TouchWIZ vs. TouchFLO

Years ago, I bought my first Windows Mobile device, a Dell Axim x51. It was an interesting little device that I carried around with me for one main reason: before the Sony Reader, before the Kindle, I was reading ebooks in the .lit format on my Axim via Microsoft Reader for PocketPC.

In the years since (and before, actually), a handful of smartphones running Windows Mobile had been released, but they were all large, clunky phones that were geared mostly towards business folks. Until Apple came along with a little gizmo you might have heard of, the iPhone, and suddenly smartphones are cool. And different companies started releasing different smartphones with different operating systems, and now it's almost impossible to get a decent new phone that doesn't require a mandatory extra data plan.

This put me at sort of an impasse. I knew I was going to wind up getting a touchscreen smartphone, but which one? A part of me did want an iPhone. I'd even bought a first-gen iPod touch, and I will concede that, for all it's flaws (the iPhone's been out for two years, and it's just now getting MMS?) the iPhone's OS is still probably the best smartphone OS available (though I'd like to run Android or webOS in an emulator or virtual machine). But I also didn't feel like switching carriers just to have an iPhone.

The deciding factor for me went back to my collection of ebooks. I wasn't looking for a phone with an app store to charge me for yet another copy of Bejeweled to play. But I did want to read my books. Getting the books onto an iPhone would be a royal pain, as I'd already experimented with it on my iPod touch. Even if it were a little easier, my .lit books would still need to be converted, unless I stuck with Windows Mobile. So I decided to stick with my carrier, and stick with Windows Mobile.

When it came time to buy, I'd narrowed it down to two choices: the HTC Touch Diamond, and the Samsung Omnia. Loyal readers will know that I picked the Omnia from my earlier review. It really came down to the fact that I liked the physical design of the phone better, and the fact that it cost less than half of the Touch Diamond.

You might think that's the only real differences between the phones, since they both run Windows Mobile 6.1 Professional. But see, there's one major issue with Windows Mobile that has most tech bloggers trashing it for not even being in the same league as the iPhone OS, webOS, or Android. Windows Mobile is ancient, by tech standards. Sure, Windows Mobile 6.1 is only about a year old, but the truth is Microsoft's really just been tacking new features or updated apps onto the same basic OS since PocketPC 2002. Even with Windows Mobile 6.1, a lot of the underlying Windows Mobile stuff looks the same, expects a stylus, and expects resistive instead of capacitive touchscreens (which means no support for multitouch).

To make up for Windows Mobile's ancient, boring, and stylus-driven interface, different manufacturers have taken to making their own shiny, slick, finger-friendly applications and interfaces to replace the stock Windows Mobile Today screen. Samsung uses what they call TouchWIZ, which I mentioned before. It's basically a virtual shelf full of widgets. The widgets are slid off the shelf where they expand with some limited functionality, or opened to a Samsung-specific, finger-friendly app like Touch Player. TouchWIZ is a huge improvement over the stock Windows Mobile Today screen, but it's not perfect. For one, the widgets on the shelf can't be customized. For another, it's kind of a pain to scroll to the app you want, drag it off the shelf, open it, do want you wanted, close it, and put it away.

The best thing about HTC's Windows Mobile smartphones wasn't the design of the phone, but its interface. HTC uses an interface they call TouchFLO 3D. Like TouchWIZ, TouchFLO 3D replaces the Today screen with a finger-friendly interface that puts most of what you need from the phone up front, sparing you from going deeper into Windows Mobile. Unlike TouchWIZ, TouchFLO uses tabs. For example, there's the Home tab, which displays the time and date, and gives quick access to your call history and calendar. There's the People Tab, where you can set up speed dial buttons for your most frequent contacts. There's the Programs tab, where you can set up one-touch access to your favorite applications. The Music tab is a portal to Audio Manager, HTC's music player. There's also tabs for your texts, emails, photos, the internet, the weather, etc. You can switch between tabs with a band at the bottom of the screen. If an icon for a tab you want is showing, tapping it will bring it up. If it's not, sliding your finger along the band will scroll it. An icon will tell you what tab you've scrolled to, and releasing the band will switch over to that tab.

Now, I really do like my Omnia. I've had several Samsung phones, and all of them have been great save one (and that one was replaced for free). The Omnia is much more sleek than any phone HTC makes. But TouchFLO is better by miles than TouchWIZ. Audio Manager is a better music player than Touch Player. Everything is easier to access with TouchFLO, and TouchFLO has a more sophisticated, slick look than a simple shelf of cartoony widgets. The only thing I really like better about TouchWIZ is that Samsung included a clock widget with it's own alarm clock app that's much easier to use with your fingers than the default one. The clock on the Home tab in TouchFLO seems to go to the Windows Mobile alarm, which is difficult to operate without a stylus, and is limited to system sounds instead of ringtones for alarms.

