There are so many things wrong with this.

After spending a fair amount of time with the Halo: Reach beta last week, which I had a pretty good time with, online multiplayer has been the focus of my thoughts for the first time in a while. And really, when I think about online gaming, I tend to think about how little of it I do these days. Back in the days of Halo 2 and maybe even extending into my time with Modern Warfare 1, I generally paid a visit to the virtual killing fields on a daily basis. But a lot has changed since then, both in my personal life and in the industry. Rather than wasting your time with an exploration of why I can’t seem enjoy the competitive online scene for more than a month at a time anymore, I’ll just go with the easy answer and say that all the kids I used to play with no longer play games online and that I’m not entirely interested in meeting digital friends. So for me, the novelty of a new game and primal competition can keep me satisfied for maybe month, but as soon as I pick up a newer game I have no interest in returning to the never-ending massacre that I had been contributing to. How can developers change this behavior?

Well, it’s probably a good idea to examine the online games that I’ve gotten involved with over the past couple years. I’ll only bother to list the ones that managed to draw me into public matches with the rest of you strange weirdos for more than a week–BioShock 2, Modern Warfare 2, Battlefield 1943, Left 4 Dead, and Gears of War 2. My motivations to suffer through BioShock 2‘s multiplayer were pretty much achievements and the need to properly review the game. I also enjoyed the Big Daddy twist applied to your run-of-the-mill CTF game in the “Capture the Sister” mode.

Modern Warfare 2 genuinely had me hooked for a while with its immense customization and class-balance. Not to mention, persistent leveling is always one way to keep a player going for one more session. But ultimately, I just got sick of running around and shooting things for no apparent reason other than to release stress (or build it, depending on how you’re playing).

Battlefield 1943 is a game that I enjoyed the hell out of in the down months of summer and pretty much played just for the sheer joy of it (remember when we used to do that?). I also really liked the effect vehicles had on the battlefield and how they essentially created different classes of play-style.

Left 4 Dead is probably the one game out of this bunch that I still come back to from time to time, although I haven’t bothered to touch it since Left 4 Dead 2 came out and likely destroyed the first game’s player community. But I think it’s the necessity of team-work paired with the intensity of fighting off an undead horde that makes that game so consistently fun. I actually talked to strangers when I played Left 4 Dead.

"Pills here!"

And lastly, Gears of War 2 entertained me for a good long while with one of the best online experiences of this generation. But unfortunately, Epic may have created a monster when they introduced the irresistibly fun Horde mode. They need to find a way to make the competitive element of multiplayer just as addictive as the cooperative one in Gears 3.

So the recurring theme I’m seeing here is that games which require some degree of team-work tend to last a little longer than the lone-wolf bloodsports. That’s not to say a game can’t hook me with rewarding progression systems or good old-fashioned gameplay, but I definitely feel like cooperation is the best way to get me invested in a “community” of total strangers who belittle each other like it’s their job (and considering some of the CoD players I’ve had the pleasure of gaming with, unemployment isn’t really that big of a stretch). The question now becomes, “How do developers convince gamers that we want to work together to accomplish objectives that don’t revolve around simple body counts?”

The first thing that comes to my mind is the system in PS3 exclusive MAG, which I haven’t had the pleasure of playing myself. But from everything I’ve read and watched of the game, it seems that Zipper Interactive incentivized team-work by rewarding players with more experience for completing tasks assigned by their squad leaders and things of that nature. That is certainly a step in the right direction, but this rational-self-interest model doesn’t necessarily equate to true cooperation. In my humble opinion, voice-chat is essential to real team-work and convincing people to actually problem-solve with strangers takes more than a few stat bonuses and arbitrary experience rankings to accomplish.

