Burnout Revenge: A 10 year retrospective

Today marks the ten year anniversary of the release of Burnout Revenge in North America, and as a fan of the series I had to take this opportunity to give Burnout Revenge a retrospective. Criterion has created a top tier arcade racing series and titles like Burnout Paradise and Revenge could still stand out as objectively better than some of the next gen racers out there. My Burnout 3 retrospective has what needs to be said about that game; its a masterpiece of the PS2 era that perfects its gameplay around what it wants to achieve, and is worth recommending to even haters of driving games.

First off, I will admit, I did not like Burnout Revenge when compared to Burnout 3 when it was released. I felt the tone was a bit too aggressive, the addition of traffic checking brought it into cartoony aggression, and the tracks were self contained in their own bubble without a feeling of belonging in a greater world.

That said, Revenge has most definitely aged better than Burnout 3 ,and if both of these games were presented as they are now, I would pick Revenge as the game to play because of the HD graphics, sense of speed and award calibre sound design. That's not to say Burnout 3 looks bad 11 years on, but just that Revenge has a much stronger presentation to itself over its predecessor and feels made for a newer generation of consoles, as evident in the Xbox 360 version.

So, does the 360 version significantly improve the game? Is it still worth playing a decade later and with new consoles on the scene? Well, lets find out.

On the 360 version, the first thing I noticed when playing is the intro screen. It has the same female voice as the xbox/PS2 version, but she describes how the game is now all set for the next generation of racing in HD. Its a nice touch and a feast for both the eyes and ears when playing on a widescreen TV with surround sound (another thing only imagined back in 2004/5).

So next up, the differences between what was on the original xbox, and the 360 version.
The menu has a different background, of a high end supercar plastered with the 360 logo racing down the sunshine keyes, along with the traditional burnout theme as opposed to the BT remix of the doors playing to a car weaving through traffic in the older version. The menu itself is fundamentally the same, so its easy to choose whatever race type you wish.

The tracks themselves have more detail, from added barrels to new animations in the skybox like a helicopter flying overhead or a flock of birds. It still has the reddish tinge of aggression that fits the games overall theme of revenge. The sound is improved, more on that in a bit. the game also feels seamless, as transitions from the menu to a race are more fluid thanks to the soundtrack playing through instead of abruptly halting every time a new race is chosen. The loading screens are animated with crashed vehicles instead of wallpapers sliding together awkwardly, but are just as long. Importantly, it still plays and looks like a burnout game should, and is just as fast, so no complaints. A solid upgrade.

Races are in one word:INTENSE. I could not believe the sense of speed that the cars were giving, and these were supposed to be the slowest in the game?! The sound of the car shifting into top gear with boost flowing and dodging oncoming traffic is bound to be on my list of great xbox 360 moments if I ever get round to making such a list.

hyperdrive has nothing on this

The sound design has a lot to do with this. Boost sounds like a rocket igniting, and shifting to the highest gear at 209MPH really pumps you up as you dodge a seemingly endless road of oncoming traffic. Drift slams sound like tigers clawing into each other, and the sound of near misses comes with the appropriate whoosh of wind past. It truly is award winning stuff that no racer since has managed to capture.

In terms of gameplay, the same modes are available as on the old xbox version. There are the standard races through traffic, time attack, traffic attack, crash mode and road rage. My younger self hated the idea of traffic attack being the default in Revenge, something which got fixed somewhat in Burnout Paradise, but right now I see how it adds to the idea of speed being able to obliterate anything. Traffic attack as a mode is a logical progression, smashing vehicles to set a new record on the leaderboard, and ultimately is a barrel of fun. If you want a way to vent off your frustrations of the work commute home, then look no further!

Traffic Attack as a concept feeds into a larger idea, that there is a lot more traffic on all of the courses, and the mechanic can be a necessity in the urban environments. Even Paradise seems to have a lower traffic count than some of the busy junctions you have to traverse, so in that regard checking traffic works within the game rules.

The track design is absolutely superb for the mechanics. Alternate routes and big air jumps are included into tracks, with windy corners for great drifts, and opportunities to test your top speed on long straights. Leap off Eternal City's Spanish Steps and get a pair of wings.