Luckily, thanks to some entreprenuering individuals on the internet, it's possible to install TouchFLO onto the Omnia. I get the easy access to everything TouchFLO offers, and the TouchWIZ apps (like the clock) can still be used. I put it on one of the quick buttons on the Programs tab.

For update reasons, if I was going to consider a Windows Mobile smartphone in the future, I'd definitely take a long look at HTC's phones. Still, it's hard to argue with the Omnia's much lower price and sleeker form. If you do have or go with an Omnia, you might want to start googling how to get TouchFLO on it, though, because TouchFLO beats TouchWIZ hands down.

Windows 7 RC1: One Month (ish) in.

Back at the beginning of May, I wrote about my first 24 hours with Windows 7 Release Candidate 1 as my main operating system. At the time, I figured I'd just give it a whirl, buy new hard drives, then go back to business as usual with Windows Vista.

I wound up using Windows 7 for so long because it took a little longer than I'd thought for the right combination of funds and specials at Newegg. I did get new hard drives, though. I replaced my Western Digital 80GB SATA I hard drive with a WD 640GB Caviar Blue SATA II hard drive, and I replaced my WD 320GB IDE drive with a Hitatchi Desk Star 1TB (that's 1000GB for my less technically inclined readers) SATA II. I got a slight speed upgrade, and more than triple the ammount of storage I had before. And when the time came to install Windows, I went right for...

...Windows 7 RC1.

It's hard for me to really express why, but Windows 7 really is the best Windows yet. I know that Windows Vista put off a lot of people with demanding (at the time... let's be honest, who doesn't have at least a gig of RAM in their main computer these days?) system requirements and compatibility problems on both the hardware and software ends. On the other hand, XP looks as ancient as it is, and is lacking some of features I liked in Vista.

Windows 7 seems to be out to please both fans of XP and fans of Vista. In some ways, Windows 7 is still Vista. It's got Vista's underpinings. It's got the Vista Game Explorer. It's got User Account Controls. It's got Vista's Start Menu (with a few tweaks), Vista's sounds, Vista's cursors, and Vista's icons. It's got the Aero Glass effects and Flip 3D. The thing is, all of this stuff works as well or better than Vista. There are more UAC levels than just on or off. The button in the Start Menu shuts off the computer by default now. And the kernel has be streamlined so that, even with Aero turned on, Windows 7 runs as fast (or some people have claimed even faster) than Windows XP on the same hardware.

Windows 7 isn't just a faster Vista, though. Windows 7 brings some slick new features and upgrades with it. Here's just a few that I've enjoyed.

DirectX 11: Okay, since I don't have any games that use it, or a graphics card that officially supports it, I can't claim to have really enjoyed it yet. But I'm confident I will... on some of the games that used it, DirectX 10 did make a difference, and from what I've read DirectX 11 will make more of a difference from 10 than 10 did from 9. In the meantime, every other game I've tried (except one), from games as old as Neverwinter Nights to games as new as Terminator Salvation, from games as simple as Luxor to games as graphically demanding as Call of Duty: World at War has run just fine. And for the record, the game that didn't run (Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic II) seems to have issues in Vista as well.

XP Mode: I personally haven't found much use for it myself, since everything has worked fine in Windows 7 (and trying to install KOTOR II in XP mode failed). But this does seem like a way to help win over the XP hold outs. XP mode is actually a pre-set up Windows XP virtual machine for Windows Virtual PC. You run XP in the virtual machine, but the idea is that once a program is installed in the virtual machine, it can be run from Windows 7.

The new taskbar. I know some people don't care for it, and I'm pretty sure if you change the settings you can make it more like Vista's, but I love it. Intead of pinning a few programs to a tiny quick launch area, pinned programs icons are big. And open program windows sit with their icon. The whole thing is sort of like a cross between the old task bar and Mac OS X's Dock. Hovering the mouse over a program icon will give you previews of all the open windows for that program. Windows 7 also neatly organizes all the programs that install stuff on the system tray in a neat little box that helps reduce clutter by only showing you icons for the ones that you allow, and even then mostly only when they need attention.

Windows Update. Yeah, I know that Windows XP and Windows Vista has them too. But this really comes down to hardware compatibility. You see, since using Windows 7, I haven't had to manually install a single driver. Windows recognized most of my hardware from the initial installation, including my monitor. Windows Update was also quick to offer me udpated drivers for my graphics card. What impressed me the most, though, were the two devices that it didn't have drivers for: my printer, and my Omnia smartphone. In both of those cases, though, Windows asked if it could check Windows Update, then promptly found and installed the apropriate drivers. That especially impressed me, as I had a hard time getting my old Axim to sync with Vista back when Vista was a release candidate.

Libraries. This was something that took a little getting used to, but now that I'm used to it, I can't believe it hasn't been done sooner. Basically, instead of having a shortcut to your "My Music" folder on the side of a Windows Explorer window, there's a library named "Music" (not to be confused with your iTunes music library). By default, the Music library will display the contents of "My Music" as well as "Public Music." But let's say you use your "My Music" folder as a place for your iTunes library, but you have another folder of unsorted music that you don't want to include in iTunes. You can still set up that other folder to show up in the Music library, and you can use Windows Media Player or VLC to play them.