So this is the part where I reveal my master plan that will surely leave you in awe. I hope you’re ready. Leagues. Allow me to elaborate. See, in my experience, when you’re split-screening on the couch with your friends or siblings, it doesn’t even matter how good the game you’re playing is because the company you’re in makes the experience fun. When you’re gaming with people you actually know, everybody’s more willing to abide crazy rules for made-up games, everybody’s slightly more competitive but never begrudgingly so, friendly rivalries develop when you’ve learned another player’s tendencies. And maybe I’m crazy, but I get the feeling that if we actually got to know who we were playing with on a first-name basis then maybe we’d show them a little respect and cut all the BS that comes with online anonymity.

...Or it could just breed more hate. At least then we'd have teams to root for.

How would these leagues work? How would they be any different from clans or dedicated servers? Well, to be perfectly honest, this idea is mainly about transferring that real sense of community found on PCs to consoles, which have struggled mightily with the concept. Even games that have introduced clan features have failed miserably in implementing them. Halo 2‘s clan playlists were so underutilized that Bungie eventually cut the content out of the game in an update. Developers need to realize that console gamers just don’t have the dedication to pursue vibrant clan communities (hooray for ignorant generalizations!).

Community needs to be forced on us. The idear is that once we get a taste of it we’ll wonder how we ever got by without it. So that whole oppressive forcing part comes into the equation as follows–the developer creates tier groupings based on skill level. And when I say skill level I mean just that–not experience level. Games have recently gotten in the habit of inflating our egos with experience-based leveling, rather than the cold, hard facts of skill-based levels. I don’t know how Bungie determined my skill in Halo 2, but it seemed like a fairly accurate gauge. Anyways, the developer makes these tiers of level 1-10 players, level 11-20 players, and so on. Within these tiers, which would likely contain tens, in not hundreds of thousands of players a piece, small leagues of maybe 100-200 players would be carved out so each tier contains hundreds of small leagues within. If you’re still following me, we now have a system that ranks a player based on performance and accordingly places them in a random league within their skill tier.

Now that we are in a league, all of our matches will be played with the 100-200 (obviously these numbers are examples that would need to be fiddled with until a proper balance of familiarity and quick match-making could be found) fellow gamers in our league. Being stuck in one league forever certainly runs the risk of getting boring, so the developer could reset the league populations every month or something like that. But for the time spent playing with the same people, we would inevitably become familiar with our peers. Deep stat-tracking and highly visible leader boards would only serve to stiffen the competition. We’d make friends and make enemies, we’d become known ourselves, classic rivalries would form and make for some legendary show-downs. And even if all that stuff didn’t happen, I think everybody would be more receptive to actually talking to each other during games. And if you’re stuck in the same community for a month then you really can’t be a jerk-face or you could get booted from every match you play.

This is pretty much how online interactions work today.

This idea that I’ve presented is very bare-bones and would require a lot of fleshing out were it to ever be applied in the real world, but I see so much potential in it. A developer could even add more depth by letting players pick filters on what types of matches they like to play, so you could join a league that focuses more on objective games than deathmatch or vice versa. I just think that if developers want us to continue playing their games and buying their DLC, and if gamers want to enjoy friendly competition in an online environment akin to your living room couch, then the only answer is to find a way to force cooperation and community on us. Games like Left 4 Dead and MAG are a start, but we need a system that makes online conversation something to look forward to, not dread. If anybody else has thoughts on how to accomplish this goal I’d love to hear them.

Share/Save

Little more than a month after the release of the “Stimulus Package,” which has sold over 2.5 million units so far, Activision and Infinity Ward (or what’s left of them) are prepping the release of another map pack, titled “Resurgence Pack.” The downloadable content will go for the same $15 as the first map pack, and will feature five maps, two of them Modern Warfare 1 remakes, just like the “Stimulus Package.” The new maps (pictures in link) are Carnival, Trailer Park, and Fuel. The remakes are of Strike and Vacant.

