under the fat chef zombie, getting trapped as the headless, fat chef zombie "plummets" down on top of her. First off, you may recall how the chef zombie was "falling slowly" earlier. But now it is "plummeting." I don't know about you, but when I think "plummet" I don't think "fall slowly." I think "falling with great force from a great distance." Second, you may also recall how the little girl zombie went "soaring through the rain." Now, to me, this says that the little girl goes some distance. At the very least, more than two or three feet. It doesn't matter where she was standing when she was kicked. If she is to land directly where the chef zombie falls, she has no choice but to break all the laws of physics that I know of and curve in her flight path. Perhaps even switch directions entirely while in flight. Keep in mind, the zombie chef did not take any steps backwards. He began to fall backwards immediately. Trust me, I acted this out as closely as possible to the text of the book. I wish I hadn't, but I did. It makes... NO SENSE! And that's just one example of the "action" scenes in this book.<br />
<br />
Now, this is just the prose. Imagine, if you will, that the dialog is even worse. Now, stop imagining, because it is. The dialog is melodramatic, confusing, and generally worthless. I could go on and give examples, but I don't want to punish anyone reading this review any more than I already have.<br />
<br />
You know, let me just get down to the heart of the matter. I've said it already and it needs to be said again: This book is terrible. It's a confusing, poorly-written mess. Maybe with the help of a good, paid developmental editor, and not a family member, it could be a decent book someday. As it is, though, it's just not worth your time. It's definitely not worth $40. Especially since the book ends with "To be continued..." I looked at those three words for about ten seconds, just dumbfounded. I was like... Seriously? I had to wade through that mess and I don't even get any closure? Poor form, book... poor form.<br />
<br />
<br />
Bottom line: There are several books of which it has been said "this is not a book to be set aside lightly, but thrown with great force." I wouldn't say that of this book, but only because I respect my walls too much. The best I can say for this book is that it does have some good ideas. Unfortunately, good ideas by themselves can't hold up a poorly-written story. Avoid this book at all costs.</div>Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-19391358486573641982012-05-10T20:43:00.001-07:002012-05-10T20:43:20.468-07:00Munchkin Zombies<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/xmunchkin_zombie.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/xmunchkin_zombie.jpg" width="216" /></a></div>
Note: This is the rough draft of a review I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">BuyZombie.com</a>. Please<a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2012/04/06/reviews-of-zombie-related-things/munchkin-zombies/" target="_blank"> go ahead and see the final draft over there.</a> It's a great website and resource for zombie news. <br />
<br />
<br />
The Munchkin franchise by Steve Jackson Games is one of the most venerable in gaming today. It doesn't have the lengthy history of D&D or even Magic: the Gathering, but it wouldn't exist without them. The whole point of the game is that you are a munchkin... That is, you are a role-player who doesn't view RPGs as fun games and an exercise in improvisational acting, but rather as fun games where you kill monsters and take their stuff by maximizing your stats and dice rolls. There are quite a few versions of the game. The most well-known version is the original fantasy version, but there are versions for science fiction, kung-fu movies, the Cthulhu mythos, the Axe Cop webcomic, and more. However in all of those sets you play as the "heroes" killing monsters. Munchkin Zombies is a more recent set where instead of playing as a human survivor in the zombie apocalypse, you play as the zombies, hunting down humans so you can eat their brains.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>If you've ever played Munchkin, you will already have an idea of what to expect. If you've never played Munchkin, here are some of the things you can expect:<br />
<br />
Ridiculous, overpowered, and ridiculously overpowered weapons to give you an advantage.<br />
More horrible puns & pop culture references than you can shake a stick at.<br />
A little bit of cooperation.<br />
A lot of backstabbing.... lots and lots of backstabbing. (Don't worry, though, unlike other games where backstabbing is encouraged, I've almost never seen people get upset at the backstabbing in this game.)<br />
<br />