There are other features I'm sure I haven't mentioned, but that's the stuff that really stands out for me. As long as Microsoft doesn't screw anything up between now and October 22nd when Windows 7 officially launches, I definitely plan to upgrade and use Windows 7 as my main operating system for a long time to come.

Windows 7 Release Candidate 1: 24 Hours In

Loyal readers may recall that I was beta testing Windows 7. And anyone that cares about the new Windows also knows that Windows 7 Release Candidate 1 was released yesterday, May 5th.

Release Candidate software is a bit different than beta. Beta software is expected to have bugs. Beta testers are expected to play with the beta software and report bugs they find to the developers. New features might be added, and some features might be taken away.

Release Candidate software is still test software, but RCs are supposed to be near final. There are no major changes from RC1 to the final version. Testing is to verify that everything works the way it should and stamp out any remaining bugs before the software is released to manufacturing (aka RTM, aka the retail version you can expect to see on computers being sold sometime during the next year).

Back when the beta came out, I installed it on a computer I wound up selling to finance my new monitor, as well as a netbook that I used pretty much just for instant messaging and web browsing. I was impressed with it then, because everything was up and running smoothly, including the wi-fi, which is often a rarity for beta software. Frankly, I was content to use it, never once firing up Windows XP during the beta period.

RC1 went on the netbook first. To my disappointment, I didn't really notice much of a difference from the beta. If anything, it was a little more sluggish. Whenever you'd click on anything, it seemed like Windows needed a moment to think about it before it acted.

Mostly because I'm ready to leave XP behind, I'd already made up my mind to stick with Windows 7 on my netbook. The real question is whether I want to upgrade my desktop, or if I want to stick with Windows Vista for awhile.

Just like the netbook, installing Windows 7 on my desktop computer was a breeze. Windows recognized everything, including my monitor. Desktop resolution was the correct 1680x1050, and I was getting sound from all five speakers and the subwoofer. The only driver that didn't show up from the fresh install was for my printer, which I didn't even think about until well after the fact. And even then, Windows Update was happy to provide me with a drive for it.

The setup is basically:

Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 3.0GHz
3GB Kingston Hyper-X
DFI Lanparty Dark P35 Motherboard
BFG GeForce 9800GTX+ Overclocked
80GB SATA 1.5 C:\ Drive
320GB IDE D:\ Drive
Pioneer DVD burner for D:\
Some generic internal flash card reader for B:\

The Windows Experience Index rated it like this:
Processor 6.4
RAM 6.4
Graphcis (Aero) 6.1
Graphics (Gaming) 6.1
Primary Hard Disk 5.4

The WEI goes up to 7.9 now, as opposed to Vista's 5.9 (and where everything except the processor [5.6] and hard drive [5.3] were 5.9).

It was already clear that my day-to-day tasks like websurfing, watching videos, bittorrent, etc was going to work fine in Windows 7. I'd tested Nero 8, VLC Media Player, Ultra ISO, μtorrent, 7-Zip, GonVisor, AVG, and Foxit. The real question, then, was whether or not I'd be set for gaming.

In an effort to get this online as fast as I could, I didn't spend too much time with any one game. Instead, I selected three modern games to run the computer hard, and one older game to check for compatibility issues. The breakdown is more or less like this:

Dead Space: Ran on the highest settings. Didn't run noticably different than on Vista.
F.E.A.R. 2: Ran on the highest settings. Didn't run noticably different than on Vista.
Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X.: Never tried it on Vista. Ran it on the highest setting, and it seemed like it was occasionally stuttering. Turned V-sync off and turned AA down to 4X, and it runs fine.
Star Wars Republic Commando: Ran on the highest settings. Didn't run noticably different than Vista.

One interesting thing to note is that H.A.W.X. has two .exe files. One is the regular (and I assume DX9 version) and the other looks like a DX10 version. The DX10 version failed to launch, and reported that I was missing a .dll file. I downloaded the .dll, and Windows reported that the .dll isn't compatible. The DX9 version worked fine, though. I know Microsoft has said that Windows 7 is going to have Direct X 11, but is it not DX10 compatible?

When the dust settled, for the most part Windows 7 handled everything I tossed at it like a champ. I'd say Windows 7 is ready for prime time, and most people should be happy with the upgrade, whether they're going from XP or Vista. Gamers might want to hold off just a little longer until they get this Direct X thing sorted out... assuming they really care about the games that actually make use of Direct X 10 anyway.

OutRun Impressions

I know, I know... it's been like a month. I figured I'd better write something.