More interesting news in the Call of Duty arena involves Raven software (Wolfenstein, Singularity) allegedly being pulled off of future James Bond and X-Men games by Activision in order to support the Call of Duty franchise. Remember last time Activision took good developers off of their established work in favor of the golden calf (Neversoft to Guitar Hero)? Yeah, why not just turn every Activision game into a CoD installment now? That’d make sense, right?

Share/Save

Share/Save

Not really much of a look, but from what we can see the new maps look pretty cool. Not $15 cool, but cool.

Share/Save

The two old maps are “Crash” and “Overgrown.” The three new maps are “‘Bailout,’ a multi-level apartment complex; ‘Storm,’ an open industrial park littered with heavy machinery; ‘Salvage,’ a snowy junkyard fortified by stacked debris and crushed cars,” according to the pack’s Xbox Live Marketplace description, which has since been pulled. The $15 for three new maps? Well, that’s a mite bit psychotic.

$15 Modern Warfare 2 map pack detailed [GameSpot]

Share/Save

Yup. No pricing or gameplay details yet, but it has been confirmed that the DLC is a timed Xbox 360 exclusive. No word on when the PS3 and PC versions will be coming, but I’d bet it won’t be too long. That’s pretty much all there is to it.

Share/Save

Apparently, this video was made almost entirely from in-game action running on the PC version of Modern Warfare 2, but it was recorded at different camera angles and cut up to look real, real classy. First of all, I can’t believe how monumentally superior the PC version looks in comparison to the 360…makes me want to upgrade my PC and play me some pretty games. But more important than my expensive desires are my respected opinions, and I think that this machinima fellow Michael Barnes deserves a job at Infinity Ward. He certainly made a more entertaining “No Russian” than the IW guys could manage. Whether that has anything to do with the current techniques of first-person-stories is a conversation for another time.

Share/Save

"I find your lack of faith disturbing."

Over the past 24 hours, the web has been aflame with rumors of Jason West and Vince Zampella’s departures from Modern Warfare 2 developer Infinity Ward. Few details are actually known at this time, but it has been confirmed through West and Zampella’s respective Linkedin profiles that they are no longer under the employ of Infinity Ward as of “March 2010.”

Activision failed to indicate who the employees were when it amended its annual report with the Securities and Exchange Commission late Monday afternoon to acknowledge the development.

“The Company [Activision] is concluding an internal human resources inquiry into breaches of contract and insubordination by two senior employees at Infinity Ward,” read the filing. “This matter is expected to involve the departure of key personnel and litigation. At present, the Company does not expect this matter to have a material impact on the Company.”

Citing an unnamed source, an as-of-yet unverified G4 report claims several weeks of “tense” interaction between the respected studio and its publisher lead up to the meeting where Infinity Ward president, game director, co-CCO, and CTO Jason West and co-founder and Infinity Ward CEO Vince Zampella were let go.

The Infinity Ward heads in question were no where to be seen after the meeting and a security force of “bouncer types” suddenly appeared on the studio’s Encino, California campus. Allegedly, Infinity Ward employees started to feel “freaked out” when the bouncers refused to say why they had shown up unannounced.

It is unclear exactly how West and Zampella breached their contracts or why tense relations between the developer and Activision eventually culminated in the security force’s occupation of IW’s campus. The usually vocal director of communication for the studio, Robert “FourZeroTwo” Bowling, had little to say through his Twitter account: “I should also say, while I appreciate all the calls, tweets, messages and hearing my ringtone a lot. They’re in vain–as I have no info.”

Whatever happened between Activision and the co-founders of Infinity Ward seems mighty shady at this point in time and only reinforces the publisher’s negative image. In the eyes of many gamers, this fiasco undoubtedly proves that Activision doesn’t care for or value individuals within the company or even respected development studios. Considering that Infinity Ward is rumored to have moved on from the Call of Duty franchise and Activision has already found replacement developers, the revered development studio and the “unique, new IP” they’re supposedly working on could be seen as disposable to the corporate giant. It is not known at this point in time how the events of the past couple days will affect future IW projects or Modern Warfare 2 DLC plans. All I know is that Jason West and Vince Zampella probably won’t have much trouble finding new jobs, and I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised to see several Infinity Ward veterans leave to be with their former bosses.

