Omaha Omaha Hut… now that we all know
By Michael Vass | January 2, 2012
There are a lot of things that sports fans will put up with when it comes to sports color commentary. Sometimes you get to hear someone great, like John Madden, but most of the time just someone good. Occassionally you will have to endure horrendous color commentary, like how many U.S. commentators used basketball and even baseball terminology for color commentary on the World Cup in 2010. But no matter how good or bad the color commentary, fans should never have to endure what happened on Jan 1, 2012.
It was during the Giants vs Cowboys Sunday Night Football game. In the 3rd quarter, after the Giants had successfully gotten Dallas to jump offsides for the third time in the game, Cris Collinsworth – the color commentator for NBC – did the unthinkable. Collinsworth revealed, on national television while the game was underway, what the Giants were doing.
‘When the Giants use Omaha Omaha Hut it means that the playclock time is running down.’ – Cris Collinsworth during the NY Giants vs Dallas Cowboys game on 1/1/2012
It may sound simple, but that little comment is huge. Collinsworth revealed critical information about the strategy and tactics of the Giants. He gave inside information to a team, that very likely influenced the game. There is no question that someone connected to the Dallas Cowboys heard this information and passed it on to the team, as any Dallas fan would do. For the rest of the game, whether because of Cris Collinsworth’s reveal or not, Dallas never again was offsides.
In fact, it was during the 3rd quarter that the Dallas Cowboys made a massive surge and nearly evened out the game. Could the information that Cris Collinsworth revealed have been the key to breaking the code the NY Giants use for calling plays before the snap? Did this influence the game, giving an edge to the Cowboys that did not exist before? There is no way to know for sure.
What is known for sure is that Cris Collinsworth knew he should not say what he did. He prefaced his inside information with the fact that he is not supposed to say what he knew, especially during a live nationally televised game.
Did Collinsworth do this because he does not like the NY Giants? Was it because he is a fan of Tony Romo? Could it have been because he was paid, or had a bet placed somewhere? Did he want to try to increase the ratings for NBC with Dallas fans? Who knows. But whatever the reason, it is unexcusable.
If the color commentator can give away team secrets – because of their access to teams and players – on national television, what are they doing in private? Is this something that sports analysts will start doing? Sports journalists? Is it happening already? What if some other sports commentator wants to help their favorite team, should they do what Cris Collinsworth has done as well?
The NFL, and/or NBC Sports, should penalize Cris Collinsworth. An example needs to be made. Because what if next time it’s the Super Bowl or World Series or World Cup, and an announcer/commentator gives away some other vital piece of information? What if another sports commemtator decides, for whatever reason, to help out one team over another – especially if Cris Collinsworth is given a pass without even so much as the notice of the NFL. Is there a single fan that wants to have their game of choice altered or influenced by some guy in a booth? Is there a fan of any sport that wants the integrity of the game compromised?
There is a reason why teams have secrets about their strategies. There is a reason that sports commentators and journalists don’t tell the world every piece of inside information. Those reasons should be upheld, not broken. It’s no different than why inside trading in the stock market is illegal.
If by some chance Cris Collinsworth happens to read this, he should publicly apologize for his actions. He should admit what he did was wrong and request a punishment that he has earned (assuming that the NFL and/or NBC do not act beforehand). This is not something that should go away without the light of day hitting it.
But what do you think? Even if you are a fan of the Dallas Cowboys, do you think that the team should have been told what Omaha Omaha Hut means? And would any fan be upset if while watching their team in whatever sport play, the announcers/commentators gave away that teams secret plays and codes?
Do you think Cris Collinsworth should apologize? Should he be punished?
Topics: Sports | 3 Comments »
Movie Review: Mission Impossible – Ghost Protocol
By Michael Vass | December 24, 2011
The one thing that needs to be said about this fourth Mission Impossible film is that finally the true appeal of the television show is begining to be seen on the silver screen. It sure took them long enough.
The latest foray into a modern and revamped depiction of the loved 1960′s television show, Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol, hit gold with the most basic premise – teamwork. For all the gizmos, all the fancy and exotic locations, the reason that Mission Impossible wasn’t working was because of the team. That’s not to say that action junkies, and fans of Tom Cruise, weren’t coming to theaters before. But even with the hordes of viewers, the prior three films left audiences wanting more than what they got. This time they will leave feeling more complete.
