G-pinions

In just one short month of owning Nintendo's revolutionary new system, I have taken it out of the house four times. Two of those times were during Thanksgiving, where the casual and non-gamers broke out of whatever holes these people reside to experience the joy of swinging their arms. Complete success, just like Nintendo had predicted. The other two times I showed off my Wii, to genuine fans of video games, the response was less enthusiastic. An hour or two of trying to coax fun out of Elebits and Wii Sports before moving on to games with more substance. I would not have written about my adventures in gaming's past (both of these outings ended in old school Nintendo action) except for a slanderous YouTube video I just came across. Dudes with Attitudes has been out of the limelight for far too long. It's time the world realizes that old games still have worth in today's society. You thought Gears of War was visceral. Wait until you control decapitated heads in a puzzle/action game from hell.

First, a story that ends in irony. While playing Elebits last night, I casually mentioned Taboo: The Sixth Sense to my buddy Andy. For the uninitiated, Taboo is probably the worst video game I have ever played. No hyperbola needed - this game is dreck. The reason it is so notable twenty years after release is because of the prestigious developer behind it. My favorite developer of all time, Rare, crafted this tortuous turd. Andy did not believe such a game could exist so we fired it up on the Dreamcast and experienced the lowest point in gaming history. He agreed it was putrid - a video tarot card reader pretty much has to be - but challenged the idea that it was the worst thing ever slapped onto silicon. Enter: Space Shuttle Command. The first "level" of this travesty has you entering the correct flight number and name of your shuttle. Get one of the five answers wrong and it is Game Over. Yes, this is an actual game people spent money on back in the day. Because there is a semblance of gameplay in Space Shuttle Command, it gets the nod over Taboo: The Sixth Sense. But not by much.


And people complained about Grabbed by the Ghoulies?


Still waiting for the irony? I nominated Dudes with Attitudes as another candidate for worst game ever. I know what you're thinking but this was no setup. Yes, it does have a co-op mode, which instantly makes even the most uninspired games fun, but I distinctly remember hating DwA when I had last played it a few years ago. Clearly, I just didn't understand how to play. While searching for a horrible game, Andy and I found an old school puzzle game that held our attention for more than three hours. When the game crashed, erasing our hard-earned progress, we let out an audible cry that must have attracted a lonely Yeti.

I have to throw out these warnings before I dive in to why Dudes is so compelling: Dudes with 'tudes looks horrendous and controls even worse. The objectives aren't clear and the level design is murderous. Oh, and the music is non-existent. Other than that, it's a great game. I'm not joking. The premise, as the YouTube bastard clearly missed, is to destroy all the gems in the single screen level. You and your friend control a pair of disembodied heads. Once you start moving in the beginning of the level you are never allowed to stop. So you rocket back and forth across the screen, avoid traps on the fly while trying to figure out how to destroy the last few gems. Sounds like a great recipe, right?


I wish I was playing this right now

Your main task, in addition to navigating an out-of-control head, is to match your color to the color of certain objects on screen. You can only destroy a green gem when you're green. Some levels have enemies. These will kill you fast - two hits and you are dead. However, if you are the same color, you pass right through them. The game actually resembles the much loved Clu Clu Land. Both are very difficult to control and both involve solving puzzles in a single-screen environment while avoiding enemies and black holes. Oh, and they are both ridiculously hard. The simple formula Dudes presents in the beginning gets exponentially more difficult as you progress. For instance, in some levels, you have to deal with water. Touch a ship icon to safely cross the blue colored squares. However, because you fly so quickly and recklessly around the place, you'll find yourself inadvertently slamming into ship blocks, destroying your ship, and then find out that drowning is a very painful way to die. Other levels throw invisible blocks your way. When you combine these seemingly mundane obstacles with ultra twitchy controls, even the simplest tasks become as hard as a shirt that has been soaked in urine and hung out in the sun for three months.


Why isn't Clu Clu Land on the VC yet?

It's one of those games where, no matter how hard the level appears, you know you can pass it. So you try and try until you finally figure out the pattern to the madness. This is old school gaming at its best. Completely unforgiving but so rewarding when you finally succeed. Anyone can just go to GameFAQs to learn the secrets of Twilight Princess' dungeons. It takes a real gamer to fight their way through these levels with no sign of help save from your own tired thumbs. The NES may have been home to many a crappy game, but Dudes with Attitudes is not one of them. Game design clearly takes a front seat when you don't have fancy visuals or decent controls to work with. Dudes shows off the wonder of level design and continues to impress years after it first came out. I have to admit, though, after losing my progress so far into the game last night, I don't know if I'll have the strength to pass those levels again. But, if you're starring blankly at your Wii right now, I suggest breaking out the old Dreamcast and giving Dudes a spin.