Well, one of the new Xbox Live Arcade games that's been getting a lot of hype lately is OutRun. OutRun is the latest version of Yu Suzuki's venerable OutRun franchise, which started as an arcade game all the way back in 1986. OutRun made an appearance, either as a port or as part of a collection, on just about every Sega System, as well as a number of non-Sega systems, before finally getting a real sequel in the form of OutRun 2, on the original Xbox. I figured I'd write about the Trial Version, since I spent all my Microsoft Points on Rock Band songs.

So what exactly is this XBLA OutRun game? Well, from what I've read, it's sort of a stripped down version of OutRun 2006: Coast to Coast, which itself was something of an enhanced version of OutRun 2. But most importantly, it's an arcade game. And no, I don't mean it's an Xbox Live Arcade game, but an arcade arcade game. See, for the younger readers, we used to have these places called arcades, where we'd go and put tokens or quarters into these tall cabinets with screens, joysticks, and buttons, or even sometimes specialized controls like guns, steering wheels, or flight sticks. Arcade games weren't like you're modern save point-filled, cut scene-riddled, single-life multi-hour epics... they were simple games with simple objectives, often simply a high score. You'd play them for several minutes, usually until you ran out of quarters.

As such, OutRun isn't exactly in the same field as games like Need For Speed or Gran Turismo. You're not modding your car, you're not competing in a racing season, and you're not trying to work you way up in a street racing gang to find out what happened to your little brother. You're just driving your Ferrari with a blonde chick who encourages you to ignore traffic laws.

In some ways that might seem a little disappointing. Indeed, the game feels a little shallow. The demo mode mainly has you driving as far as you can before the timer runs out. If it were the actual game, making it to certain checkpoints would extend the timer, but gist would be the same. The full version also has a Heart Attack mode, in which you try to excite the blonde in your car by completing certain objectives.

Still, taken for what it is, it's easy to fall in love with the game. The courses are beautiful, and the music and presentation is classic Sega arcade, from back when they were at the top of their game. Again, the younger crowd might not remember when Sega meant anything, but for older fans, few games in modern history say "Sega" quite like OutRun. I especially love the way the blonde starts bitch-slapping you when the timer runs out.

For a meager $10, I'm inclined to say that OutRun is probably worth a purchase, especially if you can talk friends into buying it and playing online with you. But one thing I do want to caution you all on is the graphics. In an era of HD games like Project Gotham 4, where screenshots of the game and photos of cars take a bit of effort to distinguish, OutRun comes to the table with Dreamcast graphics. For some, that might add to the Sega nostalgia. And maybe old-fashioned graphics are the price you gotta pay to make a game a smaller XBLA game versus a full-sized disc-based game. But considering that the last few racing games I've played were PGR4, Burnout Paradise, and Need for Speed Undercover, the downgrade to OutRun's graphics was a bit of a shock.

Street Fighter IV Impressions

I could write a review, because I don't think there's a lot of difference between running through Arcade as Ken or running through it as Fei Long. But I'm feeling kinda lazy (even though I haven't posted here in a week), and I do want to play it a bit more before I pass final judgment.

So... as I'm sure you've heard, despite the slick new 3D character models, the game is 2D fighter. The characters cannot move in a 3D plane, and if you've played one of the previous Street Fighter games, you're actually familiar with the game mechanics of SFIV already.

Indeed, SFIV feels more like Street Fighter II than Street Fighter III. All of the characters from The World Warrior and SFII Turbo are there. Cammy and Fei Long are both unlockable, but Dee Jay and T. Hawk are gone. There are some new characters, and a few characters from the Alpha series, but aside from cameos in the characters' movies, none of the new characters from Street Fighter III.

Fans of SFIII might complain, but I think this is a good thing. For starters, the characters that were new to SFIII were, if you ask me, the least memorable in the entire series. And while SFIII had the most technical fighting, it wasn't as friendly toward beginners. Street Fighter IV has that same pick-up-and-play feeling that Street Fighter II had.

There are a few new tricks, though. The Super Combos that were introduced in Super Street Fighter II Turbo, which I don't think got a lot of play here in the US, are still a part of the game. Like Super Turbo, you have to have a full gauge to use your Super Combo. But it fills slowly. You're unlikely to fill it in one round. Indeed, you're unlikely to fill it at all, because your EX gauge energy is often better spent on EX moves. EX moves are like powered up versions of your regular special moves. They do more damage, but they eat up a quarter of your EX gauge.

Super Combos, as flashy finishers or as last-ditch attempts to get back into a fight, have largely been supplanted in SFIV with Ultra Combos. They get their enegy from the Revenge gauge, which only fills when you take hits. It fills fairly quickly, though (enough to pull off one or two ultra combos a round). Ultra combos are quite flashy, but functionally similar to Super Combos.

Another new technique is the Focus Attack. Ideally, you'd do a focus attack right before being hit. You'll take the damage, but instead of getting knocked back, you'll immediately unleash a counter. If the counter connects, you'll actually heal damage. Advanced players might find that Focus Attacks add a new layer of depth, but honestly I kind of think they're more beneficial to the CPU than most players. The problem is, the computer will pull them off perfectly at just the right time, but when I try to use them, more often then not the computer will be attacking with a combo. Which brings us to the down side of Focus Attacks... they only work for the first hit. If a combo hits with more than one attack, the Focus Attack will be canceled and you're going to eat a lot of damage.

