The Limit

As something of a film buff, one of my interests is viewing extreme or so-called transgressive cinema. Always looking to see what is new and different (dare I say hip) in the genres most likely to be controversial or offensive. Usually this is in horror or 'thrillers'.

Currently France with its loosely-grouped 'New French Extremity' films is the forefront of my, uh, educational viewing. Most of these I've found to be pretty good, delivering as advertised; shocking, compelling horror that goes places US releases fear to tread.

I have a strong stomach and an ability to handle (at least for the viewing duration) different messages, themes, and subtexts... but if done 'effectively' I still react to this material something like the way intended by the film. All the stuff I've seen has certainly built some level of tolerance and immunity to screen horrors, but I'm not jaded. All my social and cultural boundaries are intact and in place, I'm just able to lift them up enough to see whatever screen controversy is next on the list. I don't really like poor filmmaking per se, and there are plenty of extreme films that are just dumb or cruel. Occasionally one comes along that makes me think about acceptable limits.

I think I've just seen the signpost for my limit. The film 'Irreversible'.

With all the difficult-to-handle stuff I've seen the first twenty minutes of this movie probably the most harrowing of all. Movies like 'Salo', although well-made, are held out as immoral and repulsive. 'Wolf Creek' is considered utterly bleak and misogynist. 'The Heart is Deceitful Above All Things' is perverse and nihilistic. Yep. Maybe true for some and all depending on your view. I can see the point for anyone reviling these films for the above listed reasons and more.
But they are all pretty tame, ultimately, compared to 'Irreversible'. There aren't many things I wish I could un-see... and I probably don't really want to un-see this movie either, but I'm damn close. As any internet search can tell you, the movie is about the events leading up to a rape and subsequent revenge, but told in reverse chronological order. A very early film in what would become The New French Extremity, the movie is well-made (apart from an overabundance of swirly between-scenes camera work) not some back alley straight-to video-quickie, though it looks it. It is grimy-looking on purpose, with improvised (French) dialogue that was effective for me.

The first scenes are set in a gay 'club' and features some disturbing scenes and characters, (the place is called The Rectum, so you figure out what kind of activity's going on there), as the two male leads march through the place looking for a rapist. These rapid-fire handheld shots culminate in a very effective, horrific act of violence that makes the viewer flinch the way seeing real violence on a war documentary might. So that in itself is pretty grim.

But moments later, Monica Belucci becomes the victim in the rape scene. THE rape scene. Notorious. It is nine excruciating minutes of unblinking, hyper-realistic degradation that the viewer is given absolutely no respite from. The camera just sits at ground level as if dropped there by some passerby in a hurry to get off the location. I guess Belucci should get some kind of kudos for having the guts to do this scene. She's been interviewed dozens of times about it, and seems pretty unaffected. But husband (and co-star as her vengeful boyfriend) WAS affected. Belucci asked him not to be on set when this was filmed, and he was in tears during the screening at Cannes.

I want to give props to the filmmakers too, because the film IS some kind of art, but it is difficult. Art can be difficult, I know.

The rape isn't the only thing in the movie, the rest of it is interesting, and it does some cool things with foreshadowing in reverse. The story would probably be strictly exploitation fare if it weren't for the methodology in ordering the scenes. Belucci and Cassel (and the third lead) are all pretty funny and kind with each other... which of course makes the shit you've already seen even worse. The film shows Cassel just go ballistic and loose a bunch of verbal abuse on gays, a transsexual, and a chinese cab driver. I won't say his behavior is literally justifiable, but the subsequent scenes make it more and more understandable... and I'd say the more idyllic stuff that comes AFTER the rape make the point perhaps even more because they show how HE thinks about her... what he may have lost.

But the rape dominates. It just fricking sprawls all over this movie. As it is supposed to. And given the absolutely horrible way it is depicted I'm not sure I CAN give props to the filmmakers. There is a message in here about the fleeting nature of ordinary lives... maybe even a 'hey ladies, be smart when you're alone' deal in there somewhere. I could definitely see this movie inspiring some women to think twice about their own security. Hopefully constructively. But it just hard to drum up a recommendation on any level for this thing. I suppose it could be used to 'teach' someone how horrible and destructive the crime is... I dunno.

I actually feel bad about the guy playing the rapist. It'd be easy to say he has something in him to be able to play the part... he sure is 'good' at it. I'm sure he had to dig down and do it the same way Belucci did. And the scene is one long take. She said it was done like six times or something. I'd feel horrible about 'going there' to do that scene... like Bill Moseley did during certain scenes of 'The Devil's Rejects'.

Couple of additonal notes about 'Irreversible'. Screened at Cannes, the movie was extremely divisive, as one would expect. No one 'liked' it, but some people walked out (fair enough) and others shouted at the screen or at the filmmakers afterward... including Belucci. Now I can't speak for anyone else, but whatever one thinks about the film and its motives, the rape scene is not exploitative. Its about as far from that as is possible to get, in my opinion. So shouting expletives at Belucci *feels* a bit like someone telling a rape victim they deserved it. She did a job, and she did it (too) well. There is barely any nudity in the scene, it isn't explicit in the sense usually meant when describing a sexual screen topic. People blame HER for the film getting made? Like the director wouldn't be able to find someone else? Or what? I'm kinda bewildered by that... not that Cannes audiences don't have their loonies.

That brings me to another bit of looniness. Roger Ebert. Reading his review, I largely found myself agreeing or at least understanding his points... until he starts talking about women's 'wisdom' in how they dress. WTF? Here is one of the most-read film critics in the world, a man who is known for his tolerance for genres that other critics dismiss, and HE throws in a passive reference to 'she was asking for it'. Belucci IS dressed provocatively. She was attending a pretty debauched party. If Roger saw the same film I did, it'd be obvious that how she was dressed made absolutely no difference to the attacker. The rapist, was an extreme abuser and hater and Belucci was a bystander to his horrible behavior. Being female she was going to get it even if she was 85 years old and dressed in a roll of astroturf. Not that Roger has never said something asinine before, but cripes! Here is the actual error on the character's part: going somewhere in a big city unfamiliar, alone, late at night, particularly as a woman. I'm not saying she doesn't have 'the right' to do so, but if there is wisdom lacking... to me, THAT course of action was it. Even then, the film sets up what happens as pretty believable. She isn't far from friends and she takes the route she does on advice from a young woman, after failing to hail a cab. Running across the rapist (a pimp berating a whore) in an underground street crossing was pretty much just the worst luck.

And THAT is the point of the movie, necessary or not, enlightening or otherwise. Through circumstances beyond your control, your life can be wrecked in an instant. Watch this film if you want the point made in the worst possible way.

More Film Bits

Alice In Wonderland. Partly a sequel to the book and Disney film, with aspects of Through the Looking Glass incorporated. The title is almost incorrect. If you like Tim Burton you know what to expect with this film. Highlights for me were the Mad Hatter’s (Depp’s) recitation of the Jabberwock verses, any appearance by Bonham Carter’s Red Queen, and the White Queen’s (Anne Hathaway’s) visceral squeamishness. Anyone notice how much Hathaway looked and acted like Tim Burton’s ex Lisa Marie? I still get a chuckle remembering Depp’s statement about Alice defeating the Jabberwock: ‘On that day, I shall futterwacken… vigorously.’


District 9. I was hoping this would be good, but it surpassed all my expectations. Blackly funny at times, it also contains some of the most harrowing scenes I can remember in any recent film… all due to Sharlto Copley’s incredible improvised performance. The rest of the film is certainly awesome, especially considering the budget. But the lead is such a believable everyman that the film could’ve been about making brownies and it still would have been entertaining. About the only criticism I’d have would be the heavy-handedness of placing a film about segregation and prejudice in South Africa. It makes a great and unique setting visually, but is really REALLY on the nose.


The Taking of Pelham 123. My expectations for this were pretty low, but I wanted to see Travolta’s psycho villain. It was better than I thought it would be and is pretty tense in places. Denzel and Travolta were both good, and both played very flawed, mistake-capable men. The direction and camera work might not be to everyone’s taste, but its Tony Scott, one of foundational directors for the jittery, ‘music video’ film style. Its been done to death perhaps, but he is the master of it.


Lone Wolf and Cub: Final Conflict (In That Little Hand). I had this on VHS ages ago, but bought it recently on DVD, so it got a rewatch. Frequently touted as the seventh and last film in the Kozure Okami film series, this is actually misleading since the film has little connection to the famous series from the seventies that starred Tomisaburo Wakayama apart from the title characters. New leads and a new style for a film made years after the original films stopped being made and the manga had ended. This movie is very revisionist, frequently putting spin on familiar scenes in the story. Even lead actor Tamura Masakazu is a completely different sort of Itto Ogami, making a much more emotional ‘hero’. He’s good but it rather works against the traditional story, which may have been the point. Ogami in the manga and previous films is supposed to be an immovable rock of a man. Centered in honor, but driven by vengeance to the point of being inhuman. The only one who regularly gets Ogami’s humanity to show is his son Daigoro. The kid is the lens through which the reader/viewer gets to sympathize with Ogami’s plight. With a less stoic Ogami, Daigoro’s role is seriously watered down. This film is well-known in cult circles for providing the ending to the story that the original film series never did. The conclusion here is heartrending (as is the whole film) but not a patch on the finale in the manga. I could recommend this film to anyone who wants a very melancholy style of action film, but Lone Wolf and Cub fans will have to be somewhat open-minded.