The game plays rather simply. There are two piles of cards: doors and treasures. You start with four cards from each pile in your hand and can immediately play any cards that will give you a bonus. At the start of your turn you break down a door (to get at the humans inside) by drawing the top card of the doors pile and showing it to everyone. If it's a "monster" (i.e. a human or any other enemy. Zombies uses the same terminology as the other Munchkin games for rules consistency, but really you're mostly attacking innocent humans), you have to fight it. You do this by comparing your level and any bonuses you have to the enemy's level and any bonuses it has. There are also plenty of one-shot cards that can increase or decrease either your fighting level or the monster's fighting level. If you can't beat it on your own then you can ask one other player for help and they will add their level and bonuses, though you might have to bribe them into helping. This is where cooperation and backstabbing comes into play. You see, each monster you kill makes go up one level, and the first person to level 10 wins, and only the person who actually kills the monster (or in this case, eats the human's brains) gets to go up a level in combat. So maybe someone else playing doesn't mind you going up a level, but they'll ask for something from you in return, like some treasures or items. But if someone else does mind, they might play curses other cards to sabotage your chances of winning. Don't worry too much though, most people don't start sabotaging you until you're around level 7 or so. If after everything happens, your level plus bonuses beats the level plus bonuses of what you faced off against, you go up a level and draw as many treasures as it tells you to. If there aren't any monsters inside then you can "loot the room" and draw another door card into your hand without showing it to anyone. Once you've drawn cards, you can play any that will help you out, and then discard down to five cards in your hand, if you have more.<br />
<br />
And that's about it. The rules are pretty simple, once you get down to it. You'll definitely want to take a look at the rulebook first, though, since they can be confusing the first time you play, but you'll catch on quickly and feel like a pro after a short while. And while the game, by itself, is actually a lot of fun, the best part are the jokes and pop culture references. Word of warning, though: do not play any version of Munchkin if you are allergic to puns. For instance, there are cards that will let you go up a level without having to fight a monster. One such is called "Hot Meal", and it shows a zombie running after a busty redhead in skimpy clothing. Or the "Healthy Snack", which shows a zombie chasing a man in jogging gear. The funniest part is probably the fact that when people groan while playing, you're never sure if it's because they figured out a joke, or if they're just getting into character. You'll also recognize such copyright-friendly cards as "Small Town Sheriff" and the "Motorcycle Gang" among others.<br />
<br />
The game is meant for 2 - 6 players, and I've found that the closer to 6 you can get, the better. A large part of the game is the interaction between players, and the more players you have, the more options there end up being.<br />
<br />
Bottom Line: Munchkin Zombies is a fun and funny game that's a hoot to play with larger groups. If you like zombies, bad puns, and quirky games, you can't go wrong with Munchkin Zombies.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-81072870462453620222012-05-05T18:20:00.003-07:002012-05-05T18:20:57.226-07:00Apologies once again.Sorry. I doubt anyone is reading this blog anymore, but just in case... What started out as a short delay has turned into a death of anything, mostly due to real life rearing it's ugly head. I'm not sure when I'll get back on my weekly review schedule. I will be posting stuff up sporadically in the next little bit, but I'm just not sure how dedicated I can be to this blog for now. Which is a funny and kind of silly thing to say in the first place. Seeing as how I made this blog for myself as practice and nothing else... I dunno, it seems strange to apologize to anyone other than myself. Oh, well. We'll see what happens. Until something does though, well, you'll know that my circumstances remain stressful.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-80744509459128972752012-03-23T18:46:00.000-07:002012-03-23T18:46:14.176-07:00Pink Panther remake<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/220px-Pinkpanther_mp.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/220px-Pinkpanther_mp.jpg" width="215" /></a></div>I wasn't exactly sure what to expect from the movie when I first saw it, I mean, it's got quite the pedigree to live up to, ya know? But I also had to consider: Did I really want to see an exact clone of the original movie? <br />
<br />
I was happy that Steve Martin played the part of Clouseau. I felt that if there was only one guy who could pull of this movie, it was him. I'm not sure if he did pull it off, though. Years later, and my jury is still out on that subject. I hasn't too happy about Beyonce, since she was obviously only added for sex appeal (and I personally don't find simply not wearing clothes to be all that "sexy," not to mention the fact that I don't think she's nearly as pretty as everyone seems to think she is. Oh well, to half-remember a quote from Ringworld: the minority is always insane.) <br />
Anyway... moving on...<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