After playing incredibly tight games like Street Fighter Alpha 3 (in my opinion, still the pinnacle of Street Fighter), SFIV also feels a bit unbalanced. I deliberately turned the difficulty down to the easiest setting, and set Arcade Mode to single-round matches so that I could quickly unlock all the characters. I found myself blasting through with Ken with almost no effort. I've even used Ken to unlock Akuma. But with those same settings, I found myself beaten and continuing almost 30 times over a 45 minute period using Dan. It was almost as bad with Balrog. Some of those defeats were perfects for the CPU. This leads me to believe that either the characters are sorely unbalanced, or that the final boss might flip out and go apeshit on you regardless of the difficulty you set it on. Either way, its an impediment to enjoying the game to the fullest. SFIV can be played online against humans for a good challenge; when I'm just trying to unlock all the characters, I don't need to be throwing my controller in frustration.

Despite these gripes, though, SFIV is a really good game. I'm having more fun with it than I have with any version of Street Fighter III or Street Fighter EX. This is the most enjoyable Street Fighter since Street Fighter Alpha 3, honestly. The presentation is updated enough that it feels slick and fresh, with fully rendered backgrounds, although some character models are better than others. But the core gameplay is classic Street Fighter through and through. Street Fighter fans and fans of 2D fighters should definitely be thining about picking this up.

X-Blades Impressions

If there's one thing that's true in life, it's that sex sells. For example, most men will not pay to look a girl, but most men will pay to see that same girl naked.

X-Blades seems to be banking on selling the sex. The heroine of the game, Ayumi, has some odd belts and buckles to give her more of a "costumed" look, but it doesn't change the fact that her main ensemble appears to be a bikini top and a g-string.

Let's get something out of the way here... X-Blades isn't a bad game. It's a pretty-simple hack-n'-slash sort of game, with a few interesting ideas thrown in. In addition to shooting her gunblades, or chopping with her gunblades, Ayumi has a variety of magic attacks she can do when she has enough rage. The rage meter fills when Ayumi takes hits, or when she slices into enemies. The meter fills quickly, but just a few attacks can deplete it. As Ayumi battles, she can collect souls that she can use to unlock more magical attacks.

The problems stem from the fact that these ideas are executed in the most mediocre fashion. The entire game takes place on some island, where the architecture is pretty much the same throughout. This leads to bland, uninspired levels, many of which you revisit at different times. The plot is a paper thin one; Ayumi tells you she's a treasure hunter, and she tells you she found a map that lead her to the island. Once there, she nicks an artifact and finds herself cursed. Desperate to remove the curse, she immediately begins chopping bad guys. Speaking of chopping bad guys, most enemies will either swarm you or stand still and shoot at you. Combat consists of chopping and taking damage until you can spam a magic attack, then starting over. The magic attacks boil down to the same three spells, just with different elemental variations. There's your ranged attack, a magic that adds elemental damage to your melee strikes, and an area of effect attack. "Levels" consist of going into a room, breaking things to look for souls or combat enhancing artifacts, and killing enemies until they open the door to the next room. This sort of thing gets boring after awhile, so if I don't review it, it's because I got bored and didn't finish it.

Ultimately, X-Blades plays like a budget game. There's some simple hack-n'-slash fun to be had, but the emphasis is on simple. The problem is that they're charging full price for it, apparently because you look at Ayumi's bum the whole game. And while I might say X-Blades is worth renting or checking out if it was budget-priced, there's simply no way I can recommend it at full price.

Left 4 Dead Demo Impressions

Is it just me, or are zombies kinda trendy now? I mean, since 1968, we've had a handful of zombie movies, a good many descended from Romero or Russo, who worked on the original Night of the Living Dead. But even with zombies showing up in Michael Jackson's Thriller video they remained sort of a niche topic until Resident Evil. But even after Resident Evil, it took a little while, but suddenly we're deluged in zombies. Max Brooks wrote two books about zombies, one of which has been optioned for a remake. Simon Pegg starred in Sean of the Dead, a black comedy homage to Romero's films. Romero's Dawn of the Dead and Day of the Dead were given a modern remakes, and Romero himself gave us Land of the Dead, which itself lead to a PC and Xbox game of the same name, and the direct-to-video Diary of the Dead. Dead Rising, one of the early hits for the Xbox 360, was about a reporter stuck in a mall full of zombies. And we've got more zombie stuff on the way.

One of the most-anticipated zombie-related media is Left 4 Dead, a survival-horror, first-person shooter hybrid from the makers of Half Life. And while I don't have the game, a demo is available on Xbox Live, and just so I'd have something to write about, I decided to talk about the demo.