Ip Man. Donny Yen as the 20th century’s most influential wing chun sifu, who would later gain fame as Bruce Lee’s first formal instructor. This is a great film. I don’t know how accurate Donny is as Ip Man, but he does a good job with both the acting and the action. The fights as expected are awesome (thanks again, Sammo), but as has been common in martial arts films of late, a lot of questions get raised about the reasoning and practicality of their practice. In this case, Ip Man is kind of an idle dilettante just breezing through life practicing kung fu until the Japanese occupation prior to World War 2 crashes down on his reality. As has also been typical in these films recently, the Japanese get a much more even-handed treatment then they did back in the 60s and 70s. The trailers make the sequel to this film look even better, with Sammo actually stepping in front of the camera to fight Donny. Hopefully the results will be as awesome as they were in Killzone.

Ass Worship vol. 11. The level of talent on display in this… what? What the hell is this doing in the list. Uh…

I Love You Man. Paul Rudd doing exactly what you’d expect in this movie. A great premise, and executed pretty well. I’m not sure the character of his new buddy is quite extreme enough, but that probably made this film more believable. Part of the new breed of R-rated Apatow-ish comedies. More heartfelt and a little less about dick jokes. Has a great gag reel in the extras. While it is more of an odd-funny than a laugh-out-loud-funny thing, Rudd’s awkward, attempted-hip phrases were a highlight.


Halloween II. Rob Zombie’s followup to his 2007 film. I like Rob. He’s my favorite modern renaissance dude. I’m typically more lenient on his movies than the critics are. This one’s no exception. In the same way Rob transitioned to a harsher, grittier view when he followed House of 1000 Corpses with The Devil’s Rejects, his sequel to Halloween is a bleaker, more violent extension of the story. Michael Myers moves through the story almost as an elemental force (like Godzilla is frequently portrayed) and the story in Halloween II is mostly not about him. It is about the after effects of the first film on almost everyone else that survived. I’m partly convinced the poor reception to the film was its defiance of expectations as a horror film. It examines inherited insanity, the cult of celebrity, efficacy of psychoanalysis, and people putting their lives back together after a tragedy. The version I saw, the director’s cut, is apparently radically different than the theatrical version, including the ending. I’ll need to see the other cut and compare. About the only thing that really bothered me was the overuse of Michael’s hallucinations. In the first film, one of the scariest things was Michael’s descent into insanity as a child, the outward manifestation AND the viewers’ guesses as to what was going on inside. In this film, you see what is going on inside… and it is rather blah and disappointing

Monsters Among Us

What do you do if you save the life of someone who goes on to wreak great evil?

With the tagline: 'The choice you make, the price you pay.', I have been reading the manga Monster by Naoki Urasawa.

I cannot recommend this title enough. It is one of those sorts of stories that doesn't have to be told as a manga (comic) but is absolutely awesome in that medium. There are no giant robots, no superheroes, no psychic powers. This could just as easily been a made-for-TV movie... and in its plot essentials it probably has been.

Set in the mid-80's it's the story of a peerless surgeon, Dr Tenma, who has moved from Japan to practice medicine in Germany. Tenma is talented, kind-hearted, and got into medicine to help people regardless of race, social standing, or the ability to pay. Starting out as a cynical (if somewhat exaggerated) story of hospital politics, Tenma's world comes crashing down when a young boy he saved on the operating table turns out to be a serial killer. And I don't mean 'turns out be' in a few years. I mean, right away. So Tenma's career, conscience, and everything else is in jeopardy as he tries to exact some kind of answer or justice from his situation.

The manga format allows this story to be told in a detailed expansive way that no film would be able to duplicate. Print novels or lengthy anime series could perhaps do it... and of course there has been an anime series which I understand is very good in its own right. But this is the original vision.

In typical manga (or anime) fashion much of the drama is played broadly and 'overacted' in the sense of everything being super-urgent, super-dreadful, or super-tense. Part of that owes to the fact that the chapters in manga books (tankoubon in Japanese) are read one after the other, but in their original print run were serialised weeks apart. So when it looks like characters are reacting as if every chapter is some emotional climax it owes to the cliffhanger nature of the weekly or monthly manga installments. There are eighteen volumes in the series (of which I've read five up to the point of this writing).

Apart from the melodrama, this is a tale for anyone who likes their suspense and plot twists served up in heavy doses. Obviously to justify a tale spanning eighteen paperback book sized volumes there's more to it than just 'doctor tracks down serial killer'. There's a lot of bigger 'conspiracy' things going on, and a lot of sideplots involving the various characters. But all of it is interesting, and almost all of it is directly relevant to the main plot.

Unlike something like Death Note, this manga is pretty well grounded in reality. These are all realistic people, in real towns, doing real things. The plot, with all its twists is not as complicated as Death Note, but the characters are also much more believable. Don't get me wrong, I liked Death Note just fine, but it was peopled by the kind of uber-minds that only exist in fiction... not to mention the supernatural Shinagami themselves. Monster is cast with people you could know in any house or on any street corner... er, if you lived in Germany.

I'm compelled to finish this manga before embarking on the anime. I easily enjoy manga as much as I do any other medium, and I'd like to soak in the creator's unadulterated vision for this thing. It has become fairly common for anime based on suspense-heavy sources to change events or endings from their originals to keep the viewer guessing. If you've watched the live-action Death Note films you know what I'm talking about. It would take A LOT of the steam out of a Monster anime to know all the plot points coming up because you read the manga, so it will be interesting to see how they handle this. Of course I have to avoid all online plot summaries and such at all costs. Spoilers would kill anything having to do with this story!

If you can put up with a lot of dramatic shouting, don't walk, run to pick up this series. What a great change of pace from all the other monsters in comics and movies.

X Marks the Followup

This is a sequel post to the previous ‘Price of Power’ entry. I’ve spent a decent amount of time on Shutokou Battle X now and feel the need to comment on what I’ve discovered, and how it contrasts with what I expected.

To review briefly: after picking up an Xbox 360 I knew at some point I was going to have to buy and play Shutokou Battle X. It is my go-to racing series, and no matter what differences arise between installments I always have a pretty good time. Not too long ago I was dismayed somewhat by how much luster has worn off Shutokou Battle 2 for the Dreamcast, but it was still a good game.

The Price of Power ‘blog entry was my attempt to lament the drop in game content as graphic sophistication has increased. To make my point I chose two game series that crossed from previous console generations to the current one, the Earth Defense Force series and the Shutokou Battle games. The current chapter of EDF I’ve played through and was the impetus for writing the post. The section on Shutokou Battle was more anticipatory based on what news, information and rumors I could glean from the internet. So how did this latest Shutokou Battle actually stack up? Did the gutting of the content to fuel the graphics work to the detriment of the game? Did it move the meter away from substance and over to style?

The answer: Yes. But not as much as I thought it would.

Shutokou Battle X (Import Tuner Challenge in the USA) being the latest installment in Genki’s venerable franchise, had a huge foundation on which to build this game. The series has been on almost every platform since its inception, and Genki has had countless opportunities to tweak the mechanics, car physics, car selection, interface, complexity, graphics, and everything else. Like any developer making a sequel, especially as part of a franchise, Genki, has a fine line to walk between offering something new and different enough (from their own previous games AND other games) to warrant a purchase while not alienating long time fans who expect some mechanics and traditions to be maintained. Every Sonic game, every Gran Turismo installment, almost all of series, tread this narrow, perilous path. Occasionally enough time passes to where a developer feels that an intellectual property’s (IP) can be radically changed while still having a name that will be a sales draw. See the new 3d Bionic Commando or the upcoming Splatterhouse. Significant reboots of franchises are rather rare. Successful significant reboots are an order more rare still.

(Dedicated) gamers are picky fuckers. On the one hand they want innovation… they don’t just want the same old retread games. On the other, they break out the torches and pitchforks when developers go TOO far from what they perceive are the core mechanics (or narrative, or graphics, etc) that made the franchise beloved in the first place. Fans often deride developers and publishers for their lack of ability in seeing what made the good chapters in a franchise… well, good. But it really isn’t as easy as just ‘leaving the good shit in and adding some more good shit’. Who decides what is good shit? What aspect of the old game was THE good part? At what point is adding a new character a great idea, and when is it just lame? Like movie studios, game developers often seem to think MORE is the same as better… and who can blame them really when that so often seems to be what the audience responds to. The syndrome that Tim Burton’s Batman film series fell prey to? Hell, yes.

Genki didn’t reinvent the wheel (so to speak) with SBX. And I didn’t really expect them to. Shutokou Battle games are all pretty much the same game. Same mechanics, same plot (such as it is), same tracks (mostly), same opponents (mostly), same progression, etc etc. Fans of these games don’t play each installment religiously because they are always hungry for radical innovations. They play them because driving through traffic on Tokyo’s highways is really fun, but also each game’s backstory, rivals, and cars build on the previous chapters. Every new chapter does also feature just a bit of tweaking to the driving model to emphasize something different to go with the increase in detail and realism in the graphics that you’d expect. The likeness to actually being on the expressways gets closer and closer to the real thing. The updates have the latest car models to add to the game world.

I’ve likened the series (and all of Genki’s racing games) to role-playing games. The actual play features have a lot in common with RPGs; the hunting for opponents, the battles, the money earned, getting items (auto parts), affording better weapons (cars). But there’s also a history woven through the individual games, which affords the player as they spend the time necessary, a sense of very simple narrative progress complete with characters that grow, change, or drop out as time moves on across the series.