Once again Ghost Protocol provides what is expected of a spy/action film these days. Lots of location filming of places most Americans will never see in person – and some of the best locations and views of these distant lands at that. This adventure features Moscow, Dubai, and India. Each looking more luxurious and fascinating than any actually are (I’ve lived in Moscow and worked 1/4 mile from the Kremlin, it isn’t nearly as glamourous as the movie makes it though it is impressive).
We get frequent and pulse-pounding action sequences. there are car chases, with beautiful cars. Even a concept electric car that makes the idea of a battery powered car seem more than the delusions of eco-maniacs and the Obama Administrtion. There is hand-to-hand combat a plenty. Girl vs girl, with the mandatory rip of clothing (but nothing too crazy or sexist). Girl vs guy, against a smarmy egotistical louse that needed to have his “God’s gift to women” mentality knocked down a few stories. Plus multiple good guy vs bad guy fights, several of which our hero Ethan Hunt does not immediately win.
But that is the other seed of improvement in the series. Not only does Ethan the Great need the help of other people with skills he does not have, but Ethan gets the worst end of the physical stuff too. Ethan gets hurt in fights, misses the incredible jump that requires split second timing, and has the super specific ultra hi tech gadget fail at the worst possible time. Life is not the perfect plan and smooth sailing that the prior 3 films imply IMF agents have generally.
Perhaps it can be called the Bruce Willis Effect. Audiences relate better to a hero that is obviously human. A hero that can’t beat everyone in a fist fight, and looks like he was in one when it is done. A hero that makes mistakes and fails when trying to do things that require near miraculous ability or timing. Just imagine Officer McClane at the end of any Die Hard film – you want him to beat the stuffing out of the boss bad guy after all the crap he has been through in the film and cheer when he does it. It’s so effective the Bourne films included that aspect, and now so is Mission Impossible.
That is Ethan Hunt in this film. Bruised, beaten, outsmarted and outclassed at various points in the film. He still is cool and quite capable, but he is far more human. Which adds to the appeal of the character. Plus, the Hunt character takes on more of a supervisory/organizer role that Phelps of the television series had. Another part desperately needed for the films.
Putting these elements together finally lets the audience care about who else is in the film and what they are doing. Rather than being transition devices that let Ethan/Cruise go from one beyond belief stunt to the next, the rest of the cast in this film actually get characters that have depth and backgrounds. They actually get to do more than stand still and allow Cruise to look good. Which even provides scenes with levity and lightness that don’t feel forced or put upon the audience.
Ghost Protocol is the maturation that fans of the Mission Impossible series have been waiting for. Tom Cruise has finally let his ego go, having a character that takes some painful missteps (well, leap literally), and gives room for other actors to justify the screen time they get.
Simon Pegg, best know for Shawn of the Dead and Hot Fuzz, makes the most of Benji Dunn’s enthusiasm and inexperience in the feild – for laughs and Barney/Q tech genuis slot that is needed in such a film.
Paula Patton does a good job as the femme fatale Jane Carter. A beauty with good looks (if a tad skinny) and the chops to take on the enemy with a gun or barehanded as the case may be.
Jeremy Renner as William Brandt is competent. While his character is a bit of a mush, he too elevates himself as the story unfolds. Out of the main cast, he has the least likeable character. Perhaps it was the directing, or the plot, but all but 2 of his scenes seem flat and his backstory is the most dragging part of the film. Thankfully it is short and intercut with far better plot scenes.
Another great choice in this film was providing a nutjob bad guy that didn’t waste a good portion of the film trying to explain why he is a nut or what his deep inner motivations are. He is more like the shark from JAWS, or Auric Goldfinger, or the Alien – just bad and menacing because they are.
Ultimately Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol does what it is supposed to do, it entertains. There is humor, action, missteps, and spy thriller intrigue with global stakes. Throw in dashes of the exotic and hi tech gadgets that are as impressive as they may be outlandish. Shake it well with good editing and a moderately fast pace, and you are served with a film that justifies the price of a theater ticket – without feeling like you just got raped because the film studio realized that if they make it 3D they can pull even more money out of the audience pockets without any added benefit.