Share/Save

That fresh feeling...

Whether we like it or not, change is a part of life. We go through stages, phases, trends, and bends until we can’t recognize who we were when we started. And at the tender age of 20, I think I might be going through yet another transformation as a gamer. So this feature will be an examination of myself as a gamer. I’m not sure what I’ll find, but I think it’s something worth thinking about.

So last night I popped Modern Warfare 2 in for the first time in a few months and played a few hours of its highly-esteemed multiplayer. I eventually turned the console off with the realization that it simply wasn’t fun. And while I wasn’t exactly on fire after exiling myself from the online community for so long, my dissatisfaction stemmed from something else–it was pointless.

If you’ll allow me to elaborate, it felt like a pre-season football game. There’s no prize at the end of the round for finishing with the highest score. You just play for the sake of playing. While that sort of thing can be fun sometimes, I don’t go and start pick-up games of basketball with complete strangers. It’s playing with friends that gives meaningless games their fun. Considering I haven’t had a solid group of online friends since the days of Halo 2, it’s a wonder I’ve gone this long testing my reflexes against stoners and 10-year-olds in an endless game of death.

Over the past month or so I’ve taken stock of what types of games I enjoy most, and I’ve found that I’ve become more and more of a solitary gamer. The games that stick out in my memory are RPGs. The shooters I remember are the ones with good stories. And as I look at my game collection, I see that other genres are scarcely represented.

I rather enjoyed this story.

I don’t know, I’m probably rambling a lot here and it’s not very interesting to read. I still like shooters, but pretty much just for the campaigns. If I’m not progressing towards some satisfying end goal (like the climax of a narrative, for example) then I just can’t seem to care. High scores don’t matter to me anymore. I simply don’t view video games as games anymore. I play them for their interactive stories. The actual game part taken out of context is sort of pointless and boring to me now. But maybe that’s just because the gameplay I’ve been playing through lately is all predictable and similar.

See, I think expectations play a big role in the enjoyment of a game. I doubt it’s coincidence that my 2009 game of the year (Dragon Age: Origins) was one that I didn’t religiously follow leading up to its launch. In fact, I didn’t even get it at launch. I wasn’t going to buy it until I saw it a month later for $40. Then when I played it, it was all fresh and new and a pleasant surprise. I miss that feeling. I feel like there’s so much media coverage these days that you know exactly what to expect from every game you’re interested in. It sort of steals some of the magic of a new game. Personally, I’d recommend that you immediately stop following a game once you’ve decided that you’re definitely going to buy it. Sure, this might lead to some disappointing purchases, but it could also lead to some great surprises.

As for me, I can’t rightly stop following games if I’m supposed to be reporting that news to you guys. What I can do is branch out and diversify my gaming tastes. For starters, I’ve decided not to buy Battlefield: Bad Company 2. I’m sure it’ll be a fantastic game that’s just as good as the previews indicate, but it’s the orange to Modern Warfare 2‘s apple. They’re just too similar. I want a pineapple. So what I’m going to do is start buying some games that I usually wouldn’t buy. Instead of Bad Company 2, I think I’ll pick up Shadow Complex for $10. I’ve never played that type of game, or at least I haven’t in a long time. I’d like to try it out. I think I might also buy Just Cause 2. It has the same spirit as Grand Theft Auto III in my opinion, and that was a new genre for me when I bought it. I still think it’s the best game in the GTA series. And hell, maybe I’ll get really crazy and buy Final Fantasy XIII just so I can say I’ve finally played a Final Fantasy game. It doesn’t look stunningly awesome to me, but maybe that’s just the sort of attitude that will make it stunningly awesome for me.

Well, that looks new.