The demo begins after you pick one of four characters. You can play co-op with up to three other people, with each player taking one of the characters. Any characters not taken by you or another player will be AI controlled. The game then puts you on a roof near a pile of weapons, then suggests that you need to get from that roof to wherever. A hospital, I think. It doesn't matter, because the demo doesn't take you that far anyway. The object of the game is simple enough: survive to your destination.

In co-op, the game is simply a blast. You find yourself coordinating your efforts with the other players to most effectively clear a path and watch each others' backs. You can move from one spot to another, making sure that there's someone covering the guy in the lead and someone else watching the path you just came from, just in case. The game loses something in single player, though, as the AI for your allies will shoot, but who knows how they determine what to shoot at. Also, they'll follow you around, but they do a poor job of covering you while they wait for you to move ahead.

One cool thing about the game is that the AI placed the enemies at random, so each time you play the enemies are set up in different locations. This helps to keep things fresh in replays. There is one little problem with it, though. There are zombies everywhere. The first level has you escaping an apartment building, and I'm pretty sure there are more zombies in the apartment than actually could have lived there. That's not too bad, except every now and then the AI likes to throw in a zombie rush, where after you've methodically cleared an area of zombies, a horde fo them will suddenly come charging around the corner at you. I might very well be the only person to say this, but it's too many zombies. When you've cleared a floor of zombies on your way down from the roof, then as you've almost cleared the next floor a horde of them come rushing from the way you came, it loses it intended effect. Instead of a pannicky fight to survive, you're taken out of the game when you start asking, "if I killed all the zombies behind me, where'd these guys even come from?" You stop feeling like you're trying to survive a zombie infestation and start feeling like you're playing a game that's screwing around with you.

Which leads to another issue. The game is divided into levels or chapters, and the demo covers the first two. Each chapter begins and ends in a safe area. You start on a roof near ridiculous pile of weapons. You end the level by running into a room with a two heavy doors and another large pile of weapons, ammo, and first aid kits. This serves a game mechanic that is, perhaps, necessary; at the end of the level you replenish your health and ammo. But you can't help but wonder who'd stockpile all those guns and ammo there, and then leave it. Was this town expecting a zombie invasion? Did they build zombie shelters and stockpile them with supplies? It might be necessary, but it's another thing that draws you out of the game

At the end of the day, it's hard to actually assign a score to something like Left 4 Dead, because it's almost two different games. If you've got friends buying the game who want to meet up with you and do the entire game as a co-op experience, by all means get the game. If you don't have friends, or if your friends are like mine and have lives and can't reliably meet online, you might want to take a pass on Left 4 Dead, as the single player experience is definitely a little lackluster.

Dead Space Impressions

Dead Space was launched well ahead of the actual game with first a graphic novel that I didn't read, followed by an animated film that I didn't watch.

Still, knowing that there is a graphic novel and a film, I wasn't exactly surprised to see how cinematic the game is. Your ship flies in, with other characters discussing the "Planet-Cracker" ship you're going to investigate after communication with it was lost. What you'd think should be a smooth docking turns into a crash landing, and naturally as you're investigating the poop hits the fan, monsters pop out, and you're separated from the group. And frankly, the whole thing reminds me a little of Alien.

For a game that's supposed to be scary, it's not. It's more like startling. You're going about your business, and POP!- out comes a monster. Maybe you jump, but you kill it and move on.

No, the scariest thing about the game is that it's just got awful, clunky controls.

Honestly, I'm too early into the game to make a generalization or recommendation on Dead Space. But I will say that, so far, whatever it is about the game that had most of the gaming press just fawning over it? I don't see it.

Town Hall Presidential Debate Impressions

I'm craving a milkshake. I can't be the only one who thinks going out and getting a milkshake would time better spent than watching this crap.

Hey, get these guys outta here. Bring back Biden and Palin!

Man, what does the media see in Obama? Charisma? Every time he prefaces what he's about to say with, "Look," in that condescending tone of his I just want to smack him right upside his pompous head.

A teacher making $30,000-$35,000 a year? Might want to double that figure.

John McCain points out that Obama wants to raise taxes on the wealthy. Obama says McCain is lying, then explains that if you make less than $250,000, he won't raise your taxes. That would mean that he would raise taxes if you make more than $250,000, right? So how is McCain lying? And why do Democrats love this class warfare stuff so much? They're basically saying that rich people should pay more because have more... which is fine, but that top five percent Obama would raise taxes on already pay something like 90-95% of the income taxes collected in this country. Should we just keep taxing them until the rich have the same take home pay as the middle class? If that's the case, then no one will want to be rich, and then who will we tax?

I think we'd be a lot better off if the government didn't waste so much money. I mean, downsizing works for corporations, right? Get rid of the government we don't need... Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Homeland Security, National Endowment for the Arts, Secret Service for people who are no longer President, Department of the Interior, National Drug Control Policy, and the Department of Education (a matter for the States). We can also reduce the number of Congressmen in the House of Representatives, the salaries of the President and every member of Congress, and the size of the Department of Transportation.