In Shutokou Battle X, the driving ‘feel’ has been made more forgiving. It is typical for Genki games to be characterized as having slippery or ‘floaty’ handling, but this really only applies to early or unmodified cars. In real life a low-power or stock car is not as difficult to keep on the road as this game indicates, but that is because the poor handling is an abstraction. It is designed to a) symbolize crappiness in both car and driver, ie ‘making you be crappy’, and b) give the modifications a serious effect. In real-world driving if you upgrade your suspension by small increments; maybe stiffer springs first, then stiffer dampeners, then bigger sway or anti-roll bars, then upgrade everything to a coilover system, then a racing-heavy four-corner adjustable coilover system. You will notice improvements but they may be subtle or only noticeable in the most extreme track situations. In a Genki racer they need every mod to make a demonstrable difference. So in effect, they start you off a little more difficult or ‘worse’ than real life, in order to encourage you to mod as soon as possible and then reward you when you do so with tangible results. The floaty handling usually manifests itself in the fact that you have to make lots of small adjustments constantly while driving, as if the car has a bit of a mind of its own. You have to constantly feed inputs to the controller to get it to go exactly where you want, a combination of steering being a bit loose or unstable and tires that don’t hold the road or give you a proper feel for when they are about to break traction. In the old Dreamcast chapter, Shutokou Battle 2, the game never completely dropped the tire feedback problem. In SBX the floaty feel seems minimal, only manifesting itself to me (and I may just be really used to these games by now) driving down straights when the instability of the steering has me making small adjustments to keep it heading correctly… rather like the tires needed balancing. Once you improve the tires and suspension, even by one increment, the floatiness goes away. This is a fairly big change from the old days where you had to buy the upgrades, adjust and test a lot, then fiddle with the sensitivity controls for the game itself. Continual upgrades, adjusting, and fiddling continue to improve the handling as always, but you can banish the trademark Genki floatiness almost right away.

Another difference in this game is how it handles breaking traction. Various installments have waffled back and forth as to how important or useful drifting is. In real life drifting is more useful in touge (mountain road) racing, or as a show and competition form on a formal track. It is not really used in highway racing which is more akin to driving on a circuit with its well-paved roads and less drastic elevation changes. Drifting would also be death used in highway traffic. Touge uses spotters to make sure the road is clear… doable on the short twisty sections out in the country. Can’t do that on urban expressways. So highway battling typically takes its corners in the slow-in/fast-out philosophy of grip racing. Being a driving fantasy, Shutokou Battle games try to incorporate drift… making it more important as drifting has gained popularity (as a competition) in real life. In earlier chapters, your car just broke loose and careened into a wall if you tried to drift. It was possible to get this under control, but it was almost in spite of the game, not because of it. With the PS2 iterations and the rise in drifting’s popularity, this changed, though still not allowed with the same alacrity as the companion series Kaido Battle. In SBX, losing traction (accidentally or on purpose) in a stock car will cause a weird, sudden slide that just as suddenly ends when enough speed is scrubbed off. It is jerky and unpredictable, much like the way the Ridge Racer games handle the same phenomenon. It was REALLY off-putting at first, because I have always hated Ridge Racers sliding. But much like the floatiness, this detriment can be quickly dialed down. And once you learn to expect it, it can be controlled right handily. I don’t think it is realistic… odd they didn’t just use the drift mechanics from the Kaido Battle series… but it does put the option to drift controllably as a firm, planned cornering option into the expressway battles.

Some other things: glancing off cars or barriers are rather like Shutokou Battle 3 on the PS2—some speed loss and a hit to your SP bar, but recoverable in all but the closest battles. A direct hit into traffic causes a really weird, almost slo-mo hit to the traffic car. The effect is roughly the same as all other Shutokou Battle games, but it FEELS like it is costing you a ton of time because of the perceived slowdown. I’m not sure if it actually does cost you more time… I don’t think so… and I’m not sure if this was intentional on Genki’s part; maybe done to make the player really hate crashing and really try to avoid it. Your car is also larger than its apparent shape, meaning you will hit traffic and opponents by just getting really close to them, rather than literally touching them. Driven properly this isn’t much of an issue, because:

This game is really REALLY easy.

Given the power of your modifications and the new more forgiving driving model, this game presents the least challenge of any Shutokou Battle game I’ve ever played. I finished the game handily in a JZA80 Supra that was still three upgrades away from the maximum allowable engine size. Supras are known for having overbuilt engines that can handle monstrous amounts of horsepower, but I didn’t have to get anywhere near those titan levels to romp through all the final bosses of the game.

And you know what? That lack of difficulty was okay, frankly. I have enough games on my plate that require scadloads of practice or effort to progress in microscopic increments (Mushihimesama Futari anyone?). This was really enjoyable to drive and race just for the pleasure of it.

The new versions of the cities are really beautiful. Lots of detail, and animation. A couple of new offramps added that lead to an entirely different kind of racing for this series, with very hard-angled corners. New rivals, new bosses, and everyone seems to have gotten a graphic overhaul for their stickers, the rivals’ team or nickname emblems.

Okay, so the game was fun… more fun than expected considering the rumored losses. Losses that turned out to be true, but had little effect on my fun with the game. What were the losses exchanged for the improvements?

Drastic downsizing of the car list. There are only about two dozen car models in the game. That is a major drop from the hundred or more that was typical in earlier chapters. There are a few more makes and models amongst your opponents than you can get yourself, but besides limiting your options, this really increases the repetition amongst your opponents. Many teams have members that all drive the same car. Many bosses have had their traditional car changed. It was quite disconcerting to see some historic rivals like the Death Driver and The Emperor have such radically different rides. The number of cosmetic upgrades (aero parts, vinyls, etc) help this somewhat. But at the end of the day, this was probably the single biggest hit to my pleasure in the game. It was a groaner to think to myself ‘oh another team entirely made up of Evos’ over and over again. One of the big attractions to Genki Racing Project games is the immersion factor, and that has always been helped considerably by the number of different car types (multiplied by the possibilities in modifications) you could encounter. It has seemed like no two cars were alike, like real life. And there have always been plenty of oddball or weird cars thrown in like vans, utility trucks, muscle cars, or maybe a Corvette Z06… all unexpected in the racing environment of Japan. None of that in SBX.

Downsizing of the highway map. They dropped the Wangan and Yokohane expressways, the epicenter of flat-out drag racing in these games. These areas had to be opened up in the previous games by progressing… and offered a stark contrast to the tighter corner-based racing of the games’ initial C1 tracks. This could’ve been as big a drag as the loss of cars except Genki added the two aforementioned offramps which themselves have some fairly long drag-able straights. Genki also took a cue from the Kaido Battle series and started putting parking areas into the game. Parking areas are the social heart of Japan’s racing scene. At key offramps around the expressway system, the racers, teams, hangers-on, groupies, and just plain car nuts gather around and talk, compare vehicles or just loiter. Music is blaring, challenges are made or refused, a lot of snacks and drinks are bought out of the area vending machines. This adds a lot to SBX, giving new forms of interaction, and new places you have to go to find your rivals.

Traffic is a lot more sparse. This is probably in keeping with making the game a bit easier and more accessible, though I’d say Genki’s inexperience with optimizing the graphics comes into play and they needed to minimize slowdown… of which there still is some in instances where many cars are onscreen, the developer’s traditional weakness in this area.

That’s really it for the minuses. Less cars, less track, less traffic. The first two are definitely ‘content’. The game isn’t literally shorter than other iterations in terms of rivals and number of races to run, but it is really obvious that there is less variety. As I said, this bothered me less than I thought it would because, and I don’t want to sound like a graphics whore, the game is just so much prettier and realistic. And my mind was taken off the shortcomings by having the two side road areas and new rivals to master.

As if time has continued its march in the Genki world, so some old teams have disappeared, new teams have arisen and the player has to find his place in the scheme of things… usually at the top when all is said and done. There were some pretty cool things to this part of it. There is a selection of bosses that have been recurrent through the games usually called the Thirteen Devils. For this game, they are kind of in semi-retirement and a new group, the Phantom Nine, have come to prominence. Upon beating the Phantom Nine you, of course, catch the attention of the remnants of the Thirteen Devils. This is all handled with cool intro videos and music.

It is as fun as ever to knock these rivals on their asses and once again assume the mantle of King.

Note: I played the japanese version of this game. One wanderer rival, Green Wild Child, has a different requirement than what is indicated in the USA version (Import Tuner Challenge). His Japanese requirements are the same as they are in SB3 on the Playstation 2, a license plate edit.

Beautiful Slog

If you’ve read any game forum bitching from me over the last two months, it has largely revolved around one game, Odin Sphere for the PS2.

Back in 1997, a game called Princess Crown came out for the Sega Saturn. This game was being hailed as the cat’s ass at the time, for its phenomenal graphics, outstanding music and production values, and its real-time battle sequences. Being the import-crazy fan that I was (am) and with all the critical nods, it wasn’t long after its Japan-only release that I bought a copy. It didn’t disappoint. The combat was kind of quirky. Although it looked like a 2d fighting game, it still had something of the ‘we each take a turn’ flow of an RPG. It was in real-time, but the recovery times, power bar, and other aspects made it so you couldn’t just whale away like you might in Street Fighter. It was more tactical. Timing your defense (blocking or evading) could be difficult, especially given how committed you were once your character entered the combo slash sequence. Wise item use was also required, with inventory management important even during a fight. But the cool story, amazing artwork, and just all-around uniqueness of the game made it enjoyable and memorable. Once you got the hang of the fighting, the only downside was that all those incredible art assets meant that the development time and budget would only go so far, and to get the game up to an appropriate length quite a bit of repetition is involved in backgrounds, enemies, and soundtrack.

I guess the length a game of this type needs to be will be a major fiber in the fabic of this ‘blog entry. Odin Sphere was released ten years after Princess Crown, but is still very much a similar animal. Now on the next generation of hardware, Odin Sphere kept Princess Crown’s core play concepts the same while improving in almost every area (except the aforementioned length). Again, the fighting is quirky and oddly reminiscent of RPG combat, with copious inventories and gaining levels in both magic points and hit points.