Topics: Movie Previews and Reviews | No Comments »
Movie Review: Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows
By Michael Vass | December 20, 2011
The 2nd in what well looks to be a string of movies based on Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s deductive slueth features Robert Downey Jr. in the titular role and Jude Law as his right hand (at times literally) man Dr. Watson. Like the prior film it is a period piece, and filled with the British accents and locals that are home to the characters.
This film wastes no time in picking up where the first film ends. Dr. Watson is away, once again deeply involved in getting married why Holmes is equally busy with tracking his quarry – both Professor Moriarity (Jared Harris) and Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams from the prior film). Watching McAdams enjoyably trifle with Holmes and the verbal interplay was amusing, but sadly ends far too soon and surprisingly with finality. Though nothing is absolute in film, it appears that she will not be returning to future films. Still, the movie is consistent with the overall depiction of Adler and her relationship to Holmes:
To Sherlock Holmes she is always the woman. I have seldom heard him mention her under any other name. In his eyes she eclipses and predominates the whole of her sex. It was not that he felt any emotion akin to love for Irene Adler. All emotions, and that one particularly, were abhorrent to his cold, precise but admirably balanced mind.
The film quickly moves on to introduce Dr. Watson, and a far more manic Holmes some undertermined time later. After a few scenes that will surely drive PETA mad, and a quick paced dialogue that conveys that Dr. Watson is no slouch in his own mental nimbleness, we get to meet another important character – Mycroft (Stephen Fry). [For those that have never read the books, the name is not a play on words or in any way refering to Microsoft]
This begins a maze of twists and turns, winding a path from England, to France, and on to Germany. The countries are critical as the time is prior to WWI, and tensions among the European powers are rising quickly. Anarchists, quite similar to the lunatic terrorists of today, are busy attacking innocents and blaming this country or that. Holmes is in a constant race to keep up with the next disaster, and hopefully avert the fall of the dominoes.
This film does an excellent job of conveying the time with accuracy. Unlike most romanticised views of the time, we see Europe more as it was. Gritty, dirty, crowded but filled with a feel of expansion and growth into something else. There is also the clear distinction between the classes and the areas they inhabit, which Holmes travels between with fluidity but never ease as he is an outsider everywhere due to his mind.
The acting is on par with the first film. Downey is quite believeable as the drug addicted (only referenced once in the film, early on and in just 1 sentance) revengeful foil to the plans of Professor Moriarity. Even in the most calm scenes of the film, Downey seems disheveled and out of sync with the world, giving Holmes an akwardness you might expect for someone who is reading the tea leaves as he sips.
Jude Law bring in a noteworthy performance. His Dr. Watson is sharp and intelligent, obscuring a man that is more akin to the wild abandon that is Holmes than he would care to admit. Law again exemplifies why Dr. Watson is both a confidant and conspirator to all the things that Holmes tries to accomplish. This movie though adds a touch of the harsher life before meeting Sherlock Holmes, the skill of Dr. Watson’s marksmanship honed in wartime and his rowdy behavior that accompanies his love of drink. In fact, in one of the more personal battles between Holmes and Watson (during a larger battle of mercenaries agaist the duo), we get to see Watson battle with his desire to live a life of adventure and his deep desire to have a family and wife.
Jared Harris has the toughest role. He must give Prof. Moriarity a strong sense of amoral ambition, and a willingness to inflict pain without making him loathesome or evil – as the character is neither. He had to provide the character with intelligence, and patience for his long plans and web of interactions, yet make him move with purpose between these steps. Lastly he needed to impart how much pleasure Prof. Moriarity takes in battling with Holmes and yet his need to win. It is a difficult role based on many subtlies, and while most scenes are very effective not all are.
Perhaps the worst role in the movie is that of Stephen Fry’s Mycroft. This is not because of an inability on the part of Fry (probably best known to American audiences for his part in V for Vendetta) but because of the script and direction. Mycroft is address as more of a high society snob. A man detached from the day to day travails of the common man, and filled with as many eccentricities as his staff and brother combined.
