Wii football: more Gary Neville than Lionel Messi

I really am a doomed prophet. Little over a week ago did I big up the World Cup, banging on about how it was competing with Mario - my first summer love, circa 2010 - that Argentina and Brazil, in particular, were brilliant to watch. Well, sadly, the gold has since turned to shit. Argentina have gone. Brazil have gone. The Spanish, with the exception of David Villa, are yet to fire.

I need a new football game to compensate for this drop in quality, but I've recently sold my Xbox and am hardly the biggest fan of the Wii's PES and FIFA offerings. Too slow and tactical for me, they play like RTS titles rather than the sports simulations that I pine for. And that's leaving aside the cold, hard fact that the graphics are more 'Gary Neville' than their Xbox/PS3 'Messi' counterparts.

So no football games for me for the time being then. Given the extent of my previous sports-games addictions, I should greet this as a plus. I won't though. My PES/FIFA adulation is too far gone for that.

Mario or football?

I was only joshing when I declared that, with Super Mario Galaxy 2 on the horizon, the World Cup meant nothing to me. Because it does: I like following my team, the troughs and peaks of a season; I like the hysterical reactions to our national side, however tragic the final diagnosis might be. And the World Cup is almost as rare an event as a new Mario game anyway. I should savour it. But there's one problem. I'm all about the aesthetics me, so when something fails to entertain, I'm ruthlessly disloyal.

The first round of this World Cup was especially hopeless. Negative tactics, star players failing to ignite; all capped off, of course, by a painfully mediocre first turn-out from England. It was pretty tirgid stuff. Meanwhile Mario had grabbed me by the coat-tails. He wouldn't let go, the bastard. Controlling Yoshi, rendered in 3D properly for the first time, was wonderful; the levels were packed with new ideas; and the music was suitably foot-tapping - witness Puzzle Plank Galaxy if you don't believe me. It was perfection. I wasn't ashamed to shout my love from the rooftops. Well, kinda: Mario-love at 23 years of age isn't the coolest thing in the world. Anyway, two weeks ago Mario was giving the World Cup a right kicking.

Thankfully, though, its entertainment value has since picked up. Even England vs. Germany had a sort of sadistic joy: the first goal, in particular, was one in a million. An assist direct from the 'keeper - laughable. Terrible and wretched too, of course, but that's the obvious, all-too easy reaction. It's always better to laugh than cry.

So thanks to England's shameful exit, Brazil's continuing improvement, and Argentina's resurgence under Maradona, the World Cup is back in my good books. But it's still no match for Mario.

Mario Ga Ga

I have a reason to be cheerful this summer thanks to the release of Super Mario Galaxy 2. Forget football, that game will be my everything mid-June. But there's one problem. I have a Xbox, not a Wii. I would have to repurchase a Wii to get my hands on Mario Galaxy 2. I have never repurchased a console. This is a big issue. And it makes me wonder: why has it come to this? Why am I so ready to ditch the Xbox after only a year, to return to a console that I've lost faith in once already?

My pondering begins with my present issue: my birthday is just around the corner and yet I'm eyeing up zero, zilch, nothing. This is strange. No matter the year, I'm always able to pencil in a specific game for birthdays and holidays. Sometimes it's a new release, sometimes it's a game that's passed under my radar.

Here at the start of the new decade, though, I have squat. For all of its rave reviews, Bioshock 2 still seems an unnecessary sequel, while Mass Effect 2 sounds like it would suck 50 hours-plus out of my life. And 30 hours is my limit. I had pencilled in Red Dead Redemption but that's sadly been pushed back.

My current console lacks originality. FPS, FPS, FPS. I like shooting and the old ultra-violence as much as the next man, but not in every single title. I have other issues too with the 360, those which many modern gamers may disagree with. Gamer scores and achievements and avatars eh? They add nothing to the gameplay. And downloadable content? That's just a cynical ploy to make you pay for material which should have been included in the original product.