But the graphics, animation and music are onto a whole ‘nother level of kickass. HG101 states this as making all other PS2 games ‘embarrassing’ by comparison, and I have to agree...with the addition that if you are a fan of 2d artwork it might make ALL other games embarrassing, even through the current generation. I’m not going to go so far as to say it is the best looking and sounding game EVER, but it is probably in the top few. I’m not even going to brook discussion about that. If you go online and watch videos of this thing and still don’t agree, you’re fucking blind and an imbecile. Begone.

I dislike the term 'action-RPG' because it has come to mean so many different things to so many different people... and ANY game with a protagonist that progresses in his/her abilities (levels up usually) and isn't turn-based seems to get saddled with that epithet. In this case action-RPG seems to be appropriate, to me at any rate, since I tend to use it exclusively for RPGs that have combat and movement in real-time and not games like Dynasty Warriors or Castlevanian: Symphony of the Night.

In this game, the blending of genres is done well on the surface, but as I played became central to the issues I have with the game. On the one hand, if you play a role-playing game, you know what you're in for time-and-effort-wise. Whether the game is long or short by RPG standards, you understand going into it that it is going to be detailed, involved, and more brain-centered than twitch-heavy. Action games are just the opposite. Your brain may be engaged in sorting out puzzle sections, finding all the hidden items, or figuring out how to beat a boss, but the game is still expected to move along at a brisk pace, and your progress is down to your (physical) skill at jumping, hitting, or shooting. If an item is absolutely necessary for progress it is usually provided to you right in the flow of the game. To me there are two totally different mindsets in place here. Playing an RPG is like settling in with a good long book. You learn about the characters and their backstories, there's no hurry to blast through it. The exploration and learning is THE thing. Action games are more like an issue of monthly magazine. Colorful, entertaining, quickly moving you along to the next treat for your senses, and (with the good ones) over too soon.

For Odin Sphere, the action elements propel you through the game... run through each area to defeat the hordes of enemies and get to the incredible boss. But the RPG elements run counter to this and actually hinder you. George Kamitani, director of Odin Sphere, acknowledged this problem in a recent interview. He called it 'confusion' for players over whether they should be approaching the game as an RPG, and taking time to level up, OR as an action game, taking on the enemies through sheer skill. He calls it exactly right. Because of the fighting game nature of the combat, even though it is quirky to learn how to fight without getting hit too much, once you get the hang of it you can make up for a lack of items and hit points with skillful play. Until you get to a boss. Then your failure to 'level up properly' will hit you right in the balls. The bosses do not play like fighting game opponents and frequently have shit dropping from the sky or area effect weapons. Going in to these encounters requires you have enough healing items, and enough hit points to be able to weather the undodgeable attacks... exactly what the player, heady with his action/fighting skills, probably did not account for. Your characters move quickly. The controls are responsive. The item inventories are available right there on the main screen, with no flipping through menus. Everything 'feels' like you should be able to just 'fight' your way all the way to the end. Once I'd figured out the timing, and how to avoid getting hit so much, the combat worked pretty well. And the levels were brisk and short.

But no. There's a reason why the game makes it simple to back out of various screens or return to the overworld map to choose a new area; you are going to have to grind for items and levels. By the time you get your ass leveled and equipped to the nines, upon marching through the areas again on the way to that boss you need to beat, you will find the all the rest of the fighting to be a cakewalk. The bosses are really the only thing you NEED to approach with an RPG mindset, but the effort involved will take up a lot of the time spent in the game.

Perversely, there then seems to have been a realisation on the part of the designers that the game really IS too fast for something so akin (in spirit at least) to an intricately plotted RPG. 'We have all this great production-- graphics, soundtrack, voice acting, writing-- we need to keep the players in here for a while'. So in addition to the need to grind to beat bosses, they also made five characters you have to play through, all of them seven chapters (areas) in length, with complete stories for each. The plot of each character is unique, as are their combat attacks, but the stories intersect and overlap so you have to go through the same limited number of areas, enemies and bosses every time. Each character has maybe one boss that is unique to them. This is a way for Vanillaware to use the same production assets to give you a game five times longer than it would be if it was just a one-character action game and fills it out to decent-sized RPG length.

As I said though, it doesn't PLAY like an RPG. It was just a drag to have to go through the same areas, with the same enemies over and over again. The unique attacks for each character helped. And fortunately (this is a big fortunately) subsequent characters get access to all the stuff learned by previous characters. So if you found a really useful potion recipe early on, you can equip with it very quickly in the later stories. As there is a grinding opportunity purposely made available to you right before the climax, you can even take early characters and go get some of the later-found recipes and items for them. For instance, you don't learn to make the super-healing Elixer potion until the third or fourth character, so you need to take the first few back out to make some Elixirs in preparation for their final encounters. Honestly, five characters to go through is too much. Or if they'd felt it important to have the player actually BE all five, then they could've cut the number of chapters each from seven down to four.

All this verbiage makes it plain that the game is a slog. No matter how beautiful, most players are not going to want to see the same thing over and over and over again. So why keep playing? Why did I plug a little over fifty hours into this thing?

It has quite a bit more going for it than just being pretty or having a great soundtrack. Both those aspects get repetitive no matter how well done. The framework that all these stories hang upon is the idea that a little girl is up in her attic reading each character's plot as a book. The books all tell some aspect of the world's prophesied final days. Each character is a key figure. So as you read each book, the characters meet each other, or you learn about a sequence of events from another point of view. As you play, all of this echoes a poem written about the game world's 'armageddon'. The poem has a number of stanzas with allegorical figures described participating in the end times. Seeing how this is all going to play out is pretty appealing since, in spite of too much time spent playing them, you really do learn to have an interest in the five. The plot is melodramatic in the extreme. Every character is doomed, sad, and depressed. Though they typically end up on a positive note in each of their respective books, they go through angsty, abusive hell to get there. There are lovers torn apart, parental yearning and abuse, heroes with no idea their true past, etc. etc. But Odin Sphere has such a good localisation in both the actual dialogue written and the voice acting that the game really sells the drama. Going through the first book, I was amazed by the quality, but rolling my eyes at how 'serious' it all was (so soon in the game). Several hours later I was totally buying into it, and actually found myself quite moved at parts. The scenery, soundtrack, and enemies may be repetitive but I was really rooting for these characters to turn out okay. As you get to the later books you already know how some characters are going to end up, but the game is so well done that it is still fascinating to see how they get there.

The final character, Velvet, has a story that ties up the threads from all the other protagonists. She knows more, and discovers more, than the others about the nature of the events they've all been going through. Her book finally reveals the prophecy poem and ends the individual character narratives. It is at this point that the tales from the books intersect with the larger meta-frame of the girl in the attic. A last book becomes available and playing it makes the final fate of all the characters known. The suspense ratchets up another notch, as the player is faced with one last encounter for each hero, all but one of them an uber-boss that you have never fought up to this point. As grueling as the grinding and repetition got to be, after all the heart and effort put by the designers into the game (and by the player in getting to the end) the climax plays out in truly epic fashion. I was hoping (and had read) that the end made all the work worthwhile. And it really did. Apart from the armageddon encounters being visually incredible (in an already incredible-looking game, mind you) they were mostly unlike anything that had gone before, and forced me to take two characters a little ways back through their individual books to get a few more items. After you are done, if you match the right character to the right finale (the prophecy gives clues to how to do this) the ending is a 20 minute piece of sheer awesome. I'd venture to say it might be the best video game ending ever... certainly in terms of how much work went into it.

It kind of took knowing that the last book was going to be great, though not how it would actually play out, to keep me grinding on. I kind of feel bad for anyone who tried this early on in the game's shelf life and just petered out playing it. To be fair, each hero gets their story done faster than the previous ones, because the player is better AND they have access to previously discovered assets. But in those days just after Odin Sphere's release new players would have to have played Princess Crown to have some idea what the game could have in store, and Princess Crown was released TEN YEARS prior.

My kids who had been following my progress through the game off and on, were riveted by most of the armageddon encounters and the ending. So much so that they immediately started their own save files, though I doubt they'll actually persevere through the game.

Odin Sphere winds up being one of those things I would recommend with reservations. Like a movie you know is great but has subject matter that could be objectionable. Now that its over, I'm really glad I played it. And all the levels, cutscenes, and ending bits are available for replay at any time. If I wanted to play it again it would be a relative breeze, given the ability to skip around, and the awesome saved state of the heroes. Its odd having something with so much going for it that you still have to do so much explaining about the drawbacks. That's what this whole post is, and that's what I'd have to do in recommending the game to a potential player.
If you don't mind grueling stretches of repetition, going through the same motions again and again just for snatches of plot, its really great! Some kind of sales pitch that is.

Vanillaware has recently released Muramasa: The Demon Blade for the Nintendo wii. I've mucked around with it a bit, and it looks to have similarly stellar production values and artwork. Based on the aforementioned interview with the director, Vanillaware knows all the drawbacks to Odin Sphere and addressed them in this new game. They've gone for more of an action game, keeping the items and leveling up, but making placing it more in the flow of the game. It appears that if you get somewhere then you are equipped to deal with whatever appears there. There are also only two characters to play through. I don't know how long their stories are yet, but it would be almost impossible for this game to be bloated like Odin Sphere. I know there is repetition. That's pretty much the price you pay for the incredible graphics and music on the budget of a smaller studio. See my blog entry about Earth Defense Force 2017 for a related topic.

I'm looking forward to it, but I need a break. I'm going to concentrate on driving games and a few STGs before tackling Muramasa.