I suppose the realization I’m coming to is that all the games I’ve been playing for the past several years are too similar. It makes the gameplay too predictable. And even if a game does something new for its genre, I know beforehand because of media coverage. I know exactly how every feature in the game works. This is probably why I gravitate towards a game’s story more than anything else these days–it’s the only thing that’s still fresh and new. If the game has a bad story but good gameplay (read: BioShock 2) then the only freshness the game has to offer tastes rather sour. If the story isn’t anything spectacular but the gameplay’s new and interesting (like Banjo Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts) then the game-world is still satisfying enough to justify biting in.

So I guess the only remedy for this is to branch out and experience gameplay that’s different from what I’m used to. Of course this doesn’t mean I’ll stop buying the genres I already like–I’ll just have to be more cautious when searching for games with good stories and new features. Ultimately, the most fun a game has to offer in my opinion is the exploration of a new world. New features are often a part of that new world. If the world and gameplay have been done before (as is the case with modern combat), then the only thing that can make a game interesting to me is a good story. So I’m going to go out of my way to spice things up and reinvigorate my gaming life. I’m sick of being a jaded old man. It’s time to try something new.

Share/Save

Is this Fiddy's year?

Another year has come and gone, and despite more delays than I can ever remember in one year, 2009 still saw more great games than I could possibly get around to playing. 2009 also saw me jumping into the whole game-writing thing for the first time (well, sort of). Consequently, this is InsaneBear’s first GOTY feature, and we’re going to try to keep it relatively simple. Maybe next year I’ll throw in some quirky awards meant to recognize specific games, but for now, we’ll just be sticking to the GOTY model. Without further ado…

2009′s 2008 Game of the Year – Well, maybe I’ll throw in one non-traditional award here considering IB wasn’t around for 2008′s games. And yes, I’m totally stealing this award from Giant Bomb, but I just think it’s a good idea to look back and see how time has changed our thoughts on the games we’ve played. In the case of 2008, I would have named Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots GOTY then, and I’m still giving it the honor today. Just think how rare a game like that is. How often does one of the most talented developers in the industry pretty much get free reign to spend as much as he wants on whatever he wants? Hopefully it happens again real soon, because MGS4 is an epically cinematic experience that lovingly caters to its hardcore fans with a story that somehow manages to wrap up 20 years of Metal Gear madness. Plus, you play as an old man, damn it!

The Candidates…

Assassin’s Creed II – Double. Hidden. Blades. That essentially sums up Assassin’s Creed II, a game that takes everything its predecessor did and does it better. From mission design to graphics to narrative to killing dudes, this game improves on every aspect of the polarizing ACI and has earned the right to put nicer adjectives in front of its name. The combat’s satisfyingly brutal, Ezio’s one of the most likable characters I’ve encountered in a while, and the puzzle-platforming of the Assassin’s Tombs is the sort of gaming-zen that will stroke our nostalgic hearts a few years from now. Assassin’s Creed II has got me chomping at the bit for Ubisoft’s third installment in the action-parkour series, so that must mean it did something right.

Batman: Arkham Asylum – Without a doubt, Batman: Arkham Asylum is the definitive super-hero experience in video games. No game before or since has put the player in the shoes of a super-hero quite so well. Maybe that’s because no super-hero game has ever crafted such an authentic and immersive world, full of appropriately goonish henchmen, diabolical villains, and clever collectables that pay homage to the series’ more obscure characters. Then there’s the pure badassery of utilizing all of the Batman’s gadgets and stealthy talents to dismantle a room full of terrified thugs. I don’t think any other game this year is paced quite as perfectly as Arkham Asylum and the story is top-notch. Arkham Asylum makes you feel like the Dark Knight.