But the base ingredients of the driving controls are just as perfect as they were in 3, and that is what makes Revenge fun as a racer. The great tracks, presentation and intensity could have been all for nought if the game was a chore to play, particularly since the game has multiple events on similar routes. Thankfully, you could not ask for a smoother arcade racer. The drifting is as responsive as ever, boost works a treat, and you can control your car even at rocket speeds through al manner of obstacles. No other racing series could craft a track like White Mountain's downhill descents, and make it as easy to control round as this game does. Beginners will love it, and Even the best burners will find a challenge when avoiding trickier obstacles at faster speeds on the later levels.

Crash Mode returns, and is a marked improvement over 3. It just feels more self contained, and events are played on dedicated junctions this time around. You get more dedicated crash vehicles, from tiny bangers to mobile diners. The junctions are certainly more creative, with Lone Peak's Doughnut ramp being a particular highlight.

The only downside to the crash mode is the relatively painful loading time. The older versions suffer from a long rewind, while the 360 version speeds up the replay, but not quite as quickly as in 3. The 360 version also removes the golf meter style startup so that's welcome. Admittedly, the loss of the powerups featured in 3 does mean you only score well from the largest crashes as opposed to being given the best route to the 4X powerup, but that is minor. It still is at heart a racing/puzzle hybrid that is still in a league of its own.

You could say its a blast

Finally there is multiplayer, and the Xbox live feature comes into its own for the series. At the time, there were fantastic team road rage races and crash tour, but the population is so low that the only players left are those willing to break track records. Split screen is present, but with a noticeably lower framerate I would recommend taking turns on the crash mode than racing.

While the game has aged better than 3, it isn't without fault. It has been ten years so don't go in expecting it to look as good as Burnout Paradise or Criterion's later Hot Pursuit. The aforementioned aggressive tone can get a bit much. This is a racer that goes out of its way to make you crash opponents, rather than staying focused on winning by dodging obstacles. The tonal shift feels mean and somewhat unnecessary, but some will like it and others will hate it. Traffic checking may be incorporated into the design, but it takes the suspension of disbelief too far (as if the 200MPH racing wasn't enough for you) and the soundtrack isn't quite as memorable as 3. B3 had a soundtrack that would only exist in 2004, while Revenge has some oddball choices that stand the test of time, but many are run of the mill Burnout.

A lighter tone would have been better

In the end, Revenge was and still is a blast to play. Some racers have tonnes of mileage but fall flat from being a bore to drive around, but Revenge is the complete dream for an arcade racing fan. You could not ask for better controls, interesting tracks to race around or modes to enjoy. Some may bemoan the tonal shift, but it still shows newer racers how it is done in the intensity department. Any developer making a racer right now needs to learn that 60FPS high speed racing like revenge is better than any form of 30FPS dull racing in a pretty skybox. The tracks have enough alternates to make the world tour just long enough to not wear out its welcome, and multiplayer still excels, even if the population isn't around these days.

If you like racers, Revenge is a must buy. If you hate racers, Revenge is a must buy to challenge your perceptions. Its worth getting even 10 years on.

Now the Hype is Gone: Far Cry 2

The Far Cry series is one that I have admittedly got into fairly late into its series. I played Far Cry 3 last year, and considered it to be amongst the best shooter stories out there for action fans. While games like Bioshock have a lot of philosophical quandaries, Far Cry 3 had a deceptively simpler story of how far you would go to save your friends. While simple on the surface, it addressed a lot of smaller issues that go deeper; drug use, sex and love relationships, proving yourself in an age where being a man no longer matters, what makes a civilisation civil, are we missing our primal roots? It was very enjoyable and the story added much needed context to the madness happening on screen.

On top of that the game was well presented. A series tradition is showcasing the strengths of the graphics engines, and it showed with a lush tropical theme and a bright colourful aesthetic to add to the drug theme. The gameplay mechanics were rock solid, allowing for viable stealth and all out gunfighting if you upgraded protagonist Jason Brody into a ninja or a killing machine. And of course there were awesome set piece moments, which worked in context of the story. The helicopter gun turret may have been done to death in other shooters, but here it was important storywise.

You know its good when this plays

So with such a high benchmark I had caution when buying Far Cry 2, expecting less from the game in most aspects (and ultimately it does feel like an inferior sequel, more on that near the end) but unusually it has things which I enjoy more than Far Cry 3.