Hm. Those games are also from cult Japanese developers. I smell 'blog entries coming on for those too.

(image kyped from HG101)

Cinema Bits

I'm still into heavy video game times, but I've become bogged down in one particular game almost to the exclusion of all other play. When I finish that thing soon, I'll put up a 'blog entry on it and get on to some other game topics too. Here's some films or DVDs I've managed to squeeze in over the last few weeks:

The Haunted World of El Superbeasto. Rob Zombie's years-long-production animated comedy. Surprisingly polished animation on a very raunchy violent story. At first, if one is an 'elderly person' such as myself, it might put you in mind of Ralph Bakshi's adult-oriented cartoons like Wizards or Fritz the Cat. But the spazziness and surreal humor actually has more in common I think with Spongebob Squarepants or The Marvelous Misadventures of Flapjack. Be warned: the violence, nudity, and cussin' are off the scale, though humorous in nature and not realistic. Special mention needs to be made of how hilarious Rosario Dawson is as a ebonics-spouting WHITE ho, and the songs are unbelievably funny, IF you really pay attention to the lyrics... particularly the Yellow Submarine-esque song playing behind Suzy X's first battle with the nazis. Open-minded pop-culture mavens should get this but keep it locked away from the kids.

Where The Wild Things Are. This was on my list to take my kids to go see because the book is great and a staple of just about every family library. I wasn't sure how they could expand a work made of about a dozen lines of poem into a feature film, but the production design and cinematography in the trailer looked so stunning I was willing to give the idea a chance. Then came the controversy. In the media, parents supposedly found the movie inappropriate. Well I like me some controversial films, so that made going to see this that much more appealing. I deliberately avoided actually reading up on what was so disturbing because I wanted to see if I could discern what the fuss was about myself, and see if my kids actually noticed anything objectionable from their point-of-view. First off the movie is okay. As expected from the promo reels the look and sound of the movie is unique and very well done, but quite melancholy compared to the book. I can see how the writers and director derived this feel from the story, but it isn't something I've ever felt myself all the times I've read it so it was a surprise. Also, the misbehavior on Max's part, which could be interpreted as just a mild issue read from the book, is treated as a serious alienation or ADD-related emotional disturbance. And this all may be why the movie was only 'okay' for me. It isn't like the tone was truly awful (to me) or invalid, but it wasn't joyous or cheerfully humorous in anyway. The wild things themselves are given 'everyday people' sorts of voices and they seem neurotic and dreary too.

I usually like my expectations to be challenged in a film, book, or game, but in this case my view of the source material is too strongly rooted. In the same way the Lord of The Rings were written in stone for uber-fans before Peter Jackson's trilogy of films came out.

So when I followed up on the controversy the next day I expected the emotional issues and realistically awful problems this creates in Max's family to be the point. There is also a lesson about abusive relationships taught to Max (by example) on the wild things' island. I figured THAT stuff was what would be objectionable. Well, the depressing tone, and unfriendly depiction of relationships was mentioned by critics... but what did parents object to? Scary scenes.

What the fuck? The wild things are MONSTERS. In the book and in the movie. They are stylized on the printed page as per Maurice Sendak's art style. Apart from doing the film as animation (or a Muppet Movie) the monsters, though derived directly from the book illustrations, ARE going to be more realistic. They just are. And what do parents think the wild things do on that island when Max isn't lording it over them? They must do what monsters do. So in an expanded format you are going to have to see some other behaviors. I think there are three scary 'things' that parents objected to. Shots of bones, indicating the wild things have eaten people in the past, a sequence involving the lead wild thing chasing Max down threatening to eat him, and a scene where that selfsame wild thing rips the arm off another wild thing... bloodless and treated humorously by the victim.

This is totally retarded. My kids didn't find anything objectionable in the movie. Nothing scary. They just found Max to be a bit of a dick and were glad he seemed to have reformed a bit by movie's end. And my kids are not jaded either. They get nightmares from images seen in Hammer horror films over Halloween (more on that below). They get apprehensive from previews of Harry Potter movies. But nothing in Where The Wild Things Are induced that sort of fear in them. I like Sendak's quote on the matter. Parents who find the content too disturbing for kids can: "go to hell. That's a question I will not tolerate" and he further noted "I saw the most horrendous movies that were unfit for child's eyes. So what? I managed to survive."

Speaking of which-

Dracula Has Risen From the Grave. This is a goshdamn awesome old movie. Everything a fan of Hammer films loves is in here apart from Peter Cushing. When I was a kid of about nine, my Mom started letting me stay up late on Friday and Saturday nights to watch old horror films and Kolchak the Night Stalker. Afternoons after school had the Harryhausen, 50's science fiction, and occasional Godzilla movie. But late-night was the dark stuff. Literally. I would sit close in front of the TV with all the lights out, some snack going uneaten while I absorbed the horrific spectacles paraded out in grainy prints from Universal, Hammer, Amicus, AIP and others. My Mom was a good church-going woman, but she just didn't see the harm in these rendezvous with FICTION. She trusted that I was discerning enough to keep a bedrock of disbelief underneath the enjoyment or fear. And it didn't hurt that I never complained about nightmares. Even when I did have them, the possibility of being banned (like other kids including my brother-- hah!) kept my trap shut on the subject.

Anyway. The movie. Risen is the third in Hammer's Dracula series. Hammer studios was known for very 'English' actors and acting, colorful 'stagey' costumes and sets, and most of all for putting the sex and blood into horror. The sex was mostly lowcut bodices on the victims and heroines, and the blood was the luridly colored 'paint' common to films of the 60's. But at the time of their release (before I was watching them on TV mind you) they were pretty strong stuff... to the point of being severely censored or banned in many countries. The over-the-top acting (and very theatrical costumes and sets) were the standard for films of the day, but the color and style really set the Hammer films apart. And of course Christopher Lee's version of Dracula, made more of an actual personality in this film, is just the cherry on top. The movie drags a bit in the middle as it sets up all the people and logistics necessary to move Dracula from the village he's terrorised in the previous film to the big city, but the climax more than makes up for it.

Spoiler Alert: It had been a long time since I'd seen this film, so I didn't remember a lot of specifics... even the ending. Considering this film was made in 1968, I still found the climax in this film to be more hair-raising and just-plain-awesome than dozens of more modern films... including just about any 'Dracula' movie you can name. Near the end of the film, Dracula has been 'staked' by the hero. This is a particularly graphic scene... probably cut when I saw this on TV as a kid... I'm mean, no shit, the blood is pouring out. But in THIS vampire mythos you can't just stake the vampire (at least not one as powerful as Dracula) you have to say a rite just after to complete the process. Well, no one manages to get the words out, so Dracula motherfucking gets out of his coffin and pulls this huge, and I mean huge, stake out of his own chest and gets on with the business of knocking the hero around and kidnapping the girl. When he gets back to his castle he orders the girl to remove this huge gilded cross that is sealing the main doors. She throws it over the side of the short cliff on which the castle resides and after the climactic struggle with the hero a few minutes later, Dracula falls off same cliff and lands impaled on the gold cross. But of course it doesn't end there. You gotta say the rites. This time a formerly-enthralled priest does the honors... all the while Dracula is spitting and writhing on this cross, and almost manages to get himself off of it. But the words are spoken, and the end of Dracula is shreds of his cloak and copious amounts of blood running down the cross. It probably doesn't get much better than THAT to a horror-seeking kid plomped in front of a late-night television set. How can Where The Wild Things Are even approach that? It isn't realistic looking in the modern sense, but once you spend the earlier part of the film getting involved and buying into Hammer-world, it's pretty damn intense. And I would still let my kids watch this. It was part of my growing up. I just can't see this as damaging. I almost feel like I'd be depriving them if I didn't at least give them a chance to see Hammer films as I saw them. Well better than I saw them actually...

The DVD I watched comes in a set and the print is so much more colorful and clear than anything previously available for any Hammer film. Watching a DVD like this, especially on an HDTV, will give the viewer some idea what it must have been like to see them in a theater, before grainy, scratchy, washed-out prints became the norm. And even with those faults, I still remember Hammer films as being the most colorful selections in my late-night fare. I'll single out Veronica Carlson here too. I met her sometime in the 90's at a horror convention in Baltimore. She looked pretty good there still, but watching this movie will let you in on why she was mobbed at that meet. She made wearing a bodice and tilting your neck for the vampire an art form.

Since the color and stageyness of the Hammer films lends an air of unreality watching one of these has become a sort of tradition with my kids at Halloween. This year it was The Mummy. Pretty much all the positives I mentioned for the above film would apply to The Mummy as well, subtracting the gore, but adding in very creepy living eyes in a dead face (again supplied by Lee), and the presence of Peter Cushing. No blood but still a real wincer of a scene during a flashback to ancient Egypt. I highly recommend Hammer films as a Halloween tradition. They still give my kids sleep problems, but I look at it as necessary toughening up.

Drag Me To Crapville

Wow. Color me amazed at how wrong 'the critics' are about the film Drag Me To Hell.

I rented this thing after reading up and down the 'net about how great this thing was. 'A return to form for Raimi', 'scariest film of the year', 'funny and shocking'... blah blah blah. Almost all the majors, Ebert, Travers, etc lined up with positive things to say about this movie.

A big thumbs down to all of them I say.

After doing the Halloween thing with the kids I was hoping to settle down with a good horror movie for the later part of the evening since I didn't have any plans to go out. I had missed seeing Drag Me To Hell in the theater, and was not happy about that. So for several months it has been my plan to make up for that miss by watching this movie over Halloween. Raimi has been an okay director in my book. I like the Spiderman films just fine, but this was looking to be a return to form of the Evil Dead variety. I should have known this would be more Evil Dead 2, my least favorite, than Evil Dead 1, my most-est favorite.