This is done well by Fry, but it does not convey what Sir Doyle filled the character with. Mycroft is the smarter brother of Sherlock. His knowledge and abilities are so invaluable to the Queen that not even Holmes is clear what he does for the nation of England. Mycroft is the resource that Holmes depends upon when he is in a corner, and a sage wisdom when perplexed. Of course Mycroft is eccentric, which Fry portrays well as he is nude and discussing breakfast with Dr. Watson’s newlywed wife.
The conclusions of every department are passed to him [Mycroft], and he is the central exchange, the clearinghouse, which makes out the balance. All other men are specialists, but his specialism is omniscience.
Yet this never gells with why Prof. Moriarity, who is so determined to kill Dr. Watson and his wife – thus hurting Holmes, is unwilling to even attempt to spy on Mycroft. Or why Mycroft is able to move without fear of reprisal from Moriarity. Those that have read the books get it. It’s a battle that Moriarity is rather sure he would lose, if ever Mycroft was bothered to care about the petty actions of Holmes or Moriarity, or suffer to have to act on them. But the film never conveys this, thus relegating Fry to merely an oddity and transition device.
Another weak point in the film is the ending sting against the plans of Moriarity by Holmes. Involving the wife of Watson, it begs the question of how she could break a code by herself – created by an equal to Holmes. Even with the correct key code, an ordinary person would be expected to be quite hard pressed to accomplish the feat in 3x the time she had available. Then again, the roles for women (other than McAdam’s tenatious and qualified Adler) in the film are quite limitied, as they are in the books, which does not bode well in modern storytelling.
The film is definitely at its best in the slow stop-motion action scenes. Whether it is Downey’s Holmes dispatching 4 rogues, or a race out of a forest under seige by mortars and artillery, there is a thrill of violence that plays well with the preceding or following intellectual dialogue. Guy Ritchie perhaps overuses this in the middle of the film, as if the audience forgot the opening sequence, with a monologue that is completely without need. Still, the flair in the film is the action and enough to keep most male audience members attentive.
Overall this is a good film and worth the money to see in a theater. The performances are well-done (though not Oscar worthy), the dialogue refreshingly adult and beyond the normal need to reach the lowest common denominator – without losing the audience in the process. The plot is well written and worth paying attention to in detail.
Topics: Movie Previews and Reviews | 1 Comment »
Fright Night (2011)… Prepare to be bored tonight
By theredraylives | December 17, 2011
Fright Night (2011)
Dir. Craig Gillespie
Anton Yelchin, Colin Farrell, David Tennant
2-1/2 out of 5 Stars
Note that this review is not about- and has nothing to do with- the original version, or how much better/worse this version is than that version.
Fright Night is not the worst horror movie you’ll ever see. Frankly this should have been the tagline for the film, as after watching it one comes away from it with exactly that feeling. It isn’t necessarily scary, and it’s not really gory, especially in the post-Saw era of horror filmmaking. This sadly leaves it lacking in the horror department, and coupled with its grim failures in pretty much every other aspect, it makes for an entirely non-memorable experience. Worse than being really bad and nowhere near really good, the film simply “is” in the way that water is simply wet. There’s nothing new, nothing fun, nothing surprising, and certainly nothing frightening here.
This is particularly a shame considering the talent involved. Anton Yelchin, for instance, is a bright young talent. Colin Farrell is a good actor when he wants to be, and he certainly brings a creepy and brooding atmosphere to Jerry that is probably the film’s greatest positive attribute. It absolutely wastes David Tennant, with his single befuddled expression and incredibly throw-away connection to the main plot and characters.
Colin Farrell is quite effective as Jerry the Vampire (no, seriously). He commands attention on the screen and he is indescribably creepy, no matter how gorgeous all the female characters seem to think he is. Atmospherically, the film is very well shot, with great emphasis on darkness to (attempt to) enhance the dark and bleak setting. As the film begins and well into the first act, the pace is quite even, and Gillespie does a great job of showing how effective and brutal Jerry is at what he does while still remaining hidden in the shadows. As the first act winds up, outside of the appearance of Christopher Mintz-Plasse (who is terribly misplaced in this film), this thing is actually shaping up to be something decent.