Anyway, I'm feeling all cynical now, so I'm going to finish on a lighter note.

Summer day, June 2010. Postman approaches front door with a slim, rectangular box in his hand. I'm like a dog, buzzing around in the hallway, waiting for him to poke it through the letterbox. The box is squeezed through and then hits the floor. Before I rip it open with my bare hands, I know what it has to be. Super Mario Galaxy 2. The finest example of my favourite genre, made by the best developer in the world. I feel like a kid again.

Room 101: 3D Sonic

The transition from 2D to 3D was a logical step for most, allowing developers to expand their visions and to create more dynamic worlds. Nintendo did this effortlessly with their mascot, Mario, while the likes of Rockstar have flourished with the help of this extra dimension. The GTAs are notable benefactors: though they sold well enough before, it was only with the new technology that they became genre-defining - and in turn almost single-handedly created the sandbox genre. Other developers, however, were not so adaptable to this brave new world. In particular, Sonic Adventure on the Dreamcast saw the once untouchable Sega begin to lose their relevance. Over a decade ago it set a rot in motion which is still in need of curing.

It was all so simple back in the 90s. Mario was the undisputed king of platformers with little if any competition. Then Sonic burst onto the scene. Sonic offered a different brand of platformer: lightning-quick, with rollercoaster-like levels, and an infectious Japanese techno beat. Quite simply, the blue hedgehog had a cooler vibe than Mario, and this allowed Sega to dominate the teenage end of the market. As the years passed and Sonic's popularity showed no signs of waning, Sega did not re-invent the wheel for the sequels that followed - they did not need to. But with the release of the Nintendo 64 and its flagship title, Super Mario 64, the gaming world was changing. Nintendo blew people away. This was Mario, no doubt, but this was also the next step in video games. Suddenly Sonic and his flat vistas were no longer enough. Sega had to react with a 3D world of their own. In terms of game develoment, it was arguably their most costly mistake.

This is not to say that Sonic Adventure - the eventual rival to Mario 64's throne - was a bad game. It was decent in its own right, but - and this is the dealbreaker - it was just not Sonic any more. The loop-the-loops were still intact but they were broken up by distinctly un-Sonic features, such as talking and, more to the point, walking. No longer was each level a visceral escape for the senses. So long the perfect foil for Mario's ponderous pace, Sonic had lost his mojo.

The saddest thing about Sonic Adventure is not the title alone, more its effect on the franchise. Since its release, and in spite of ever-loudening calls from Sonic fans, Sega have been reluctant to turn back to 2D. The times they have been willing to go back, they have been successful: the 2D sections of Sonic Unleashed were widely celebrated by fans and journalists alike; it was only the werewolf half of the game, in 3D no less, that proved to be the game's downfall.

As time goes on, maybe Sega will return Sonic to the glory he deserves. But this will take some time, and so it hastens me to cry once more: what if Sonic Adventure had never existed?

Room 101: Halo

These aren't the best of games, these aren't the worst of games. No, the following titles have put a blight upon video games, laying down laws and setting trends that we can never turn back on. Isn't it a shame that shit sells?

Part 1:

Topping my list is Halo and all of its ungainly offspring. Fair's fair, I'll give credit to the first game: while it was as generic as the later titles, at least its single-player campaign was well-made. That, however, is no excuse for its sequels, which have gradually become worse and worse, leading to the mess of Halo 3. Usually you can tell the overall quality of a video game - as with most forms of art - from its opening. Think of Super Mario 64 and the playground of Peach's castle or the atmospheric opening to Metal Gear Solid 2 - they both set stunning foundations for what's to follow. Halo 3, on the other hand, has to have one of the worst opening levels ever made - for a high-profile title anyway. You are plonked down in a jungle and then must lead out men across a confusing, linear path. It all looks the same. The developer, Bungie, knew this. That's why there's an arrow leading in the right direction at every turn. Half-decent games do not resort to this. Either it is clear where you have to go next, or you are provided with a realised world to explore (see Fallout 3 or Bioshock for examples of the latter). Thankfully, Halo 3 does improve, ironically by making the second level like every dark, narrow and gray series of corridors you've ever seen in a sci-fi shooter; and resulting levels stick to this template. By its end, I did not loathe the game (it's average, nothing more), but I was pretty critical of the hype and of its overall effect on the industry.