The setup is fairly straightforward; you play as one of a cast of mercenaries with their own backstories and are sent to a war torn country deep in Africa to assassinate the main arms dealer, the Jackal. He has been supplying both warring factions with all the death devices they could possibly need to continue the war, and he is bad news...or is he?

The Far Cry tradition of curious villains likely started here, with the Jackal really showing a lot of traits with both Vaas Montenegro and Pagan Min. He actually nurses you back to health after you contract malaria literally five minutes into the game (you really should have planned this better) and the rest of the game is the hunt for him while playing the warring factions against each other to get more information.

Unfortunately, another trait the Jackal shares with Pagan Min is that he disappears for long stretches of the game, mostly existing through audio logs, and you really feel his loss, as the rest of the characters are just so bogstandard, with only the mercenaries you encounter on your travels providing an anchor to the chaos. You want to hear more of his stories on the nature of warfare and blood diamonds but because there is so little screentime his point is lost in the chaos of the game. This leaves a game with the feeling that there could have been a much stronger narrative framework for the missions than what we actually have.

Did you miss me?

The civil war aspect seems to be the secondary focus then, and to its credit the game shows two very believable armies fighting for control. The UFLL feel authoritative but are constantly hiring mercenaries to keep dodgy deals off the books, and the APR are ruthless intimidating masses, and the obvious invaders, but which gained a foothold from ruling nearby nations for the better. Neither ultimately benefit the country, showing some dark scenes like destroying water supplies and burning villages. Its a shame then, that ultimately you never influence how the conflict ultimately turns out.

However, what they are fighting for is the reason Far Cry 2 stands out among the pack; the African country.

The first thing that really gives Far Cry 2 its own flavour is the setting. I don't think there is a better setting for this game and without it Far Cry 2 would be a shell of what it ultimately is. Set in the Unnamed African Country (UAC), it truly gives the game a breath of fresh air from most shooters with desert or urban combat. Here it shows an area where war is an everyday part of life, and some truly grim settings. The first visit to Mokuba feels awful because I had never seen such a place in games before. Its meant to be a town, but its really a slum built on sheet metal with no running water, food sources or electricity. Garbage bags and insects buzz around waiting to prey on the next poor soul to enter the area.

And that is only the beginning. You are truly surprised at the variety of locales. Going into Far Cry 2 I assumed it would be savannah's, desert and little else. What I actually got was a taste of jungles, swamps, oasis, desert, ancient villages, river settlements, huge elevations, even a breathtaking lakeside view near a bar. It all looks spectacular, even after a few years of improved graphics tech. The art direction towards a realistic depiction of an African civil war has to be commended, and more games should do a game world this interesting to play in.

With the realistic world comes some realistic mechanics, and this is the second way Far Cry 2 stands out. Your character is a real idiot for not taking malaria precautions before arriving, and as a result you have to take malaria tablets every half hour or so to prevent the disease from killing you. This also fuels story missions, because eventually you will run out of tablets, and must find civilian missions to help the people stuck in this war. It may sound noble, but you are doing it for the same reason they are; to survive.

Weapons you find are rusted and the only thing the armies have at times, and as a result they are prone to jamming and malfunctioning. I cannot think of many other games that do this, even in the military genre, so having this adds to the game immensely. You learn that to become unstoppable you need a clean set of tools to get the job done. As a result you do assassination missions for blood diamonds, and head to weapon shops to help them out to get new weapons. Like with malaria, the mechanic serves story missions.

And finally there are missions involving fellow mercenaries like yourself that help you in the long run if you do favours for them. Any safehouses you find will be better stocked the more you give a helping hand, and even if you get shot to bits other mercenaries will heal you when out on the job. Its either that, or do the graphic improvised first aid to keep going.

The realistic world does have issues though. The map reading keeps with the immersive theme, but you do wish you could fast travel to safehouses like in Far Cry 3 to save on the long car journeys. Bus stations are your only hope, and much of the time they are a trek to get to anyway so you may as well drive across the 50 square kilometres of map.