After this, viewers should prepare their eyes for overtime, between all the eye rolling and the “I-can’t-believe-this-is-this-stupid” wide-eyed stare. Jerry- for some inexplicable reason- seems to forget all of his “400 years of survival” (which he makes mention of later in the film), instead opting to attack people in the street, blowing up a home, and causing a car accident, leaving a path of destruction so wide and absurd that one would swear a tornado tore through the set. Not that the authorities seem to notice, mind you; at one point, said home that detonated the night before is not even taped off, and there isn’t a police or fire official in sight. Jerry doesn’t lose his advantage through any ingenuity or careful planning on the part of our protagonists, but through the sheer force of his own stupidity, since try as they might the filmmakers couldn’t make the characters seem smart enough to turn off a water faucet much less thwart the undead.
Meanwhile, act II also introduces us to Peter Vincent (Tennant), who is also unequivocally the world’s biggest tool. He is a “vampire expert” that, in the span of five minutes, proves that not only is he not an expert, but is rather something of a sad and pathetic fraud. He then vanishes from the film entirely for a gigantic span of time (which is tragic given Tennant’s talent and the fact that the conclusion to what one could loosely call his character arc is so rushed and out of left field that one half expects him to also reveal he is half-griffon).
From here the film only devolves even further. We build toward a climax which involves Mintz-Plasse returning as a vampire for a showdown, which is so brain-crushingly awful that one begs for the sunlight to obliterate him and spare the film the embarrassment (Mintz-Plasse, usually enjoyable, says every single line of dialogue as if he is a nine-year-old who thinks he is a vampire, and finds it overwhelmingly exciting). It also features the return of Vincent, whose character suddenly has a backstory with Jerry even though it is so late in the film that it has absolutely no worth or impact. Given this revelation, might Vincent not have made a better main character in the film than Yelchin’s character, who had no semblance of a character arc? The film nearly collapsed on his pale, scrawny shoulders, and perhaps the charisma of a David Tennant could have lifted and carried this film and made it into something better than it was. In the end, the most absurd strategy of all saves the day, the hero gets his girl, and Vincent looks baffled by his existence.
This film starts with a great deal of promise and falls flat on zero character development and a black hole of dramatic tension. Why was Yelchin’s Charley the main character? Why does he have a meaningless connection to Mintz-Plasse’s Ed, which is only used to create some hokey melodrama later in the film? Why was Tennant’s character- by far the most interesting and promising of the human characters- reduced to a monument to wasted potential? The plot itself barely has a pulse. The film becomes such a disassociated mess that the only thing exciting about the ending is the fact that the film has finally ended. One would be better served watching until Charley escapes from Jerry’s home, and then just making up an ending from there. Two and a half out of five stars.
by Nicholas Haskins
Follow me on Twitter or book my face. You can also find this review and others over at examiner.com. Or, choose the form of the destructor! Choose, and perish.
Topics: Movie Previews and Reviews | No Comments »
Review: Neverland on SyFy Channel
By Michael Vass | December 6, 2011
“To die will be an awfully big adventure.” – Peter Pan
Obviously, J. M. Barrie never worked in Hollywood. Even better, he did not live to see cable television or the abomination of a television miniseries that squandered all the joy, imagination, and wonder of his creation, Neverland.
The SyFy miniseries Neverland is neither an adventure nor grand. It never reaches for awe or even a mere plot that is cohesive. Instead for 2 nights viewers were offered a gosammer of a story with potential, 2 big name stars, and enough special effects to distract any pre-teens that happen to have suffered through watching both nights.
Of course nothing on television could be that bad. There of course must be something that was well done in this farcial (and I mean that without a shred of the whimsy the word normally implies) revisionrd prequel to the 1911 classic book. There is. The best thing about this cable television miniseries is the fact that Bob Hoskins (playing Smee like in the failed film Hook) is rarely seen, and Keira Knightley (as Tinkerbell) wisely chose only to lend her voice to the production – their careers will be saved.
The fact that the miniseries starts with inconsistencies is hardly the worst thing about the miniseries. The opening scenes, which prove to have only the most slight connection to anything else we will see, at least provide the potential for grandeur and imagination. It ends far to quickly before we are sucked into a far less compelling story about street urchins cobbled together by a man who is never clearly defined and his right hand Peter (Charlie Rowe).
