Jason Dobson

Classic. There really isn’t any other word to describe New Super Mario Bros., Nintendo’s latest, and dare I say greatest game for the Nintendo DS. The game is classic both in its gameplay, which carries with the it the hallmarks of being perhaps the most polished platfromer ever created, as well as in how it makes you feel while playing. I’m over 30 years old and the instant I began playing New Super Mario Bros. I was 11 years old all over again. Some people say Nintendo makes ‘kiddy’ games. I say they make games that bring out the child in you, as that is exactly what this game does so well.

At its core, New Super Mario Bros. is a traditional 2D side scrolling platformer that dabbles in 3D but never forgets that it is a throwback to a simpler age of gaming. The game is an uncomplicated, yet highly addictive experience that brings together elements from over two decades of the franchise. As remarkable as Nintendo is or has been in the past, here the company is in rare form.

The best way to think of New Super Mario Bros. is as the culmination of all previous Super Mario Bros. adventures. The developers have picked out many of the most remarkable aspects of past games, added in a few new touches, and created a quest that feels familiar yet decidedly new at the same time. For example, classic items like the Mushroom, Fire Flower, and P Switch are found throughout the landscape, but there are new items like the Mini Mushroom that shrinks Mario so that he can squeeze through tiny spaces and down ridiculously small pipes, and a Blue Shell that Mario can wear and dash through enemies like a tossed Koopa. There’s also a Mega Mushroom that A

When we last left Bill Roper’s Flagship Studios, the team was just wrapping up a development push in October 2005, and had recently implemented a number of interesting new monsters, items and skills. While talking at length about the game, Roper talked about a number of key gameplay mechanics, not the least of which was the fact that despite the game’s appearance it is an RPG, and not a FPS. This means that hits during combat are determined by stat roles behind the scenes and not by twitch gameplay – a sticking point for many players expecting a game more in the vein of Quake or Unreal.

Hellgate, instead, with its random dungeons and numerous items, has more in common with Diablo and its sequel. Appropriate that, since Roper and his team trace their roots to Blizzard North. Now, with E3 on our doorsteps, we’ve taken the opportunity get a jump on our coverage of the game by speaking with Bill Roper again about his team’s ongoing project, especially considering the recent unveiling of the game’s second character class, The Cabalist.

Thanks for taking the time out of your busy schedule to speak with us again regarding Hellgate: London. The game really looks like its coming along. When we last spoke the team had just implemented a lot of exciting new things in time for Halloween, and you commented that there were a ton of new things flowing into the game at that time. Is the game still in a similar state of flux, or have things settled down by now?

Heh, things never seem to settle down. That’s what makes game development so exciting. There are a lot of new content we have put in for E3. We have also made some changes to the gameplay and minor directional changes to the game. This is part of the development process for us. We put things in and determine how fun it is. We will change it if it turns out to be bad. Things don’t always turn out like you imagined or designed. We have a very flexible process.

Is there anything the team has recently implemented specifically that you’d like to talk about?

Well, we added the Cabalist class and finished a few things to enable multiplayer. These are the biggest two features we are showing off at E3.

Is this the class you alluded to in our last interview which focuses on the use of arcane powers and related abilities? What does this class bring the game?

Yes, this is the class we hinted at last time. What it brings to the game is a new game experience. When we create character classes, we aren’t satisfied with different stats as so many RPGs are, instead we want the game to play fundamentally different with the different classes. With the Cabalist, she has blasting spells and pets. She can sit back and let her pets do some work while she helps from the outside. The game feels much different than the Templar who runs into the thick of things and swings away.

How does the Cabalist’s ability to summon creatures and control primal forces affect the game? How are these abilities accomplished in-game?

This is all through the pet system. The Cabalist can have one major pet and several minor pets at once. The pets run around and occupy monsters while the Cabalist boosts her pet or directly helps kill the monsters.

What are Spectral Spells? Can you give us some examples of your favorite spells?

There are different element types in Hellgate. One of the elements is Spectral. We also have poison, fire and a few others. Spectral energy at its core is a dimensional energy. The energy phases you between hell and Earth.

Let’s say I’m jumping into the game for the first time. Why would I choose to play as a Cabalist over the previously announced Templar, and how would I approach the game experience differently using this newly announced class?