I wanted to review the movie in a context that didn't pit it against the originals, and I finally realized that that would be impossible, so I will try and be as unbiased as I can be, but I will, of necessity, have to compare it to the originals.<br />
<br />
The movie runs at a much faster, more modern, pace. Sometimes that was just fine, but at others it made the movie feel too rushed. Not so much that it was a major distraction, but it was a distraction. They also threw in a lot more action, ("a lot" being relative, considering that the originals contained zero to none... discounting the Cato fight scenes, which were arguably the best parts of the original movies,) which was a mixed blessing.<br />
<br />
I was sorry to see that Cato was not included in the movie, but he didn't show up in the originals either until the third movie. (I think it was the third movie, at least. I'm too lazy to double-check.) I was also kinda surprised that Clouseau's assistant wasn't Hercule. Not that he was in very many of the originals, but you'd think that they'd go for whatever ties they could get.<br />
<br />
The opening credits were nice... I guess. They had a few good moments, but, really, they needed a lot more work. They seemed choppy. The originals were always fluid and almost told a story by themselves. This new opening was just a bunch of random scenes.<br />
<br />
But my biggest beef with this re-make is the fact that Clouseau actually solved the mystery all by himself. In the originals, one of the parts that made the Pink Panther movies what they were was the fact that it was this entirely incompetent detective (after the first movie, at least,) who manages to solve the mystery in spite of his detective skills. It's as though his poor detective skills which always led him in the wrong direction managed to paradoxically be exactly what he needed to solve the case. But in this new one, even though he was mostly incompetent, he was still able to use his brain and real detective skills to solve the case on his own. That's not how Clouseau is. I may not have wanted a clone of the originals, but if there is one thing they shouldn't have changed, it was that.<br />
<br />
That being said, I did enjoy the movie. It was consistently funny, as is to be expected of Steve Martin. (Steve Martin did do an excellent job, I'm just not sure he did an excellent job being Clouseau.) There were more than a few parts that had me laughing hard enough to miss hearing a few lines and even the "groaner" jokes weren't all that bad.<br />
<br />
Bottom Line: The movie did, more or less, what I expected of it: It made me laugh. Was it a great movie? No. Was it a good movie? Yes. Is it a true or a worthy successor to the originals? Well... That's quite a different question. I would say... somewhat. I don't think that it's nearly as good as the originals, but, having said that, I do think that it could stand amongst the originals and not be ashamed, if nothing else. (After all, it was a lot better than "Son of the Pink Panther." Make of that what you will.)<br />
<br />
<br />
P.S. In case you are curious, I have not seen the second Steve Martin P.P. movie, and I'm not sure when I will get around to it, so I am not commenting on its quality at all.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-88323097530863458782012-03-23T08:23:00.000-07:002012-03-23T08:23:48.386-07:00Casshern<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/casshern_wallpaperweb.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/casshern_wallpaperweb.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><i><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">Casshern</span></i> is a Japanese action flick, supposedly. However there's very little action. I've seen the anime <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">OAV</span> that it's based on, so I was expecting a strait-up, mindless, blow-up-robots-with-your-bare-hands action movie. What I got was... <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">weird</span>. I mean... the best word I have to describe the movie is "<span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">weird</span>." There was so much that happened in the movie that made no sense whatsoever to me. Even after everything was said and done and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">everyone's</span> motives were revealed and all the secrets in the open, it still made almost no sense. And the amount of robot-destruction was at a minimum. I spent most of the movie scratching my head and being disappointed at how little action there was. I'm not against non-action flicks, but I had certain expectations, you see, and those expectations were not met.<br />
<br />
Yet, despite that, I think I really loved the movie. <br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
Maybe I didn't enjoy it per <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">se</span>, but the movie touched me. You see, throughout the movie, everyone makes bad choices and does everything they can to advance their own agendas, usually while hampering those of others. And not in a nice way either. It was vicious. The various "bad guys" want revenge in quite literally the worst way possible; <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">Casshern</span> (the good guy) really was just trying to stop the violence and killing, usually ending up just making things worse; his father is consumed by grief, making him perform atrocities; the government is about as controlling and evil as it can be with the several government people we meet being evil and conniving, ranging from selfish to well intentioned extremists. And by the end, everyone dies. Some more than once.<br />
