I’ve played enough Infamous this weekend for a review

I’m not generally a sandbox action game fan; I’ve never played more than a few bits and pieces of any of the Grand Theft Auto games.

Infamous is the first I’ve played all the way through. Sure, the game is over two years old, but I had to wait until the price was right.

After downloading the 7+GB game over the PlayStation Network, I played the game this past weekend and got the good ending; I then started over and replayed a third of the game, forcing myself to make the evil choices. I might not be a very good completionist, but I try. Sometimes.

The plot is presented in comic book fashion; instead of game-engine or prerendered cutscenes, the major plot points are presented in a series of comic book style storyboards (with Cole, the protagonist, narrating).

After a bomb goes off in Generic Metropolis™, Cole, bike messenger (unfortunate bomb delivery man) and urban explorer extraordinaire gains electrical superpowers; he can shoot lightning from his hands, leap off tall buildings and land unharmed, and has become incapable of riding inside any vehicle, holding any weapon, and swimming. Apparently the electricity does not behave well with most things.

He fights off gang members, other superpowered people (called conduits), and works with various factions in an effort to discover who was behind the bombing of Empire City. Along the way, he’ll have to decide whether to help the downtrodden non-superpowered peons, or take his rightful place as Emperor Palpatine.

The controls are mostly good; my main gripe is that the jumping is a bit imprecise. Several times I would attempt to jump from a train, only for Cole to grab back on to the side. The controls for the various powers are easy to get down, and while you might end up using one or two more than the rest, they’re all pretty useful (except for the lightning blades; I never used those). I’m a big fan of the grenades.

The story was pretty good, too; there’s a good twist at the end, and I’m curious to see what happens in Infamous 2.

While I don’t regret not playing the game sooner, I wasn’t expecting to enjoy the game enough to be interested in the sequel. If that’s not a good review, I don’t know what is.

Sense of Justice

No, this isn’t another post lamenting the sad state of our legal system. It is, however, the theme for Growlanser II: The Sense of Justice.

Working Designs released Growlanser II and III in a bundle they titled Growlanser Generations; it was their final release before going out of business (apparently it’s hard to make money when you only localize one game with a niche audience every 3-4 years; who knew?).

Growlanser II is a direct sequel to Growlanser (whose theme I posted back in March), though the main character has changed. Carmaine, the main character from the original game (along with some of his party members) will join Wein Cruz’s party.

It changes up the system from the first game; instead of trekking from place to place until a party member learns to teleport, Wein and co. can choose their destination from the world map. This results in gameplay that is more SRPGish than its predecessor; unfortunately, it falls prey to SRPG problems, as well.

If you encountered enemies too powerful for you in the first game, you always had the option to go around fighting monsters until you’d leveled up enough to face the stronger enemies; in Growlanser II, you are occasionally not allowed to leave the current battle to improve your characters.

Which means that if you made some unfortunate ability allocations, you can find yourself in an unwinnable battle. And that’s why I never finished Growlanser II.

Besides, the first one was better, anyway. Even if Wein’s scythe is cool (you never see RPG characters with scythes; it’s always swords and staves).

It’s true; there are no stupid questions. Only stupid people.

Some poor soul found their way to my little corner of the internet by searching for the phrase, “should the right to privacy still exist”.

I am dumbfounded.

Rights don’t stop existing merely because they’re inconvenient or unpopular; that’s why they’re called rights.

Further, the right to privacy is a negative liberty; it merely requires that you be let alone (if you choose), not that others provide you with anything.