Gun mechanics are fairly standard, but the addition of flame based weapons adds another layer of strategy as you burn the grass with molotovs or a flamethrower. The effect looks great as you see wildfires spread and can be used tactically.

While comparing to later instalments, it becomes apparent early on that stealth just isn't a viable tactic for most missions. You have a monocular to tag useful equipment, but cannot tag enemies movements like in later games. You also have no stealth indicator, so enemies will show no signs of spotting you before firing the AK47's right at you, even if you were hiding in the bushes. It makes weapons like the silent MP5 or the suppressed Makarov feel like a wasted opportunity, that they could have been used to greater effect if the mechanics improved on the stealth focus. Headshots also curiously seem to miss, so if you did take the aforementioned weapons and hoped to get silent kills, good luck because a lot of the time you hit the body and enemies take a lot of damage anywhere but the head.

This might not do

Still, it does seem like a middling complaint knowing that these issues on the gameplay standpoint got rectified in the sequels, but heres my big complaint when comparing to the sequels; the narrative framework.

Far Cry 3 worked so well because the story pulled you into the mechanics, and not the other way around. You want to know more about the Far Cry 2 story because of the mechanics and the world. By contrast, Far Cry 3 has all of the same mechanics, but teaches them to you slowly and with fantastic story missions to invest you into it. You were intimidated by the first base you had to liberate because you were a Joe Soap with only a machete and the real fear of getting shot if you were spotted.By comparison, in this game you are a mercenary with all the military experience you need to kick ass across the world. Its perhaps a relatability issue, but then you also see that the characters in Far Cry 3 are a lot stronger. I cannot tell who the names are of the characters here, despite knowing a few over the course of a lengthy campaign.

You get to know all of your friends in Far Cry 3, along with the secondary villains and main baddies. They also reacted to your actions, illustrating your gradual arc from being a doomed tourist to an unstoppable legend. Its like Breaking Bad, you don't notice the change until someone else points out in the story of what you were like before you arrived on the island, and then it hits.

Despite all the moaning about a weak story and inferior mechanics, its not enough to avoid giving Far Cry 2 a recommendation. You just rarely see a game world as interesting as this one, and despite the lack of fast travel, there is something to be said about a relaxing drive through the lush jungles. Mechanics are solid, and standout in a genre filled with spotless weapons and no secondary concerns to your health. Its definitely worth buying if you see it in stores, as its likely quite cheap and easy to find. Who knows, maybe you will find a better tale in here than I could. Give it a shot.

Now the Hype is gone: Modern Warfare 2 (part 2)

This Retrospective review of Modern Warfare 2 was originally going to be a comparison between itself and Black Ops 2. Both had the story about an invaded America and both had multiplayer that was considered by many in the community to be the best in series. However, I figured both have very different approaches when you get down to it, and never is it more apparent than their multiplayer design.

Modern Warfare 2 differs from most other entries by going all out with its now blockbuster level budget, and is definitely bigger than its immediate predecessor Call of Duty 4. There are more killstreaks, more weapons, more equipment, more modes, more of EVERYTHING…
But does that make it a better game?

Again, comparing to Black Ops 2, the single best word to describe Modern Warfare 2 in terms of multiplayer is ‘unrestrained’. Many elements that were toned down and refined to perfection in Black Ops 2 were let loose in this instalment, which leads to a gulf in enjoyment for the player. They can relish in the enjoyment of blowing up entire teams with grenades and shotguns, or they will be pummelled into the ground for half the match before they can get their feet and counterattack. This one element is enough to make it a love/hate game.

For starters, you are given approximately double the amount of available equipment from Call of Duty 4, and a lot of these, while misplaced, are all fun to use and offer a viable tactical advantage when used in the right way. The interesting thing about the weapons on offer is that despite having more, the balance isn't as all over the place as you might think, and all offer their own unique feel.  Modern Warfare 2 decided to add a decisively updated arsenal upon the CoD4 arsenal (which were relatively prevalent in modern times, but felt like the game took place in the 1990’s rather than present day). MW2 included the likes of the FAMAS, ACR, Intervention, UMP45 and TAR21 to feel like these were the weapons of now, and likely the near future. There are strong but slow automatics, fast firing but low damage hoses, semi auto powerhouses, burst fire precision rifles, and all act different to others in class. Its a well rounded class, and this works better than future instalments like Black Ops, which instead of offering variety, made clone weapons to balance. 