Peter is the leader, in spirit at least, of a small team of petty criminals. Peter has aspirations of been a successful theif and partner to his mentor James Hook (Rhys Ifans). Hook for his part teaches fencing to the lower classes, while sheltering his waif squad of pickpockets. At this point the miniseries feels more like a bad telling of Oliver Twist in some respects, but it goes on.
Hook has some nefarious friends, that maintain a more glamorous title and priviledge than Hook, who lost his for shadowy and unknown reasons. To regain his lost status, Hook must embark on a perilous theft, so dangerous that he cannot bring his chorus of little theives with him. Which of course leads Peter right into the middle of the robbery.
Not only is the robbery uneventful, it is unclear what risk anyone was initially concerned with. In the middle of this, suddenly, Hook and the crime troupe suddenly disappear – with a fair portion of the store they were robbing. Sadly Peter is left behind. Skipping about 10 minutes of useless chatter that amounts to nothing at all, Peter winds up trying to follow his friends.
Thus we finally enter Neverland. Be happy that I have just save you from 1 hour of the most uneventful television in quite some time.
From this point on, the miniseries is an ever growing list of inconsistent character interactions, unbelievable motivations, pathetic scripts, bland acting, and truely forgettable scenery.
No one ages in Neverland, but equally no one gets a shred wiser. Simplistic acheivements like making new clothes, or perhaps tracking the Indians, completely escape the pirates thoughts – for 100+ years. Native American Indian children, at least 100 years old, never learn to be better than just children. Defenses the likes of which might be appropriate for a game of tag are the best plan ever thought up. Yet there is rum, and enough gun powder and bullets to wage a continuous battle seemingly for eons.
If only this were the worst of it. The crocodiles, which are done in CGI to monstrous size and with 10 legs to boot, randomly infest the waters of Neverland or are completely absent – usually when hordes of bodies are in the water and rip for the kill. The fairies are equally unimpressive. Looking like miniturized adults covered in a gray flour paste covered with tinfoil, they are niether charming as Disney envisioned, nor imposing as this miniseries intermittently suggests.
Perhaps the only other point in favor of the miniseries is that real Native Americans were used. To add to the realism the lead character, Tiger Lilly (Q’orianka Kilcher), is about as expressive as a tree and as cute as well a tree. Yes, in real life everyone is not a model or superstar in looks, but this cable program is hardly trying to attain any sense of reality – lest the female pirate captain look more like a roller derby champion than a pinup model. The only other english speaking native American is played by Raoul Trujillo, as some spiritual monk whose only purpose is an occasional translation for the tribe, or words of wisdom for Peter and the Lost Boys.
In variably, after twists that are simultaneously tiresome, useless, and though chilling, we come to a climax of the series. Hook reveals his true dark motivations, betraying Peter for the … well 5th time that I can recall but there may have been more… and that he is a tourtured soul filled with guilt as well as a lust for power. The Native American Indians apparently wipe out all but 6 pirates (of which 4 are killed leaving only Hook and 1 other alive). Peter accidentally cut off Hook’s hand and Hook knocks out Peter by tossing a pocket watch at him (literally). Oh, and Tinkerbell is banished from her kingdom by the rulers of her kingdom (its in the highly limited dialogue of the fairie scenes), only to be stepped on like a bug.
This sets up the anti-climax, which is supposed to bring us full tilt into the 1911 book. Hook apparently cliff dives into monster crocodile filled waters and swims an unknown distance to the abandoned pirate ship with the last surviving pirate to chase Peter forever. He did this with 1 hand and while continuing to bleed out. Where he gets a new crew (since the Indians killed all his men) is unknown.
Peter reappears with gifts for his Lost Boys, and tells them they will never go home again. This leaves them open for untold adventures, a sure hint for sequels, followed up rapidly by the realization that Peter has lost his shadow – in case the hint about sequels was to subtle. Oh, and Tinkerbell is alive and well. Roll the credits.
Literally everyone else was both forgettable in their acting and the characters they portrayed. If anything is to be gained from the SyFy revisioning of Peter Pan, it is that the book is a classic that is best read, at worst seen in a play or watched on a Disney DVD.