Battlefield 1943 – I think it really says something that a $15 downloadable game can compete with full-fledged retail products for this award, but the fact is, 2009 was a banner year for downloadable games. BF1943 may be “just a WWII shooter,” but it’s a dang good one. The shooting feels fantastic and the classes are balanced. The maps are fun too. But what really stands out about this game is just how fun the vehicle element makes the battlefield. The terror you feel as a tank rolls over the trees to your side and opens up fire is unparalleled in most modern shooters and is only countered by the joy of allied planes dropping bombs on said tank from above. This bite-sized FPS is just as fun as the heavy-hitting blockbusters out there, period.

Borderlands – Oh, Borderlands, you steal my heart. Sporting one of the most striking visual styles of 2009, this first-person-looter has an addictive quality that few games this year can match. The shooting actually manages to feel good while weaving enough RPG elements into the game-play to make things feel different. The never-ending parade of new weapons keeps you coming back for more and really encourages experimentation with different guns. And then there’s the incredibly fun special abilities of each character class. Mix this all in with fun mission design and four-player co-op…oh man, I want to go play some Borderlands.

Dragon Age: Origins – The age of dragons has begun and I hope BioWare keeps it going strong for years to come. Dragon Age creates a believable world full of racism, religious tensions, cut-throat politics, and age-old prejudices that are all dealt with in mature and meaningful ways. The core-quests are truly memorable, the boss fights are rewarding, and almost all of the NPC party-members are interesting in one way or another. But the thing that stands out most to me is that for once, I was actually role-playing in a WRPG. BioWare made the very wise decision to do away with the arbitrary and judgmental morality meter, instead opting for individual party-members’ approval. This design allowed me to actually get into character and play without worrying about achievements or morally specific powers/talents. Oh, and there’s that whole origin stories thing were there are multiple beginnings and endings to the game. I’ve put more time into this title than any other game of 2009.

Halo 3: ODST – Like Halo? Me too. Like suspenseful stories that manipulate chronological order for more dramatic effect? Me too. Like Nathan Fillion? Yeah, me too. Put those three things together and you’ve got yourself a little game called Halo 3: ODST. This latest entry in the always superb Halo series takes the intense combat of previous titles in the franchise and transplants it into a moody and atmospheric world driven by an innovative mission structure that has you playing flashbacks of other characters memories while trying to piece your own story together. The game’s more personal, band-of-brothers sort of narrative also manages to provide some nice background for the Master Chief’s epic quest. Then there’s the extremely fun Firefight mode, which sees a group of players co-operating together to fend off hordes of deadly enemies.

inFAMOUS – I have to throw out the disclaimer here that I haven’t actually played this game and that I’m basing this assessment off of Ryan’s review, but from everything I’ve heard, inFAMOUS absolutely deserves to be on this list. This is a game that shines where it counts most–the game-play. Tight controls allow for fluid motion and precise combat that make getting from one mission to the next a joy. The magical properties of electricity allow you to grind along electrical wires, glide through the sky, and leap from building to building in a way that changes the definition of parkour gaming. You can also upgrade your powers depending on whether you want Cole to be a destructive bad ass or a disciplined paragon, so morality actually has game-play ramifications here. This is a game that just flows well and keeps the fun coming.

Modern Warfare 2 – No FPS on the market has shooting that feels as right as Modern Warfare 2 does. It strikes the perfect balance between arcade and tactical and then forces you to constantly apply those shooting skills to a plethora of finely-balanced weapons in a non-stop roller-coaster ride of a campaign. And of course there’s the infinitely replayable multiplayer mode, which has even more perks and equipment augmentations this time around. The multiplayer is something that’s so finely tuned that you’re forced to constantly be evolving and changing up your strategies, and it’s a blast the entire time. There’s always a counter for your play-style and class set-up, which is the way competitive multiplayer should be designed. But even more fun than all those online frag-fests is the Spec-Ops mode, a collection of 23 challenging missions specifically designed for a tag-team approach. These missions feature excellent game-play variety and are extremely rewarding. This is a game that’s hard to pull yourself away from.