It was rather depressing. Yet what got me was at the very end of the movie...<br />
<span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">Warning: Spoilers ahead: </span><br />
<span class="blsp-spelling-corrected">We are presented with a montage of clips of all the characters acting in their exact opposite roles, spliced in with the shot of the protagonist and his fiance being taken away in a beam of light to another world (I think). It shows the son who betrayed his infirm father instead is caring for him lovingly; the simpleton who is confused at all the violence surrounding him is happy, sitting on a bench and learning simple joys; The protagonist and his fiance just being together in peace. A bunch of other stuff like that: All of these people who did horrible things to each other and to humanity, almost all of who were either sad, angry, evil, or had given up hope all were doing the opposite. They were all kind, good people and you could just sense the peace and happiness come off of them. The beautiful music accompanying the montage helped a lot too. It was really and unexpectedly emotional. And when contrasted to the previous 99% of the movie, it was all the more powerful. Kind of like being beaten with negative emotion nerf bats for two hours and then suddenly Mike Tyson punches you in the nose with a positive emotion boxing glove. The emotions it stirred up in me made me want to be a better person, to re-evaluate my life and change it for the better. It made me want to improve the condition of my fellow man and mankind in general. For lack of a better term, it was a spiritual experience. The only reason I might hesitate to use that term is because, except for the last few minutes, its a very, <i>very</i> dark film. But, then again, life can also be a very, very dark place.</span><br />
<br />
<span class="blsp-spelling-corrected">Bottom Line: I would hesitate only ever so much to suggest that you go out and watch this film. Let me say that this film is very, very worth watching. Just, don't expect it to make sense. If you go into it with the expectation of you will not understand what is going on or why, then you will enjoy this movie a lot more. I don't know if it will touch you in the same way it touched me, but the potential is there. Pay more attention to your emotions than your brain when you watch this, and you just might be able to make sense of it.</span>Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-18022302274990380222012-03-13T19:35:00.001-07:002012-03-13T19:36:08.370-07:00Mall of Horror board game<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/mallofhorror.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/mallofhorror.jpg" /></a></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Note: This is just the rough draft of a review that I wrote for <a href="http://buyzombie.com/">buyzombie.com</a>. Please check out the polished article here: <a href="http://www.buyzombie.com/2012/03/05/reviews-of-zombie-related-things/mall-of-horror-review/">http://www.buyzombie.com/2012/03/05/reviews-of-zombie-related-things/mall-of-horror-review/</a><br />
<br />
<br />
If the Zombie Apocalypse has taught us anything, it’s that a shopping mall is just about the worst place to be in the event of the breakdown of society caused by hordes of the flesh-eating undead. Mall of Horrors wants to make sure it’s a lesson you never, ever forget.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Mall of horrors is a board game for 3 to 6 players where each player takes control of a group of survivors competing with the other groups of survivors for, well... survival. Eventually rescue will arrive, but not until only a small fraction of the starting survivors remain.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"></div><a name='more'></a>There are six different rooms you can hide your survivors in, and each turn you have to move your survivors around. But each turn, zombies show up to different rooms at random or when certain conditions are met, and when there are more zombies trying to get into a room than there are survivors trying to barricade it, the room gets overrun and someone gets eaten. This is where the game gets really cutthroat. You see, the survivor is chosen by vote, so if you’re in a room that gets overrun, make sure you have more survivors in that room than anyone else if you want to keep yours alive. Once the victim is chosen the other survivors hightail it out of there while the zombies are busy eating. The good news, at least, is that the zombies then clear out, so you it's relatively safe to start hiding in there again. A couple rooms are more advantageous than others, such as the security room, which lets players there vote on who gets to be security chief for the turn, or the parking lot, which allows you to search for cards to help you against the zombies. Of course, a couple rooms are less advantageous, such as the grocery store, which has so many entrances that it will always be overrun after four zombies besiege it, or the parking lot, where the zombies will always eat someone there when a survivor is present.