Only your support allows us to provide election coverage, political event coverage, and our political commentary. Visit Alchemy at World of VASS, and take part in our 2012 Buy & Win Contest – help keep us going. We appreciate your support.
Topics: Television | No Comments »
Star Wars: The Old Republic – open beta
By Michael Vass | November 29, 2011
There has been much anticipation about the new Star Wars massively multiplayer online game (MMO). The last game to tap into the huge well of avid gamers that equally find Star Wars compelling was Star Wars Galaxies (SWG). That attempt was anything but up to the expectations of gamers, fans, and likely the software developers. With the demise of SWG, and the popularity of the Bioware version’s of the ancient universe of Sith and Jedi still riding the crest of popularity the question is what will Star Wars: The Old Republic (SWTOR) be like?
Well, to start off, the fans of SWG will be disappointed. There were not many of them, but they will not like this new game. It has revamped and restyled everything. There are no hidden paths to become a Jedi (or Sith), there is not need to hop from every available planet dropping crafting stations and houses just to make a single blaster rifle. In fact, even the ability to get and improve spacecraft has been altered.
Fans of the other Bioware Star Wars games will be much happier. SWTOR is modeled after Knights of the Old Republic and other similar games. That includes response bars to deal with NPC’s and companions. SWTOR is preset with multiple planets to visit, a ton of knowledge and lore, and a core story that is quite simple to understand and navigate.
Fans of MMO’s in general, especially the standing king – World of Warcraft (WoW) – will have a very different view. Star Wars: The Old Republic is not like any other game out there. This is good and bad. There are factions, in that there is the Empire and the Republic. There are the rudimentary and required maildrop runs and of course beast trolling. But the feel and the look are NOT what most MMO gamers are expecting.
SWTOR is … kind of like playing a somewhat open ended videogame, with tens of thousands of other people. Make no mistake, the game will be filled with people day one. But even in the Beta, with every servers filled as the system was being stress tested, the feel of the game was never exactly overrun. There is an expansiveness and isolation that comes with the playing of the game.
Imperial Agent
The first few levels of the game are basically the same as anu MMO. With the exception that your character can speak! That is a first to my knowledge. But you get to be introduced to the world quickly. I stuck with only the Empire storylines, as that is where my own passion lies. The opening story is directly what you would expect, you get no respect and are vying with other NPC’s to justify your existence.
The game moves along rather fluidly, and up until you get a companion you are mostly on a perdetermined track. This likely adds to the feeling of isolation and restriction that is inherent in the game. You see and can interact with other players constantly if you wish, but the gameplay does not really lend itself to that. Though grouping with others is rewarded, and will make may areas far easier to deal with.
You will learn quickly that the MMO is heavily dependant on instances. Not a new feature in MMO’s but in this case done quite well. The entrance into an MMO feels seemless, and looks it as well. There is no apparent lag time, even with a huge number of people in the world at once. You just walk into the clerly marked area, and thre you are, your own special storyline (sort of). You can even bring friends along – if they are not the same class as you are.
As was mentioned before, you will have a companion as you travel. In fact as the game progresses you will have several – but not more than 5, and only 1 can travel the world with you at any given time. But you can interchange them, and have they go off to take care of varios chores and mundane tasks.
If you like crafting in MMO’s, you may not like the crafting in SWTOR. Yes you still gather raw materials. Yes you still need to learn blueprints (called schematics) and you must advanceup the chain. But putting it all together does not directly involve you. In fact, the companions handle the assembly and some of the gathering as well. They are influenced by how they feel about you, and their own inherent abilities, but the actual build takes place away from you – the companion arrives with the finished result (if any).
Crafting will likely take place for most around level 8. That’s about the same time you get a companion. The companion will also fight along side you, kind of like pets, if they have any offensive capabilities. You can outfit them with weapons, clothing, and alter their looks to a degree (initially). They are pretty intelligent AI’s but, you can also step in and micromanage their fighting actions to a point. The companions have different abilities and attributes than you, and often are of completely diffent races. So you can be a tank, and have a companion that is more of a healer, wherever you go.
The companions that you get to have depend on the class you chose. From there the order in which you get them is preselected. You add more as you raise levels, though it is possible to lose a companion as well – though that is unconfirmed.