I went with the unrated version thinking THAT would be Raimi's Evil Dead 1 self really unleashed as opposed to the PG-13 rating that I thought he'd been saddled with to justify the budget that probably went into Drag Me To Hell.

As it turns out the budget was pretty big for a horror film, but small time for Raimi after doing shit like the Spiderman trilogy. He also wasn't reigned in by the PG-13 rating apparently, since he's quoted as not wanting gore to be the draw. That's fine. Gore shouldn't have to be the draw in (all) horror films. Having seen only the unrated version, I can't imagine what was cut since NOTHING about Drag Me To Hell rises to an R level. In fact, apart from a few very cartoony gross-out effects I'm not sure much of this gets to a PG-13 level.

This film has nothing to recommend it. I can't believe it was the horror darling of the critics. The characters are likable but boring apart the different and awful cursing gyspy woman. She was great (and disgusting). Not enough to make a great scream flick. Not one bit of this movie's plot was a surprise. Not one scene was scary. The only thing shocking was how many different ways Raimi could force foreign objects into the heroine's mouth. It went beyond oral fixation. She's eating drool, worms, embalming fluid, a fly, a shawl, everything except, presumably, Raimi's cock since it wouldn't require any auditioning 'extras' to land the lead part. I take that back. It DID take some sort of bravery and fortitude to eat everything Raimi required on film.

What the fuck? What did I miss? I feel like Will Ferrel's character Mugatu in Zoolander. Mugatu laments at the climax that he 'must be taking crazy pills' if everyone else sees talent in Derek Zoolander where he doesn't. 'I invented the piano necktie, Derek! What have you ever done!'

I felt like that watching this movie. I sat there just waiting for the part that everyone found so great. And it never happened. The movie started out fine. Complete with a child, A CHILD, getting pulled down to hell. That made me think 'wow, this movie might pull very few punches'. The first encounter with the gyspy woman is fine too. But the movie never really tries to be anything but sort of blackly humored fantasy movie. Everything is too brightly lit to be atmospheric. Everything is shown right out in the open. There are a few jump-at-you bits, but they are pretty weak since they are boldly foreshadowed. And nothing in the movie is as grim as the very first bit where the kid is pulled down by demons... until the heroine herself is pulled down by demons.

What? Did I just post a spoiler? No. I just saved you the rental fee. Even if everyone else in the world likes this movie, I'm considering this the opening (and likely only) volley in my personal campaign against the film.

Blech.

Hardcore Means You Show Penetration

In any fandom these days it seems like there is some sort of demarcation that separates the ‘true’ fans from the johnny-come-latelys. Y’know that thing that lets old-timers say ‘back when things were good’ or lets fans of any seniority claim elite knowledge because they know about super-obscure such-and-such.

In Japan, the root definition of ‘otaku’ before the West prettied it up was ‘maniac’… as in ‘detail obsessor that needs to get a life’. The Japanese can pursue an area of interest with a single-minded zeal that inhabitants in few other countries can approach. I suspect fat, middle-aged British and American military history collectors can come pretty damn close.

But it you follow discussions and articles on the internet or in periodicals, you can sure find a lot of fans acting like maniacs about their chosen interest (read: passion). There’s a lot of foaming at the mouth about how things ain’t like they used to be, the big companies only put out crap that’s sinking the industry, competition and innovation is being stifled, if you don’t listen to/play/buy X then you are a tasteless fuck and fuck those tasteless fucks anyway.

Here’s what I have to say to all of that: ‘Don’t fall in love with anything that can’t love you back.’.

I have an awful lot of stuff I’m into. Some of it I’m ‘passionate’ about. But y’know what? If they were to stop making, updating, or continuing ANY of it… I might not like it, but I’d survive.

NONE of the issues we have with our interests is worth rising emotionally to a level beyond annoyance. Really. And fans that disagree with you, or heaven forbid contribute money to something you don’t like? Disagree with their choice sure… but why slag on 'em?

‘They aren’t members of MY community motherfucker!’

Right.

The original motivation for this post was for me to get some thoughts out on the whole 'hardcore versus casual' debate in video games. But I realized this argumentative tendency is not exclusive to the gaming community and in fact is typical of any organized fandom. And for what? Is any of this shit really that important? I was going to get into some crap about how we should be open-minded, or people’s definition of good, quality, or fun is different, or how the voices of minority jerks tend to drown out the majority of level-headed people. True as all of that might be, it ultimately doesn’t matter.

Music is fun. Video games are fun. Movies, and books, and anime, and militaria, and all that stuff is fun. Or it should be. I think we get so heated or obsessive as fans that we lose sight of the fun part. But I guess bitching about tasteless fucks is fun too. Or it must be to a lot of people anyway. When you find that little corner of interest you feel you can call your own you get pretty defensive… or offensive. Even if no one is really attacking you. Even if the companies really don’t have it in for you.

Music might be a little different. Because music reaches a little deeper and can affect outlook, dress, attitudes, and a host of other things on a more fundamental level than other interests. It is possible for other pastimes to have that effect, literature and manga/anime come to mind, but with music it is common for one’s lifestyle to be thematically tied. This has also led to very real persecution. If you wear another music-influenced lifestyle openly into a deeply redneck bar you could have a few problems before you find your way out again. A music fan might get a pass on feeling bent towards certain other subcultures… but they still have no excuse for assholery towards fellow genre citizens. Not known for their subtlety most of the time, metalheads (my most closely-identified musical affiliation) are a real collision of solidarity and ‘you listen to those faggots?’.

I often find myself getting really interested in something only to find it go mainstream soon after. It is kind of a joke among friends of mine actually. Like I’m a barometer for the next big thing. But I’m also a supporter of stuff that flares up into popularity and then dies out. And I’m okay with that. Whatever happens with video games, or kaiju films, or manga, and all that stuff, I STILL have the things that made me a fan in the first place. In the case of some things like music or video games I’ll never own it all. Never ‘complete’ the collection. Even if these things stopped getting made this very second. And no one can take my interest away from me. I might grow out of something… or give up on it. That’s up to me. Arguably, Sony ‘fanboys’ may have helped kill of my beloved Sega consoles, but I can still play those consoles. I can buy more games for them. Nothing changes the fact that, for me, they are great machines.

On a gaming forum, I asked for some definitions of ‘hardcore’ versus ‘casual’. The battle between these two extremes has permeated message boards, magazines, conversation… all levels of video game discourse. I can’t pick up a gaming periodical that doesn’t have some mention of this issue. It seems to mostly center around the Nintendo wii and DSi and the manufacturer’s strategy of really reaching beyond the dependable core game audience. The fear is that all this catering to the so-called casual gamer is diluting the resources needed for companies to continue to produce the games ‘true’ gamers really want. There was some good points made about how the definition of ‘hardcore’ and ‘casual’ have probably changed in common usage, and whether people on said forum actually self-identify as ‘hardcore’ themselves. Ironically, as I’ve found in discussions on music or lifestyle or tabletop wargaming, or any fandom, most discussers eschew labels’themselves or FOR themselves, but don’t actually have too much of a problem applying them to other people… usually toward the negative if their ire has been raised.

And that brings me around to my real main point again. I guess I’m at a loss as to why our ire does get raised most of the time. I mean, if someone personally insults you, fair enough. But whether Sony is out to screw you with the PSPgo and its new software system… what does it matter? Don’t buy it! Your world won’t end!

I remember reading on some Nintendo site a while back: ‘its like I’ve always said, Nintendo just wants your money, and they’ll do what they have to to screw you’.

Like you’ve ALWAYS said? How much fucking mind time do you spend contemplating Nintendo and its corporate ways? Newsflash! Nintendo and all other companies that SELL something are out to make money. Sometimes they do it in a ‘good way’ and sometimes the do it in a ‘bad way’. It is subjective at any give time when a marketing move is good or bad. The beauty of our consumer society is that you can vote with your dollar. Don’t like it? Don’t buy it. Particularly on these elective entertainment ‘fanboy’ pursuits. If your geek object fades away into obscurity because it just isn’t marketable to the legion of tasteless fucks, you will live. I'd like to assume that 'like I've always said' is hyperbole on the part of the writer, but you still have to wonder just how many times they have actually come 'round to that topic, and if it is just as cathartic now as the first time they typed it?

I spent a lot of years working for Games Workshop, a magnet for nerds and fanboys feeling betrayed by marketing decisions. My time there really gave me an appreciation for what company staff really feel and go through when they have to deal with rabid fandom. I will never say a bad word about my time with GW. I loved it there, and I still love the company and the people I worked with. How often will you read THAT on the internet, GW gamers? You don’t really know what the hell is going on inside a company to bring it to the decisions in makes. While I worked there you wouldn't believe the 'truth' I heard from gamers supposedly in-the-know about what my own company was doing. They'd walk up to me at conventions and say 'is the reason you changed the models for blah-blah army because the sculptor has a heroin habit? That's what GW staffer 'X' told me!'. WTF NERD?!

Not all the decisions will be good ones, but seeing a place have to pay its employees, provide insurance, ensure safety, stay in budget, satisfy customer service, etc etc. can really open your eyes.

I don’t actually think there is anything wrong with geeking out over stuff. Or making your pastimes important. If you don’t let it rule your whole life, obsessing over the ephemera of such-and-such can be fun. And a real social rallying point… or a social disaster depending on how you handle it. Context people. Not everyone wants to know the details of your 42nd level monk/thief. But these things don’t REALLY matter. Not next to the loss of life in a terrorist bombing, or a child being diagnosed with cancer. Now if someone goes on a message board for supporting cancer victims and says ‘fuck malignant lymphoma’ I am not going to say a word.