Everybody could afford health care if income tax was half of what it is today.

Sure, let's bring up Iraq again. As if going on about it will magically send us back in time and keep Bush from invading. The irony is that I don't disagree with Obama on this matter... we should have focus on Afghanistan, we should have focused on bin Laden and al-Qaeda, we shouldn't have invaded Iraq. Doesn't change the fact that we did get involve with Iraq. We do need to finish up in Iraq, but we need to do it responsibly.

I pity this moderator. These clowns are bickering like idiots.

"I wanna follow up."
"If he gets to follow up, I wanna follow up too."
"You already did!"

Raise your hand if you think that either Barack Obama or John McCain are qualified to be President. Now would all of you with your hands up please move to another country.

I think Hillary Clinton's crooked. I can't stand her as a person. But I wish she was still in this. If this is about picking the lesser of evils, Hillary was it.

How'd I know that Obama would bring up North Korea when talking about diplomacy? North Korea is a terrible example. They act up, we negotiate, we give them something, they behave for awhile, then they start acting up again. It's extortion. We're basically rewarding them for their bad behavior.

Now I want a sandwich.

WipEout HD Impressions

It's WipEout... only now it's HD! Seriously, there's not a lot to say; either you're familiar with the series or not. Specifically, WipEout HD takes all its cues from the two recent PSP titles (WipEout Pure and WipEout Pulse)... the campaign mode is especially modeled after WipEout Pulse's. The tracks, teams, and ships are all lifted from those games as well, and so far I think the music is straight from Pulse.

This isn't necessarily a bad thing. I spent a lot of time with WipEout Pure at the PSP's launch, and it was a fantastic game. The only reason why I never bothered with Pulse is because I'd kinda gotten out of the PSP scene. Still, I know I and some of you were hoping for more stuff from older WipEout (for me, especially WipEout XL and Wip3out). WipEout HD will be supported with DLC, though, so there's always hope.

In any case, WipEout's picked up a bit from the transition from PSP to PS3. The graphics, as mentioned, are HD, and the game is buttery smooth with colorful tracks, ships, engine trails, and weapon effects. I also think WipEout is more comfortable to play with the PS3's controller than it is on the PSP.

At the end of the day, it seems unfair to criticize WipEout HD for rehashing too much of the PSP games and not enough of the PSX games. The simple fact is, for $20 and a 1GB download (that took my PS3 nearly two hours to complete), you're getting a faster, prettier WipEout with both online multiplayer and splitscreen two-player that's really good enough to have been pressed onto a Blu-ray and sold for a lot more. Fans of the series, definitely check it out.

Megaman 9 Impressions

I'm a Megaman fan. A huge one, at that. I've seriously played every Megaman game except for the old Tiger handheld ones, the Wonderswan Battle Network ones, the board game one for the original NES, Super Adventure Rockman and the old DOS ones (although I'd seriously love to). Oh, and some Chinese one that is somehow official, but not made by Capcom.

Of all the Megaman games, my favorites were the classic NES Megaman games, and the Megaman Zero games. Imagine, then, how pleasantly I was surprised to hear that the team that made the Megaman Zero games was making a brand new classic-series Megaman that looked like an NES game. I'll wait...

...ok, done imagining? I was apparently more excited for it than I though, because despite the fact that I haven't made a Virtual Console/Wii Ware purchase in over a year, despite the fact that I haven't even played with my Wii since Mario Kart, and despite my decision to get the game for the PlayStation 3 (best controller, I figure, and I have the Megaman Anniversary Collection for PS2 with the first 8 sorta makes my PS3 my default Megaman console), I broke down and got it for the Wii. Yeah, I know, I couldn't wait four freaking days. And the sad thing is, WipEout HD comes out on the PSN Thursday, so I'll probably buy it and Megaman 9 (again) together.

But I digress. You don't want to hear about my buying habits; you want to know how the game is. And it is clearly a classic Megaman game: 8-bit graphics, limited color pallet, disappearing bricks, and precision jumping straight out of the NES era. The graphics and the MIDI music make me smile (although compared to awesome soundtracks like Megaman 3, the soundtrack is mostly forgettable). But the one thing that stands out the most to me is that the game is HARD. Yeah, I know that the original Megaman games have a reputation for being hard. Trust me, they're not this hard. True, I might not have enemy patterns down as tight as I do for the first five (I actually never had Megaman 6... my first time playing it was in college on an NES emulator, and I never played it seriously until the Megaman Annviersary Collection came out), but more often than not it's not the enemies that are getting to me (except the second stupid elephant in Concrete Man's stage), it's the platforming. In my first sitting, I played all eight of the Robot Master stages... I only made it to three of the Robot Masters (Galaxy Man, Splash Woman, and Magma Man), and of those three I was only able to defeat Galaxy Man.