Street Fighter IV – The fact that a fighting game is on my Game of the Year list in the year 2009 is astounding, but that just speaks to the awesome quality of Capcom’s revival of the premier fighting franchise. This game hits all the right notes, looking fresh enough to avoid the “rehash” label while feeling familiar enough to jump into after years of not playing Street Fighter. It’s accessible enough to draw in casual players but somehow has enough depth to satisfy hardcore world-champion players. Every character is balanced and fun to play as, new or old. Most importantly though, Street Fighter IV revives the killer instinct of one-on-one competition in a deceptively simple arena, both online and in the traditional local setting. Capcom’s fighter is just plain fun.

Uncharted 2: Among Thieves – What a thrill ride! Set-peice for set-piece, Uncharted 2 can compete with any game put out in 2009. There’s a nice variety of shooting, puzzling, and platforming, and everything looks absolutely amazing along the way. Nathan Drake’s second outing is most certainly one of, if not the best looking game ever made, due in no small part to the sublime motion-capture and animation. The voice acting’s even better though, and it heavily contributes to Nate and friends being some of the most believable, relatable, and flat-out likable characters ever to grace the land of video games. Nolan North deserves just as much credit for Uncharted 2‘s success as the developers at Naughty Dog, because it’s the Indiana Jones-ish personality that he brings to the character that makes this game so endearing. Definitely one of the funniest games of the year. Oh, and then there’s a robust multiplayer mode and a separate co-op campaign, complete with top-notch cinematics.

'Cause we're the two best friends that anyone could have...

Honorable Mentions (Or more accurately, games that should be in the running but never found their way into my disc tray)…

Demon’s Souls – It won GameSpot’s GOTY and it’s innovative use of community co-operation sounds very appealing to me.

Forza Motorsport 3 – The undisputed cream of the racing crop. This series’ ability to offer enough depth to satisfy simulation freaks whilst maintaining the accessibility to bring in casual racers is astonishing.

Killzone 2 – Ryan tells me it’s terrible, but he’s never played a single match of multiplayer, which is this game’s main appeal. The progressive, class-based online mode sounds like something with more depth than most shooters today.

Left 4 Dead 2 – It’s Left 4 Dead, but improved in every way. Plus, I hear that Valve somehow managed to create a cast that’s just as memorable as the first game’s.

New Super Mario Bros. Wii – Remember when you and your brother would sit in front of the TV taking turns with Super Mario Bros. 3? Well, this is pretty much that, but with co-op, so you don’t have to take turns.

Ratchet & Clank Future: A Crack in Time – This is the sort of game your inner 12-year-old would make if it had the chance. I mean, come on! You can use a belching fish as a weapon! This game is the epitome of fun.

Red Faction: Guerrilla – It takes all the destructive goodness of the old Red Faction games and ups the ante, throwing it into a third-person perspective in the process. I’ve heard a lot of good things about this game from a lot of different people, and when sledge-hammers can be used as weapons, I’m inclined to listen.

Shadow Complex – This won Giant Bomb’s Xbox 360 GOTY, which is pretty impressive considering it’s a $15 downloadable title. But is it really that surprising for a flawless face-lift of the classic “metroidvania” style games to be so popular? I know I want to find out what all the fuss is about.

Silent Hill: Shattered Memories – The deeply personal and subtly creepy narrative of this game honestly made Brad Shoemaker wake up in the middle of the night screaming out loud. Enough said.

Warhammer 40k: Dawn of War II – I’ve heard this game described as a western take on the small-scale strategy of games like Final Fantasy Tactics. Whatever the case, Dawn of War II is unlike any other western RTS on the market and many players prefer the personal nature and progression inherent in the micro-unit style of war.

Runner-up – Modern Warfare 2

2009 Game of the Year – Dragon Age: Origins

So there you have it. Keep in mind that these are all based on my personal thoughts and aren’t meant to be an unbiased, authoritative voice on the matter. I’d love to hear everybody else’s choices in the comments. And if you have any special awards, like best biceps or something, please share!

Share/Save