Elebits! Castlevania: Portrait of Ruin! Assault Heroes! Plus our takes on a few recent sizable news announcements, as well as a stylish send-off to the original Xbox in the second part of our 'End of a Generation' countdown.

Download link.

(Or better yet, use the iTunes subscription link near the top of the page and review us!)

I am sorry I have been absent for almost a whole week. Nick valiantly carried on the G tradition in my stead, but I'm sure you were wanting for Haikus and random rants, right? Right? Sadly, the reason for my brief stink away could lead to an even longer hiatus in the coming weeks. I was staking out the Greater Bay Area for a place to call home. And, as this picture clearly demonstrates, I found a perfect, flat apartment to call my own. Let's see if you Google Earth sleuths can figure out where this building is located based on images taken miles above the surface we dwell on. To make it ever more difficult, the red arrow which seems to be indicating my future home may actually be pointing to the wrong building altogether. That's just how I roll.

Do not fear, I may not have been updating but I have still been very much immersed in the gaming industry while I made my Western voyage. For instance, I have played roughly ten hours of the new Castlevania game. How is it? I haven't technically finished it yet so you may have to wait a few days for a comprehensive analysis, but if you're holding the package above a checkout counter right now and need to know if it's worth $35, I can assure you that it is most definitely not. While that one sentence opinion may not have helped anyone in the grand scheme of life's plans, it did plant a tasty idea in my mind. I have literally thought of this while typing the preceding sentences so, if it seems half-baked, you are correct. Please don't laugh.

You know how everyone hates numerical ratings? Nick and I have made a concerted effort to avoid using numbers of any kind in our almost three years (or is four?) of barfing up our opinion. But one theme has rung true throughout - a propensity for buying cheap games. Why would Nick and I rip on Electronic Art' latest atrocity and then happily buy a brand new copy of Luigi's Mansion or Gun X360? It's all about price. I purchased the Gamecube's sole noteworthy launch title years after the fact because I felt $10 was well worth the experience of playing a ghost-hunting game with little in the gameplay department but undeniable charm. Nick scrounged up a last generation port of Gun X360 at launch because, after much finagling, he was able to get it in his hands for less than half the price of retail. While Nick and I would never push old women to the ground for the chance to plop down the absurd price retail stores were initially asking for these games, it was easy to slop out some dough when the price rounded more to our liking.

How about a review system that places a monetary value on every games? I realize the logistics are nearly impossible, but the idea seems solid enough. Viva Pinata, for instance, is a game I could hole-heartedly endorse. I spent $50 on the game and felt as though a bargain was offered. I can confidently state the game is actually worth the MSRP. Kameo, on the other hand, is fun and beautiful, but I never would have spent $50 on it. However, I am ecstatic that I was able to snare it for $20. Price is one of the major reasons to buy, or avoid, a specific game. To rate games on their worth would save some hassle for would-be buyers.

Obviously, this system has some major flaws. Most glaring is the capitalistic treatment of games in this system. Even if you include the likes of Hamsterz and Ping Pals, games are still a form of art. To place a monetary value on art is an insult to the artist. However, it cannot be ignored that games are a commodity. If developers had to live on the street just to code a few more lines, games would not exist today. I apologize in advance if anyone is insulted by sticking a price tag on games, but I can't worry about insulting a select few with my grand ideas to help the greater good.

Another problem? I play every game I can get my hands on. I wouldn't be able to recommend spending $60 for Gears of War because it just isn't different enough or fun enough to grab my attention for long. But if you play only a few games a year and want a graphical powerhouse that packs a wallop in the gameplay department, GoW would be well worth $60. My new rating system has some quirks that need to be worked out, but it makes reviewing off-beat titles with limited appeal much easier. Plus, it makes reviews timeless in a way traditional number ratings do not. The monetary value of games should not vary much during the life of a system. Obviously, no one would spend $60 to play Super Mario Kart now. But, it would have been worth that much at any point in the SNES' life.

I'll use Dead Rising as an example of a game that should retain its value through the life of the X360. Dead Rising was a game I really loved. Easily one of my favorite titles of the year. But the gameplay was simplistic and the story mode over all too quickly. If someone was reading that review when I wrote it back in August, they may have moved on to other, more affordable titles. However, when the price drops to $40, someone could read my review, see all the good things DR has to offer, and could feel confident in their purchase.

Don't worry, Nick and I aren't going to invent a standard G scoring system anytime soon, but I may just toss the ol' "it's not great, but if you can find it for $20 you should scoop it up" line in a review in the near future. If that isn't an obvious hint about the actual worth of Castlevania: Portrait of Ruin, I don't know what else to say.