Well, the Cabalist has many cool abilities and looks. They are fun to play, and mostly because the gameplay experience is so different than the Templar. The approach is finding weapons to enhance your pets and spells. They use focus items to cast their spells. Finding new focus items and using two at once (!) really make for interesting dynamics. You can choose to be just a blaster without pets, or pet heavy. There are many variations and combinations therein. Cabalists will be different from each other so there is no one single approach. I believe that is one of the keys to making our games massively replay-able.

When picking a character class, will players be able to select their gender, and will this have any effect on their character’s characteristics?

Yes, each character class will have a male and a female option. There will be no gameplay differences between male and female, however NPCs will address you differently depending on your gender, along with class and faction status.

Have you and your team decided on how many classes will be available in the game out of the box at launch? Are you leaving it open for other classes to be introduced in the future, either downloadable or through retail expansions.

We haven’t announced how many classes will be available at launch and we are definitely leaving it open for expansion classes.

When played from the third-person perspective, how does the camera work? Is it able to be freely manipulated by the player, or is positioned from a fixed isometric perspective?

You have camera control as you move around. You can pitch the camera up and down and rotate it left and right with the mouse. The mouse wheel zooms in and out, and will enter first-person perspective if you zoom in all the way. The game can’t really be played from a traditional isometric perspective. It plays with A

With the launch of the Xbox 360 coming just a month following the release of Battlefield 2: Modern Combat for the Xbox and PlayStation 2, word began to spread quickly regarding a possible port of of the game to the new platform. It wasn’t until much later did the first details begin to emerge regarding the game’s debut for the Xbox 360, and even longer still before any concrete details began to emerge regarding the changes Battlefield 2: Modern Combat would undergo for its next-generation debut.

One of the most dramatic – and expected – differences between this version and those originally released in October 2005 comes by way of the game’s visual presentation. Everything looks more crisp and detailed this time around, as vehicles, weapons, and even soldier models looks far more detailed thanks to the extra horsepower afforded by the Xbox 360. It is disappointing that more attention was not paid to the environments, however. When compared to the lush, intricately detailed streets of Mexico found in G.R.A.W., the battlefields of Modern Combat feel particularly sterile and void of personality.

Something that differentiated this game from its PC counterpart with its original release was that while Battlefield 2 was and remains the benchmark for online team-based first-person shooters, Battlefield 2: Modern Combat instead was gifted with a tremendously robust single-player component. That observation remains true for this latest version as well. Seemingly by definition, Battlefield is a multiplayer experience, yet the developers have leveraged off of Electronic Art’s experience at delivering remarkable home console games, and have turned out a single-player campaign that almost measures up to its PC counterpart. However, as terrific as it is, the campaign is unfortunately saddled with a two-dimensional story that never amounts to anything more than forgettable.

Thankfully, while the story itself may be lacking, the sheer number of options available is not. While taking part in the nonstop frenetic firefights amidst the vast, highly-detailed environments, the player has access to over thirty vehicles, as well as new equipment and numerous upgrades. The other thing that makes the single-player experience such a breath of fresh air is hot swapping, or the ability to switch direct control from one soldier to any other within visual range on the fly. This sets up the opportunity to instantly become best-suited to deal with a given situation at the press of a button, and gives the player the feeling of being more in control of the battle rather than getting by at the mercy an A.I. that, while more impressive than what was found in the initial versions of the game, is still prone to bouts of stupidity.

This jumping from soldier to soldier, coupled with the game’s more forgiving nature when it comes to aiming and run-and-gun gameplay lends the whole experience to feel much more arcade-like than its PC originator. Weapons lack much of the realism that was found on the PC, and this more than any other change from the PC version is sure to alienate its share of players. Battlefield 2: Modern Combat has been built from the standpoint of delivering more of a pick up and play experience, and this has been achieved at the expense of the simulation feel that some existing fans may be expecting.

Battlefield 2: Modern Combat also includes support for some literally manic 24-player online multiplayer matches over Xbox Live. However, unlike its PC counterpart, here multiplayer plays a distant second to the game’s single-player campaign due to the fact that hot swapping, the key component that makes the single-player game work so well, not being available in multiplayer. Similarly, multiplayer matches are limited to just two modes: conquest and capture the flag. While fun, the lack of variety offered only serves to drive home the point that Battlefield 2: Modern Combat is primarily a single-player experience.