What is confirmed, at this point in Beta, is that your first companion will be around level 8. Which depends on your ability to progress therough the early storyline. The next is at level 15 or so. This is where you really get to be more free. At level 15 you get your starship (also predetermined by your class). At that point you are open to travel most of the universe, and visit a decent assortment of planets known both from the movies and book on Star Wars.
Levels for planets are very clearly marked. You won’t just wander onto a planet without any idea that it was a level 50 and you are a mere level 21. Several planets feature PVP as well as PVE. This is seperate of the PvP servers. Which is more of what Flashpints are for, battle royals with the other side.
The graphics of SWTOR are not stellar. They stand well above other MMO’s like DC Online, but the depth of detail and diversity is slightly behind WoW. It definitely pales compared to Elder Scrolls: Skyrim, but then again so does almost everything else. As MMO’s go, the graphics have enough detail to let you get the feeling of the Star Wars Universe, but the minutia is still unknown. An example is that animals are detailed enough to give you a clear understanding of what it is supposed to be, but no nuances, like the texture of skin.
The sound in SWTOR is very good. There are many chances to get tidbits of themes that are well known to fans, and derivations on those themes depending on where you are and what you are doing. The sounds are not over bearing, nor distracting. In fact, you may not notice most of the background music 80% of the time – though you would notice if it just stopped.
The voice acting is really quite good. There was a huge list of voice actors that were used in this game, and it shows. NPC’s don’t all sound like the same 5 people. They come across with credibility, and make you feel like the character on the screen would say what you are hearing. It’s not Shakespeare, but then again it’s an MMO.
The feel of the game has a good pace to it. You want to get a companion and/or extra ones, and see what you can do with them. You want to get a new weapon to beat the latest quest. You want to get that spacecraft, and then outfit it with what you think is vital to survive. You want to visit the other planets, or jump into a space battle.
Are there drawbacks? Yes. Space battles are on rails. If you don’t know what that means, they you should enjoy it immensely, if you do not as much. The ability to craft what you want, and to alter what you have, is a bit limited. The economy for various items exists, and the tools to search or sell are pretty basic, perhaps too much so. And so on.
Several issues may just be Beta items. I won’t go into detail as that would be unfair. What I have noted are currently set for the start of the MMO. As the restriction on the Beta was lifted, this isn’t being held back due to legal issues.
The very last question you might ask is, ‘is it worth buying?’ I bought the game on pre-order. After havig played the Beta, I’m keeping my pre-order and looking forward to playing. It won’t be everything that I was hoping for, but it will be alot of what I wanted. It is definitely a move up from SWG, and a new direction for MMO’s.
Only your support allows us to provide election coverage, political event coverage, and our political commentary. Visit Alchemy at World of VASS, and take part in our 2012 Buy & Win Contest – help keep us going. We appreciate your support.
Topics: Video Games | 1 Comment »
On Black Friday and Cyber Monday, don’t forget
By Michael Vass | November 24, 2011
It’s cold out there. In some parts of the nation there are icy roads. At malls and stores there will be a mad rush on Black Friday, in fact some people are already camping out in front of stores instead of spending the holiday with family and friends.
We suggest an alternative. Take a moment to look at Alchemy at World of VASS.
From the comfort of your home, without spending a dime on gas, without crowds and competative jossling. It’s open 24/7, so we are there when you are ready. Best of all, what we offer is not sold in every mall and store in the nation – its unique and handcrafted.
As a bonus, we are offering our Buy and Win Contest. We will give our winner 5% of the revenues we generate. We dare our competitors to match that on Black Friday or Cyber Monday, or ever.
Click image to see PDF
So before you spend as much gas parking as driving to and from the malls, before you pitch a tent in front of a store, after you finish the turkey, and while you comb the internt on Cyber Monday for a gift that is actually unique and special, don’t forget to check us out.
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
« Previous Entries Next Entries »
Loading ...
Casino European Roulette with High-quality Technological style 3D graphics skin - play for fun earn and achievements! Mouse, follow in-game instructions.
Classic Black Jack game where you have to get a 21 to make black jack. Classic Casino game Hit on a chip to place bet. Then play and choose hit or stand acording to your cards.