<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">On the topic of survivors, your groups each consist of a tough jock, a crazy guy with a gun, a blond bimbo, and an optional innocent little girl. Each has a different point value and special rule. The jock is worth a lot and can keep out more zombies, the guy with the gun is worth fewer but has an extra vote, the blonde bimbo is worth the most points by far but attracts more zombies, and the little girl does nothing at all and is worth the least amount of points by far, but you feel like an incredibly horrible person (or at least you should) if you let her die. She’s just an innocent little girl. She even has a teddy bear and everything. How could you let her die? But the question the game asks isn't "What will you do to survive?" The question it asks is "What will you do to win?"</div>So, anyway, after the initial setup, the security chief rolls four dice and keeps the results secret at first. These represent which rooms more zombies are going to be showing up at. If the security chief was elected that turn, then they can look at the dice to see where they are arriving to. This represents having access to the security cameras. Then everyone secretly chooses a room to move one of their survivors to. Once everyone has chosen, everyone moves a survivor to that room, and then the zombies show up. The dice are revealed and a new zombie is placed at each corresponding number. If one room has more survivors than any other, then the zombies smell all that fresh meat and an extra zombie shows up. If one room has more blond bimbos than any other than all the screaming attracts another zombie. This is when you check to see if there are enough zombies to overrun the room's defenses and eat someone. So, whatever you do, try not to end up with a single room full of blondes. They'll end up as lunch for sure. If one room ends up with no survivors in it and 8 zombies show up, then the room is considered to be completely overrun and you can't send anyone there anymore.The Parking Lot is the exception, as it can have any number of zombies.<br />
The various cards help out, either by killing zombies, giving extra votes, letting you move a survivor to a different room, and stuff like that. The biggest problem with the cards is that it's so hard to get them. You have to have someone in the parking lot, and which is the quickest way to get your survivor killed. But, every time you do draw cards, you get two, one to keep and one to give to another player, so it's also a nice way to buy votes and keep your survivors alive.<br />
Once enough survivors have been killed, the army shows up with a helicopter rescue, and points are tallied. Ties are broken by number of cards still in your hand. If that's still a tie, then the tie stands.<br />
<br />
Overall, it's a fun game. Just make sure that you and your friends can agree that it's a just a game and no one will get mad. I'm not saying that people will get mad, but you need to be aware of whether or not your friends are capable of playing such a cutthroat game. I know a few people that really can't, and therefore I make sure never to play this game with them. You see, there's a difference between winning a game by being luckier in your dice rolls or have a better strategy than the other players and winning a game where you win by being a better politician and voting all your friends to a gruesome death.<br />
There are a couple of problems, but they are rather minor. First off, the little girl is considered an optional rule, if you want to make things last longer when you have fewer players, so only half of the "teams" have a little girl. And while I suppose it makes sense for the Men in Black to not have a little girl with them, why don the cops have a little girl while the rednecks don't? It kind of limits which color you can play with three players.<br />
Also, the game only comes with thirty zombie figures. While I haven't yet run out of zombies playing the game, I've come very close a couple of times.<br />
Finally, the game is French in origin, I believe, (if anyone knows differently, please correct me) and the fact that it was translated into English shows. It's not a terrible translation. In fact it's pretty good, but there are a few tells that, to the trained eye, are rather glaring and obvious. I don't want to strait out accuse them of not hiring a native English speaker to translate the rulebook, because it is entirely possible for a native speaker to make such mistakes/translation choices. However I would say that a few romance language artifacts found in the translation mixed with the stereotype of French pride would put the odds in favor them having stuck with a native French speaker. <br />
<br />