That said, however, this is still a fun game that succeeds for very different reasons than the series dictates. Whereas Battlefield‘s previous entries have benefited from deep realistic multiplayer experiences that bordered on wartime simulations, Modern Combat‘s strength instead lies in its solo arcade-style gameplay that, despite some problems still does the franchise proud. With a better A.I., more realistic enemy spawn points, and improved presentation, Modern Combat is a welcome addition to the Xbox 360’s library. It’s a hard sell to anyone who picked up the game for either the Xbox of PlayStation 2 upon initial release, but for anyone else looking for more gun play and explosions than a Bruckheimer film, this is a sure bet.

Score: 86%

Reviewing a port of a preexisting title is usually a fairly easy task of simply evaluating how the new version measures up, or hopefully improves upon the formula that defined the original product. As we move into the next-generation, this practice of scrutinizing ports has become will continue to be made commonplace up until the current-generation of platforms finally fades into the pages of history. As it stands today, the industry is straddling a technology gap that is sometimes gaping, while at other times, as exhibited by Burnout Revenge, the crevice that is sometimes difficult to even see. As expected, this next-generation of gaming, currently presided over by the Xbox 360, is defined not by unique gameplay, but rather through visual fidelity. In some cases within the console’s early launch offerings, this made for a rather disjointed gaming experience. However, with regards to Burnout Revenge, the popular racer was and remains as one of the most visually pleasing games available for both the PlayStation 2 and Xbox. Accordingly, the version now available for the Xbox 360 is gorgeous, and while on a standard television the number of improvements are not readily apparent, an HD set highlights just how visually impressive Criterion’s crash-laden racer truly is. Right from the word go it is easy to see that the team took their sweet time with this port, making the cars more detailed, the environments more crisp, and the whole affair seems to run at a faster, somewhat smoother clip. That is, however, until too much action begins to take place on-screen, at which point the game can begin to stutter and slowdown, albeit briefly.

However, visual acuity aside, this is the same Burnout Revenge you played last September. Sure there is some new content, and online play is a bit more satisfying now thanks to the standard set of Xbox Live Achievements, but little of substantial import has been added in to change the experience. There is the new feature of being able to save and share replays over Xbox Live, which is an interesting addition, but it is hampered by an inability to save clips longer than 30 seconds, as well as the lack of a free roaming camera which unfortunately tends to make even the most spectacular wrecks seem somewhat canned.

The 360 version also does away with the golf-swing meter employed by the Crash Mode in the previous versions. In those games, this meter was used to gauge just when to press your button in order to get the best start out of the gate. Here you are simply given the benefit of the doubt, and as such have the best possible start every time. It’s a little less strategic, of course, but it was a rather small element of the game in the first place. It is an odd omission, however, so one has to assume there was some some sort of public outcry that we were left unaware of which resulted in this feature being pulled out.

Otherwise the game remains the same, which is more or less a good thing. The problems we called out in our original review, such as how crashing into cars is no longer a liability thanks to Traffic Checking, and how alternate routes can oftentimes leave you driving on nearly vacant stretches of road for seconds, if not minutes at a time, are still present and as bothersome as ever. But even so, Burnout Revenge is still a great and fun game, and is a welcome addition to the Xbox 360 library.

The question remains, however, is that if you were among the scores of players who purchased the game when it shipped last year, is there enough here to warrant the $60 price tag? Most likely not, unless you missed out on the online component the first time around, or are a HD zealot whose eyes crave the shiny allure of anything next-generation. That said, if you somehow missed out on the game initially, this is definitely the one to get. Burnout Revenge is still not the equal of 2004’s Burnout: Takedown, but it is a wonderfully visceral racing experience nonetheless.

Score: 85%

For anyone who had been following the gaming industry for any length of time, the downfall and eventual demise of Acclaim was not much of a surprise. The company that brought us such memorable gaming experiences as Burnout, Turok, and Extreme G had begun down a slippery slope of forgettable, and oftentimes downright poor releases long before their experiment with topless biking. Of course, people look back on the low point as being 2002’s Z-Axis-developed BMXXX, but their path to self-destruction was not paved with just one game, and their eventual absence was met with sighs of relief from many, while several companies with whom Acclaim had been working with for future releases were left holding the proverbial bag.

But that, as they say, is water under the bridge. In December 2005, former Activision front man Howard Marks made a play for the now-defunct company, and purchased the name A