See anything you like?

Perks are reduced a bit from CoD4, in favour of adding pro perks as extra bonuses. Unnecessary perks from the predecessor, such as the ability to hold breath longer when sniping, work far better as extra pro variants for better perks in this game. With the exception of perhaps scrambler, all perks have their purpose and can be used to great effect, even if one or two perks feel better than others (more on that near the end).

And of course, killstreaks got increased from the base three from previous games to a whole host of reward options. AC130's, UAV's, Care Packages, Attach Helicopters and even a game winning nuclear strike can be earned through enough kills. This can be gamebreaking for many, as the rewards stack with kills and some are squashing to the enemy team. However, this really is a defining addition to Modern Warfare 2's multiplayer. The whole risk and reward element of picking higher rewards and then having it pay off is such a part of the strategy in this game that its hard to imagine it without rewards.

However, to play with great equipment and perk choices on poor maps would give MW2 a very bad rep. MW2 wins a lot of credit back in its map design and a lot of the community agree that this game has the best core maps of the recent series. The designers based maps around variety, some verticality and very well placed areas for combat. Rust for example is all Close quarters all the time while Afghan is made for domination with a fairly circular path leading to all three flags. The maps are also memorable in many ways because they all cater to different styles while also usually having some areas that can be effective for any class.

Highrise is a classic example of this. The map is suited for a general deathmatch, yet it contains a central elevated roof for snipers, two office buildings for close quarters, and tunnels for stealthy players. Even with that variety, there are areas inbetween, such as the long passages between the two office buildings that cater to a standard aggressive playstyle.

While Highrise may be the ultimate deathmatch map, by contrast Wasteland is built for Snipers with lots of grass and wide open spaces. Even here, the map has three trenches that lead to a chaotic bunker for those that want to play faster.

The gameplay is adapted to each map, and to succeed you must memorise the locations, know where the best spots to use your given class is, and if on an objective game mode, the fastest routes to the flag or bomb. Future games in the series have relied on a three lane system, which is good to play but eventually leads to having similar strategies for every match, and it becomes routine quicker.

We are looking at you Black Ops 2!

In this case, variety trumps philosophy, and Modern Warfare 2 is more varied. There are some three lane maps, such as Sub Base, but many maps are full of surprise routes and suitable cover to make for a lot more tactics to succeed.

While the game has a lot in its favour, the problem with the unrestrained MW2 is that it ultimately is unbalanced to this day. This boils down to many quirks that weren’t ironed out by release, and more so, weren’t patched after release. Many point to the West/Zampella exodus of Infinity Ward as the reason why many issues never got patched. The worst offender of balance issues that remains unresolved today is pairing the One Man Army or Scavenger perks with Danger Close and spamming grenades indefinitely. Other issues include the overly long Commando lunge, the Powerful Shotguns as secondary weapons, Tactical insertion in Free for all, party chat issues and broken suppressors on some weapons.

Despite this, the game did get a few patches early on, such as the Javelin patch, Model 1887 nerf and fast sprinting cut from holding a care package marker. If only this sort of repair happened for the duration of the games lifecycle, this would be the game that all can enjoy.

And now onto a truly subjective point, not one with much in the way of balancing the good and bad parts. Just a question; is this game more fun to play regardless of how it got to where it is?

And for me Modern Warfare 2’s multiplayer is a tonne of fun. For all the balancing issues, killstreak problems and rich get richer gameplay, its hard not to admit that it is more rewarding to play when things go your way than other entries in the series. A lot of silly stuff is allowed to work here. Even if you hate things like quickscoping, tubing, shotgun rampages and dependence on equipment, you can still play very well with a solid all round class and show them who is boss. Others can be happy with their style, and you can be happy with yours, and there is a game mode for everyone.

Over time, this still is my favourite, and on its own merits it deserved the hype it got when it was released in 2009. The blockbuster budget nearly made it fly off the rails, but its still built on rock solid shooting and options. The graphics may not wow like they once did, but they work and have aged better than MW3's duller palette. If you never played a Call of Duty game, this may not be the best to start, but this is definitely the one if you want to find out why people love and hate the series.