Bottom Line: The game isn't new; it came out in 2005 and I think that it might be out of print, but if can find it on your local store shelves, you haven't had a chance to check it out yet, give it a spin. However, since the publisher recently announced that they're soon going to releasing a "sequel" called City of Horror, you may want to wait for that to come out. If it's anything like Mall of Horror, it's probably something you'll want to check out. We'll try and have coverage for you as more news appears.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-28123392302600035312012-03-11T18:56:00.000-07:002012-03-11T18:56:38.035-07:00Puss In Boots: The Three Diablos<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/31843109118297611420.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="180" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/31843109118297611420.png" width="320" /></a></div>So, as you know, i enjoyed the Puss In Boots stand along movie. My wife enjoyed it much more than I did, however, and as one of her birthday presents, I got it for us on DVD. Since it was only a couple of bucks more, I spent the extra money to get the pack with the new "The Three Diablos" DVD short. was it worth the extra money? Well...<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>In the end I would say it was. It was a fun, funny, short little tale. I've found that Dreamworks' 20-30 minute shorts have been pretty high-quality for the most part, which really surprised me, because usually when companies crank out shorts like this, it's just to cash in on the franchise and they don't bother with quality too much. Well, I'm sure that Dreamworks is just cashing in on the franchise, but they really haven't been skimping on the quality all that much.<br />
<br />
Anyway, TTD takes place immediately after the events in the story, where he is captured by the guards of the neighboring kingdom. Instead of being thrown in prison, however, the queen of that land begs him to retrieve the kingdom's (queendom's?) crown jewel, which had been stolen by a French thief named "The Whisperer" (<span style="font-size: xx-small;">Whisper his name for the full effect.</span>) The only clue as to his whereabouts are his three assistants, who were captured. They are possibly the three cutest and meanest kittens you will ever see outside of real life. As they head out with Puss, it will be seen who learns the most and who teaches the most.<br />
<br />
As i said, the short itself is pretty high-quality. It's funny, interesting, and despite only being 11 minutes long, doesn't feel rushed for the first 8 minutes. It feel rushed at the very end, but it ends quickly enough that it doesn't detract too much from the rest of the story. My biggest problem is that it brings up and worsens a couple of issues I had with Puss in Boots, the movie: When does the movie take place? Before or after the Shrek movies? Because part of the conflict is Puss trying to decide if he can be a good guy or if he's doomed to remaining a bad guy forever. He decides that he can be a good guy. but then, why is it in Shrek 2 he seems to be a bad guy? Now, granted, you could argue either way as to what he started out as in Shrek 2, but I read him as being more of a bad guy than a good guy. I mean, hanging out in the seediest of seedy taverns, hanging out with bad guys, and working as a killer-for-hire? Seems pretty shifty to me.<br />
<br />
Other than that I do have three little things that bug me:<br />
1. I wish the climactic fight scene had gone on longer. It was actually really cool, and they could have done a lot more with it.<br />
2. The three diablos are kittens, and therefore should be "diablitos".<br />
3. Use of the word "Grazie". Now, I can understand that most Americans do not speak Italian. I also understand the concept of "anglicization of words". However, from an artistic point of view, I cannot condone the abuse of this word. You see, most Americans pronounce this word "grats-ee." However, in Italian it's pronounced "grats-ee-ey." Now, if an American character were saying it, it would be fine, but when supposedly Italian characters, who speak fluent Italian, pronounce it "grats-ee"... we'll that just bugs the heck out of me.<br />
<br />
Bottom Line: Despite my nitpicking, The Three Diablos is well worth your time and the few extra bucks it costs to buy it packaged with the Puss In Boots movie. If you plan on buying the Puss In Boots movie, go ahead and get The Three Diablos while you're at it.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-34704717364685248232012-03-11T17:48:00.000-07:002012-05-19T15:27:53.368-07:00Delve Deeper<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/TeamSelect.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="180" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/TeamSelect.png" width="320" /></a></div>
Delve Deeper is a hexagonal tile-based strategy board game for the computer made by Lunar Giant Studios. You take control of a group of 5 dwarves tasked by their king to dig down into various mountains and deliver their wealth back to him. Along the way you'll have to dig tunnels, mine resources, pick up treasures, and fight all sorts of various enemies, including other teams of dwarves.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