This whole ‘blog is about being hardcore about this thing or that. I’ve spewed out a lot of words here. But I’m the last person in the world who’d say any of it is actually important. My perspective isn’t the last word, but gaining some kind of realistic perspective should probably be the goal of anyone who has spent time in a flame war over a video game or feels betrayed by a faceless corporation.

Uh, assuming you didn’t just get fired from there that is. THAT'S important and you might have a case for slagging then.

If whatever you love sells out and gets all shitty. Move on. Make note of it wherever you have to, to whomever you feel, but try not to waste a lot of energy on it. You might need that energy for when your Mom dies in a car accident tomorrow.

Double Shot of Double Oh Seven.

I've finally watched the two most recent James Bond films, Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace.

As many Bond films as I've seen (though I wouldn't say I'm a huge fan) I couldn't help but enter into viewing these with certain expectations. Expectations to be met by these being Bond films-- the traditions I guess-- and expectations about what this 'reboot' would contain considering the modern penchant for turning series' grim and gritty. Casting Daniel Craig as the new Bond only cemented my prognostication since Craig is NOT the go-to guy for a debonaire, classically handsome, gentleman-spy type. And leave it to trailers to even further establish these expectations. I had been expecting basically the English equivalent to the Bourne films that starred Matt Damon.

And none of that was too far off, now that I've seen them.

Now don't get me wrong. I like the Bourne films just fine. The first one was understandably influential in how the suspense/spy genre was going to be depicted from that point on. Almost revolutionary. The Bond films are not the only ones in the genre to wear the Bourne influence.

The Daniel Craig version's movies basically wind the clock back all the way to Bond's early adventures after just getting his double-oh license, the license to kill. The films have separate characters but essentially describe one large arc and I found the first film a lot stronger as a companion piece to the second. I actually felt the presence of the character of Vesper (Bond's girlfriend) to be quite strong in the second film despite Vesper not actually appearing there.


Negatives out of the way first: It was COMPLETELY what I expected. In addition to that, the big dramatic moment at the end was boldly telegraphed and was in fact a virtual blueprint for how love interests in spy films-- and Bond in particular-- are handled. The only thing that suprised me in the film was that they DID go to the cliched 'betrayal/she had to' plot device. I also found the editing and some of the dialogue left me confused. This is not a huge problem watching the films on DVD, but I had a few too many WTF moments that required a rewind to see what I missed. I'm thinking in a theatrical screening this would be problematic. And this is coming from a guy who watches all kinds of movies with weird accents and dialogue and is a veteran of Hong Kong's most spastic scene cutting practices. On a second viewing I'm sure it would all fall into place, but these films are pretty fast paced and even I found my focused attention missed some stuff. Probably the only plot detail I found totally unconvincing in a 'that's Hollywood' kind of way, was Bond's treatment and recovery from being poisoned in the first film.

Positives: Bond probably need a reboot. While I find it becoming tiresome that almost all 're-imagings' (and film adaptations in general) feel the need to go all grim and gritty, I think in Bond's case it was probably necessary. The series' was absolutely becoming formulaic. And Daniel Craig DOES do a passable job in the various elegant sections when necessary. That shit just doesn't last very long. It is only five minutes work to be playing cards or sipping Dom before he has to bury an elbow in some cronie's eye socket. And that's another positive. More even than the Bourne movies these two films have a hyperkinetic pace. Most movies with that pace really push the believability envelope even for their fantastic premises (Indiana in a fridge, anyone?). Bond only really did it (for me) with the poisoning scene mentioned above. While I want to complain about the fact that Bond has almost no 'regular' adventures so soon after getting his license to kill-- the movies have an intense sort of plot most series wouldn't get to for a few episodes-- it is still true that Bond as an idea really needs no introductions or setups. It struck me as odd that he is already at odds with M and having a serious love interest/betrayal plot in what amounts to his first double-oh adventure, but after viewing them both, I think it was probably the way to go. The movies cram a lot into the running times, but still manage to have some long almost Jackie-chan style chase setpieces. And I liked how Craig's Bond is more physical/visceral but no attempt was made to make him some kind of kung-fu acrobat fighter guy. The films show him calculate the quickest way to cut off his more nimble quarry, and when he gets to them, he just plows through them Krav Maga style with lots of locks, disarms, and short sharp blows to the vitals. Bond has always been on the ruthless side, but Craig's is pretty realistically cold. I was actually moved when he himself finally finds reasons to be emotional himself. This owes a lot to Craig's performance. I don't think any of it was much of a stretch, but he was nuanced in a way that former Bond actors have not been.

Would I recommend them? Yes. If you are a hardcore Bond fan it may be necessary to put some of your fanboy expectations on the back burner and be open-minded. I am not so married to a particular concept of Bond that this was difficult for me, but others might have some work there. The films are a pretty good example of really fast-pacing that is not exhausting in the same way as the Indiana Jones movies or anything starring Vin Diesel or Brendan Frasier.

The Left Hand Feels Different

I have recently read Ursula K. LeGuin’s novel The Left Hand of Darkness. Kind of a spooky title considering the actual subject matter in the book. The story is about a (normal) human’s adventures as an ambassador to a planet peopled by beings who are part of the human family (a genetically engineered subbranch), but are all of neutral/changeable gender. The ‘left hand’ of the title is part of a quote in the literature of the planet’s take on the philosophy of dualism similar to our concept of yin/yang.

While this book was written in 1969 it manages to still be largely relevant (I think) to the 21st century reader, in theme and subject as well as avoiding anachronism. LeGuin isn’t really concerned with technology or, given the subject matter, really technical aspects of genetic engineering. She lays down the hard science and hard science fiction bits down with somewhat broad strokes so there’s not a lot of fuel for nitpicking, and the ‘science’ isn’t the point of the story anyway. Where she packs in details is the world building aspect, especially the society and history of the Gethenian (planet Gethen or Winter) peoples. She has a pretty clever seamless knack for alternating between present narrative, and relevant myth and history chapters.

LeGuin is known for a feminist slant to her stories and a distaste for violence. Both of these traits are on display in LHOD but they aren’t particularly heavy handed or preachy. In fact, the feminism aspects might be surprisingly level and almost understated for readers whose concept of the term is more strident or who are able to place the story in its real-world historical context. LeGuin speculates on both male and female aspects contributing to social constructs, positing the usual ‘men equal aggression’ trope (Gethenians lacking male identities most of their lives have no war), but also finding that the Gethenians are rather lifeless and stagnant without this male dynamic. Gethenians are shown to be a socially concerned, nurturing society… stereotypically feminine traits, but it was never clear to me why a neutral-gender population would default to this feminine standard… probably the only glaring question I really had reading the book. Probably LeGuin didn’t intend it to come off as feminine specifically—more as ‘neutral’ and that if the Gethenians had instead been feminine-dominant there’d have been some other societal imbalance indicated. Obviously I have to view this as a male reader seeing this with a mindset forty years after it was written!

Her handling of violence was also done well. The (main) protagonist comes from an ‘enlightened’ galactic confederation, and in time-honored SF tradition that means violence-disinclined, more Picard than Kirk as it were. But the ambassador is also cognizant of more primitive society’s need to grow up and through their violent tendencies. Gethen, lacking male aggressiveness and hindered in warfare possibilities by the bitter, lethal nature of their planet’s climate, keep their own violence frequent but relatively low-level… on the nature of raids into rival territory or as aspects of politics, assassinations and the like. LeGuin manages to somehow make violence (and punishment in general) futile and distasteful, without avoiding or ignoring it unrealistically or going with the ‘but sometimes it is necessary’ that most peace-espousing good guys seem to need to fall back on in American-fictive conflict resolution/rationalization.

(This actually brings up an interesting reminder to me about Lukyanenko’s Night Watch novels that I’m also reading. It is a horror adventure series set in Russia written by a Russian author, and half of what makes it so interesting is the completely different moral stance from which it is written. No attempt has been made by the translators to Americanize the books, which is all the better. But Wow! Russians sure don’t think like we do. Not that I expected them to, but it is still quite a nail in the forehead some of the conclusions the Russian heroes come to, or the decisions they make. As a white Euro-descended male, the typical Russian doesn’t look that far off from myself or most people I see every day, but it is easy to forget the EASTERN European/Asian history and context that is SO different from our anglo/gallic/latin bedrock. Lukyanenko is considered quite popular as a street-wise, every-man author too… so I’m going to assume his views are NOT atypical of modern Russians. I could be wrong about that, of course.)

I think one of the greatest things about this book is that it is one of the many examples that packs a lot of story in a spare space. I think this shit is a lost art. Authors like Michael Moorcock, Fritz Leiber, and LeGuin here could world-build complete with myth and history in a fraction of the page count of more modern authors. And I don’t feel like I’m lacking anything after I finish one of their books either. I’m not saying I don’t want to know more about the worlds, or that thick books are all beneath consideration. I just find the ‘old ways’ admirable. Spare plotting, picking up the details along the way, minimal exposition… all demanded by the minimal page counts demanded by paperback marketing of the day. LeGuin has some pretty big books out there now, as does Moorcock, whose ‘plot is everything’ philosophy really scores points with me. But those fat-ass novels still really move. Its not really about putting your characters through a breakneck pace series of events. Hell, Tanith Lee is the queen of purple prose and she still got the work done in sliver-sized paperbacks. It more about focused, concise writing that doesn’t wallow in indulgent bullshit. If someone was just learning the basics of writing and their chosen genre was SF, fantasy, or horror (hell, any genre maybe) I think they’d do better looking to this style than to the Tolkiens or Eddings. Not only will these old authors show how to get to the nuts and bolts of the craft, but if one is breaking in by contributing shorter work to fanzines or webzines one needs to know how to get the job done with space to spare.