Only a generation ago, first-person shooters were a welcome genre. They gave you a visceral thrill that's hard to achieve with an an over-the-shoulder perspective. And they were always innovative: GoldenEye for stealth and multiplayer; Half-Life for a compelling story; Metroid Prime for its atmosphere. Now, though, you see a market flooded with legions of by-the-numbers FPSs, eating up the talents of developers forced to make games that will sell. It may be slightly unfair to solely accuse Halo for this disappointing aspect of modern gaming, but there is no doubting its influence. Its continued success - despite its generic and flawed gameplay - has seeped into the heads of the money men and most disappointingly, the minds of gamers. Before, the industry leaders were the Marios and the Sonics of this world. What a shame that Halo is the new bench mark - a game without the character of an italian plumber, or a hedgehog who defies the laws of nature.

We can be thankful then, that Bioshock 2 is around the corner, along with progressive titles like Heavy Rain. The day is coming, the day when Master Chief no longer dictates...

Ashes Cricket 2009: The advert

What a day of cricket. Like most of this series, it came out of nowhere. You could say Stuart Broad's display today had been hinted at at Headingley with his six wicket haul, but no one could have predicted the Aussies' collapse. While I was watching it though, I had a Charlie Brooker-style epiphany: the advert for Ashes Cricket 2009 on the Wii is pathetic.

Now, video game ads don't tend to be great pieces of art. When they try to be, they end up at worst offensive and at best embarassing. Ashes Cricket comes under the latter bracket. In it we witness three lonely-looking men waiting for their team mates at a local cricket club. But where are their teammates? The following scene reveals twenty sweaty, exuberant men playing Ashes Cricket on the Wii, necks craned towards the TV. Why don't they just step outside and pretend they're budding Flintoffs for real, seen as they're all padded up for it? Nope, they'd rather have a session on the Wii. As an avid gamer myself, I wouldn't be so dismissive if the game looked decent - I know only too well that a good translation of a sport can be just as rivetting as the sport itself (witness early PES as an example). But Ashes Cricket? Nah. The character models are positively demonic for starters; lazy photoshops that have been thrown in at the last minute.






I should be grateful. I do see where they're going with it. But from the looks of it, I'd prefer sticking with the lonesome men outside rather than the sweaty morons. Still, it could be worse: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu8456pVSLI

Time to jump the Microsoft ship?

Last Christmas I decided to sell my Wii. After Super Mario Galaxy and Wii Sports there was little else to offer. Sure there were a few conversions (Resi 4 and Okami) but I didn't want to be left behind playing last-gen titles. Although its first tentative steps were promising, the Wii had finally emerged as a gimmick. I jumped ship to the Xbox 360 within weeks.

I played Fable II and Bioshock. They were stunning games. I was glad of my new console. They pushed the boundaries for storytelling within video games, highlighting the medium's potential to catch up with the likes of film and literature.

Afterwards I sought my next taste of gaming goodness. I kept an eye on E3 and the critical reception of games like Bionic Commando and Resi 5, but found nothing different to what I had played before. As of yet my next must-have has not revealed itself. All the 360 exclusives seem to have given way to a promising array of releases on the PS3, while even Nintendo finally seem to be redressing the balance between their casual and hardcore offerings.

It all seems to lead to this conclusion: in the coming winter I will get itchy feet again. Nintendo lost me last year and likewise, if Microsoft fail to impress, I may become impatient once again. When will I ever be faithful?