The first thing to know is that Delve Deeper does not take itself seriously. From the king's "commentary" to the various treasures you can turn in, the whole game is very tongue-in-cheek, and that's what makes the game work. The game is a pretty solid strategy game on its own, but the humor is what makes you coming back despite the very limited multiplayer system.<br />
<br />
As mentioned, you have to dig tunnels by placing the appropriate tiles on the map to expand existing tunnels or connect them to new tunnel systems you haven't explored yet. There are three levels to each mountain: Dirt, Stone, and Deep. Each successive level has more and better riches, but also more and tougher enemies. Probably the most important mechanic to remember, though, is that of hanging lanterns. As the game starts, the only places on the map that are lit up are the starting locations. As your dwarves end their turn (conscious) on an unlit hex, they'll set up a lantern, bringing light to that area. This is important because enemies spawn in dark areas. The more light you have, the less chance you have of a bunch of goblins or a gelatinous cube sneaking up on your dwarves. This is made more complicated by the fact that if you want to win, you can't usually dawdle and mine everything nearby. You've got to delve deeper and deeper for the good stuff.<br />
<br />
You're given 3 types of dwarves, Fighters, who have a lot of hit points and do a lot of damage but are slow and can't carry too much, scouts, who carry very little and don't have many hit points but are insanely fast, and miners, who are average in everything except that they can carry a ton of stuff at once. Depending on the map and your strategy, you'll want to choose which ones you take wisely, since you only get five dwarves total.<br />
<br />
Delve Deeper's biggest problem is a lack of computer-to-computer multiplayer. As it is, you can only do hot-seat multiplayer, which I've personally never found very fun. But maybe Lunar Giant will make a sequel with internet, or at least LAN, multiplayer capabilities.There are a few other things that would be nice to include in the game, but really, it's pretty solid as-is.<br />
<br />
Oh, there's a lot more to the game, like healing fairies, gnome bankers, and the treasure buying "oogler" monsters, but I'll let you figure all that out on your own. There's a decent tutorial built in for the first time you play the game, so don't worry too much about it.<br />
<br />
Bottom Line: Delve Deeper is a fun, inexpensive game. And it's humor and cartoony graphics make it a real hoot to play again and again. It also helps if you have a two-year-old in the house who is always asking you to play it so he can watch.Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611506092498083971.post-90543927990651085322012-03-11T16:33:00.001-07:002012-03-11T19:23:00.951-07:00Full Metal Jousting<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/full-metal-jousting-7.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l77/cptsqweky/full-metal-jousting-7.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>So, I'm not normally someone who really goes for "reality" television. It's some of the least realistic stuff out there, ironically. There have been a couple I've liked, such as Who Wants to Be a Superhero and a couple of the various talent shows out there, and I've been meaning to try that post-apocalyptic one... what's it called? The Colony. But I think I've found a new reality show that I actually like. It's called Full Metal Jousting, <a href="http://www.history.com/shows/full-metal-jousting" target="_blank">and you can watch it on the History Channel.</a><br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
So Full Metal jousting is all about bringing medieval jousting back as a modern, extreme sport. Apparently it already kind of does exist, (outside of Ren Faires, even!) but only on a very small scale. So this series is an attempt to both train more professional jousters as well as raising awareness, and hopefully popularity, for the sport.<br />
<br />
So they found 16 participants from various backgrounds, ranging from tournament jousting and rodeo work to stuff as generic as being an ex-marine. Things are about what you'd expect. They get broken up into two teams, and each week one person from each team faces off, simulating a tournament. Eventually it will be the last two and the winner gets $100,000. Each episode shows them training a bit more and then ends with the joust. Intertwined with the interesting scenes are the apparently obligatory "drama" scenes where we see the various personality clashes that invariably arrive when you get 16 people into tight quarters with little room for avoiding each other. But honesty, I don't care for those parts. They just detract from the interesting parts: the training and the actual joust itself.<br />
<br />
Bottom Line: Overall, I'm quite enjoying the show. I dunno if I would ever pay to go to a jousting tournament on my own, but I'd say that so far the show is more interesting than the move "A Knight's Tale". (And I rather liked that movie.)Ross K. Wolfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18101103802486896600noreply@blogger.com0