I was also surprised to see that, despite the inclusion of Rush and a weapon select screen reminiscent of Megaman 4-6, they were going for Megaman 2 in terms of gameplay. No charged shots, and no sliding for Megaman this time around. While for some people who really only remember Megaman for Megaman 2, this might seem natural, but it feels like a step backward to me. Especially the slide, which would have come in handy in a lot of places so far.

Expect a full review from me in the next few days, after I finish it. For now, if you've played an NES Megaman recently and think you're up to the challenge, check it out. But if you hate getting your ass kicked by a game, you might want to hold off, as Devil May Cry and Ninja Gaiden are walks in the park next to Megaman 9.

Dragon Quest IV DS Impressions

A little background info, here... Dragon Warrior III on the NES was my first RPG. While I'm not sure the NES mechanics have held up so great, the game still holds a soft spot in my heart. I even bought the Gameboy remake. So when Dragon Warrior IV came out, you'd think it was a sure thing for me, right? It might have been, had I not been a poor young boy who relied entirely on gift-giving holidays for new games. So when I got Dragon Warrior IV for Christmas, I actually manged to keep from opening it, ultimately returning it to the store so that I could get Megaman 5. For those of you who don't know me, I'm a HUGE Megaman fan, so I don't regret my choice, but I did wonder what I missed.

I suppose I could have played it on an emulator, but as I mentioned, the NES mechanics don't hold up so well. But now I'm finally getting my chance with Dragon Quest IV: Chapters of the Chosen on the Nintendo DS. It's basically a remake Dragon Quest IV. Some things are still pretty old-school; I hate Dragon Quest's inventory management, there is ZERO touch screen function, and while the graphics are a huge step up from the NES, they're not really more than what you'd see on the SNES. I do suspect that it's easier on the DS than the NES, as grinding for loot and XP doesn't seem as much of a task, and bosses fall pretty easy when your level is high enough. It's still harder than most modern RPGs, especially when you're tossed alone into the world at level 1 and even a few slimes can take you out.

You might think that I'm not liking it, but it's actually the total opposite. I'm actually finding the game a little addicting. When I hit a town, I figure out what's the best weapons and armor are the best my party can have at that point, then I hunt monsters outside the town until I have enough money for ALL of it. And while that'd be enough to bore me into quitting any other JRPGs, I found myself in the kitchen grinding away even as I was cooking dinner.

If you didn't start playing RPGs until Final Fantasy VII, Dragon Quest IV might feel a little dated to you. But if you grew up playing them on the NES and SNES, you'll find a lot to like in Dragon Quest IV.

Force Unleashed Impressions

OK, I confess... I'm a Star Wars fan. Probably not as much as a lot of people. I don't collect the figures or have any lightsaber replicas or anything, but I have the six movies and the old Cartoon Network Clone Wars series on DVD, I've read quite a few of the books, I saw the new Clone Wars in the theater, and as far as video games go I have both KOTORs, both Legos, both Battlefronts, Republic Commando, the first two Rogue Squadrons, X-Wing Alliance, TIE Fighter 95, Episode III, Both Jedi Starfighters, and the Clone Wars. So, for anyone still reading it probably comes as no surprise that I picked up The Force Unleashed.

Some of you are likely aware of the fact that it hasn't been doing that well with the critics. It's currently sitting at a 71 at both Metacritic and Gamerankings. I looked at the scores, but didn't bother to read the reviews.

The fact of the matter is, yes, the game does have it's problems. Crappy camera, crappy targeting, and so many bugs that I wonder how it got out the door. I've already ran into two, and both were on the same level. One was, after spending all this time to figure out how to make a platform to progress, I jumped to the platform, but Starkiller moved like he hit an invisible wall, then died. Later, on the boss fight of the level, after doing a flashy attack the boss just froze in place. The music was still playing, I could still move around and use Force Grip on the various objects lying around, but nothing I did affected the boss. I had to reload my save and start the fight from scratch.

The thing is, despite the game's technical problems, I'm very much inclined to like the game. I don't mean play it for a bit and forget it like it, either. I mean, "holy crap, it's 3:00 am!" like it. The gamer in me like's Starkiller's powers. It's fun on a primal level to grab an enemy with the Force, then whip the guy into other enemies. It's fun to use Force Push to blast a couple of them off a nearby platform, or to break a window and have them sucked into space. It's fun to soften a group up with Force Lightning, then wade in and slice them up with a lightsaber. Meanwhile, the Star Wars fan in me loves the fact that the story is official canon. Not like Expanded Universe canon, but real between Episode III and IV Lucas-sanctioned canon. And the story's actually pretty good. Maybe not Empire Strikes Back good, but much better than the Clone Wars.

Ultimately, here's my advice: there's a demo available for both the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3. Download it and play it. If you liked it, and can tolerate an occasional glitch that sends you back a checkpoint, you'll like the game, as it's really more of the same, just in different environments. For me, I do notice the technical problems, but they don't outweigh the fact that the game is fun.