LeGuin won just about every SF award you can get for this work, and it holds up. In a time where we like to bloat just about everything we touch; books, movies, serving sizes for food, it was quite a refreshing turn. Too bad you have to reach back so far for this kind of workmanship, but good there are so many examples to be had.

Color Me Not Impressed

Warning! Mainstream movie review, but serious gut-cloggingly nerdy moments included!



Took the kids to see Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen a few days ago and it left me disappointed.



I've never been a real Transformers fan. When I was a kid, the robot animation I was into were the so-called super robots (aka Shogun Warriors in the USA) like Mazinger Z, Getter Robo, and Brave Raideen. I kind of kept a little knowledge of the Transformers in the periphery of my fan slobber because in their heyday you really couldn't be in a comic shop without some exposure. I'd also seen a few of the shows, knew who the major characters were, and had some general recollection of the overall storyline and background.

Fast forward to modern times. My son is a bigger Transformers fan than I was. Not HUGE, mind you. Mobile Suit Gundam is his show of choice, though he'll soak up anything to do with robots and fighting. So it was quite the event to take him and his sister to the first Transformer movie a couple of summers back. And we were not disappointed. The kids were going to like it no matter what, and once I got over my kids watching the teenage sexual jokes, I found myself remembering a lot about the old shows and enjoying the references... in addition to the spectacular visualisations of the Transformers themselves.

In the sequel, those same visualisations are about all the movie has going for it. I know there is a huge segment of the population who says 'its a summer popcorn flick, stop trying to watch it critcially'... but there's a limit to how far I can be pushed to accept a movie based on special effects. Certainly it is the old story when it comes to blockbuster sequels that always try to out-do the earlier episodes in terms of bigger and louder, but rarely improve on them in all the ways that really count.

My biggest problem really is that for all you have to suspend a certain amount of belief to buy into the Cybertron mythos, the first Transformer movie held to a certain logic-- internal movie logic though it was. It didn't SEEM to play fast and loose with any rules because some of the rules hadn't been written yet. And the film just built on what was established. The new film completely ignores 'the rules' established in the first film and really, REALLY suffers for it. While I'll give the producers props for not inventing any of the stuff in the film (they actually mined past Transformer material for the characters and events) they've twisted it so much that it no longer resembles much recognisable from the admittedly complicated Transformer universe. They also undermined a lot of the significant aspects of the first film.

You can find whole huge lists of problems and plot holes from a number of online critics, but the ones that really glared at me while watching the film:

There's a 'greater' evil than Megatron. That really diminishes Megatron's threat and power from the first film. I wouldn't mind an OLDER evil that THOUGHT it was using Megatron, but I'd rather Megatron had just been using The Fallen. This is one thing the Star Wars movies got right. When you found out Darth Vader had a boss, it still didn't diminish his badassedness. Most audience members felt when it got right down to it, Darth Vader was the apprentice because he let it be that way, that's just how the Sith work, not because the Emperor was a real threat to him. And Revenge of the Sith doesn't do anything to dissuade you from that. Anakin either outclasses the Emperor when he turns or is well on his way to doing so, fancy dark side lightning or no. In the Transformer universe (as it exists in comics and films) there ARE older and greater evils than Megatron, BUT they aren't revealed until many stories in, and only after Megatron has been well-worn as a villain. And even THEN Megatron usually manages to come out not being just a toadie.

The prototype railgun that destroys Demolisher on top of the pyramid. WTF? The humans spend a lot of the film being largely ineffectual against in Transformer battles and the evil government human takes Optimus to task for not sharing Transformer war technology. There was a point in the film where said evil government human breaks the contract between the Autobots and PEST, the human special forces in charge of hunting rogue Decepticons... and I was confounded because the Autobots are the only ones that can easily battle other Transformers. NOW I get it. Evil government human must've known about the railgun AND had a plan in place to equip these bad boys in all sizes to PEST. Seriously though? Why wasn't THAT thing used more than once?

The Pretender. The Decepticon masquerading at the college hottie. There actually IS such a thing as organically-skinned Pretenders in the Transformer universe... and this one supposedly flashed on an Alice in Wonderland animatronic to get its non-robot form... but with all that dropped from the onscreen plot, the character becomes just an excuse to have Sam involved in more comical sexual hijinx.

In fact, A LOT of the comedy was way more broad than I could appreciate. Probably culminating in the geriatric old Transformer found at the Smithsonian (which incidentally opens out onto a huge airfield in the back-- DC skyline nowhere in sight). And I already had the uncomfortable squirmies over the humor in the first one. Now I'm no prude... far from it. But there is a certain age appropriateness that you expect with a movie about Transformers. Look at who the toys and previous incarnations have been aimed at. Movie number one had a fair amount of cussin' but it also was pushing it a bit with the masturbation humor. The second one really overdoes it. Apart from all the overt seduction the Pretender throws at Sam, the capper might be his STONED Mom lipping off to strangers about overhearing her son losing his cherry.

I think this movie just tried too hard, and lost its focus. Plot was an inconsistent mess, with holes you could drive Optimus through. Tried to be a dirty joke movie, bleah (a Transformer has testicles? Right.) Stupid robot chracters undermining the actual cool robots. And there were cool robots with awesome battles. Optimus (being a better fighter than the first film) and taking out the huge Devastator at the beginning as well as battling multiple attackers (including Megatron!) at once was just cathartic fanboy joy. It just isn't enough to hide the really bad parts.

At least my kids thought it was cool. Hopefully though they won't think too much about the scen with Pretender trying to shove her mechanical phallus-tongue down Sam's throat.

Thunder Force VI

So I bought Thunder Force VI a few days ago. This is a game I was really psyched for. I played all the previous entries (apart from the original home PC first installment) on the Genesis/Mega Drive and Sega Saturn.

As of this writing, the game hasn't been out very long, but I couldn't help reading opinions and semi-reviews on various sites from players who had the game sooner than I did. And much (maybe not the majority) is pretty negative.

I have my own opinion, but I think most of the criticism comes from two places, unrealistic expectations and a misunderstanding of what the intentions of the game designers. That doesn't mean I think everyone should believe this is a great game, but I think a lot of players... at least the ones blabbing on the web... aren't looking at the context of this game's creation.

To get it out of the way, I like the game. I think it does exactly what it is designed to do... and what Sega designed it to do. Be a basic, accessible (re-)introduction to a classic series. It doesn't have fancy Cave-esque scoring systems. It doesn't have divinely-inspired visuals or Treasure's flair for clever gameplay mechanisms. It is not an attempt to reach the next plateau of awesomeness in the same way Gradius V was. It is bright, loud, simple, fun, fast and an homage to all the Thunder Force games that went before. While mostly having gameplay and polygons in common with the fifth installment, it has the bright colors, and atmosphere similar to the earlier episodes. I'm enjoying it. It's simple, but it rocks.

Addressing some of the criticisms now, I get why many players think the levels are too short. Even for an STG where five to seven relatively short levels are the norm, Thunder Force VI doesn't last long if you are watching the clock. But the levels are not all the same length. After you get through the first three, the order-selectable ones, the length of time spent in each area goes way up. In fact level five (which is not the last level) goes on longer than most shooters I can remember. No, I'm not including Radiant Silvergun. But this game isn't supposed to BE Radiant Silvergun.

I also get why many players think the game is too easy. But um, y'know, pump up the difficulty. It isn't like the menus are in Japanese so you can't figure out how. Or turn down your lives and continues. Cripes. Accessibility. They are introducing a whole, new potentially much less skilled or experienced generation to shmups. Not every person buying this is going to be a 1CC Dodonpachi player. In an interview in Edge magazine game director for Thunder Force Tez says shooters, like fighting games, have grown 'too manic'. I agree with him. I'm all for bullet hell shooters-- I like my Mars Matrix and Mushihimesama just plenty, but there has to be room for all different styles. The idea is a fun experience, and winkling around between curtains of bullets isn't everyone's cuppa. Every now and then even an experienced bullet hell master might want to relax relatively-speaking with something not quite so fucking fussy.

I have also seen the bizarre lament that the game is too derivative of the old Thunder Force games. Hm. It has been centuries (in video game terms) since the last Thunder Force game came out. I'm not sure I would've expected them to do anything BUT closely reference the previous games. I'm guessing they were going for a balance between old and new that would show new players what Thunder Force is about while instilling nostalgia in older players. Some of the bosses are updates of old ones. The weapons all have previous counterparts. The levels are mostly polygonal remakes of areas we've seen before. But in this PS2 incarnation it is newer, brighter, faster, and louder. It is the first game after a looooooong hiatus. It kinda HAS to have that 'in our last episode' thing going on-- the talky narrative box at the beginning of any comic or manga-- only this is dosed along the whole game.

I've seen the occasional mention of somewhat unsophisticated visuals, not a lot of extras, or slowdown. Well, they work just fine for me, especially considering this project was an experiment for Sega, and as such has a really pared-down budget. Shooters are a tough sell in this age of dwindling arcades and players ravenous for RPGs(Japan) or FPS games (USA).

As detailed recently in Edge magazine, Sega bought a famous but defunct license and used it as the start of what Tez Okano hopes will be a revival of interest in shooters in Japan. In order to make that viable it had to be done economically. That meant developing it on the PS2 and not having the most wiz-bang visuals or masturbatory extras.

Realistic expectations, and a simple enjoyment of this game should equal support for it. And support for this game may help bring along more STGs.... of all types.

So yeah, I like Thunder Force VI. A lot. Sure as shit beats Broken Thunder or no Thunder Force at all.