How much do retailers pay for video games? Are video games worth a pre-order? How is this OUR problem? Part: 3

In the last two part of our article, we learned about prices that retailers pay for games and about the worth of pre-ordering a game. Today in the last part of our 3 part article we will learn how the price retailers pay and the fact that we pre-order games have actually created a problem for gamers.

Think about the last time you pre-ordered a game. Now think about the extras you got for pre-ordering the game. Now think about how those extras had a significant role in the way you played the game. While some of you may be thinking, hey I got an extra map for Black Ops 2 or an extra character for Borderlands 2, others are saying, I got weapons with the same if not less power than the ones currently in the game. I got an item that doesn't really help me out much, or other things that do not really make the game any better or worst than it already is. See, just recently I went out and bought a copy of Battlefield 3 Premium Edition. I owned Battlefield 3 in the past through a trade I made with a friend, but I never bought any of the maps or the extras because I found them to be expensive. The Premium edition was $25 on Black Friday and it includes all the maps and weapons from the past DLC as well as the future DLC upon release date. That for me was getting more than my money's worth of game. When I pre-ordered borderlands I got some starting weapons that I used maybe twice, an extra character that would be $10 had I not pre-ordered the game, a character I may add that did not change the game at all for me. A vault hunter's relic that gave you a 5% chance to loot better items, the creature slaughter dome which wasn't all that great and a key to open up a treasure chest that would give you some awesome items according to your level but that were totally random and what you currently had on you may be 10 times better than anything you got from the chest. How about those pre-orders that give you a skin for your character? Or how about having to buy the game NEW to get a complete game  like Batman Arkham City did with the Catwoman story? This is how the prices retailers pay for games and pre-orders have affected us gamers. Retailers are sort of forced into these game deals and honestly I believe the price for a retailer is kind of high for the amount of games they buy to sell to the public specially when the price has been standardized across all consoles. Then we have the promise of DLC of extra weapons or skins when we pre-order a game, but these items rarely make gameplay better and most of the time the item in question is negligible. Now we're back to the fact that we give these companies a free loan and they give us items or DLC that is uninspired and has little to no value. Have you guys noticed that lately EVERY game has some sort of extra if you pre-order it. It's how they lure us into buying and we have to stop this practice. The reason why we must stop this practice is because we must send a message to developers that we wont buy whatever crap they throw at us. DLC should never be something that completes a game like what happened with Asura's Wrath, the game did not have a TRUE ENDING, you had to buy it. Seriously? WTF Capcom? And the Mass Effect 3 fiasco was not any better, the game felt, no actually it was incomplete in it's ending. Uninspired, lazy and of course a lot of people felt it was not worth the $60 they paid for it, and many others were even angrier when they had pre-ordered the N7 edition, paying $80 for what would turn out to be an incomplete game, with extras that really did not make the experience better.

As you can see not only are these companies getting our money early, but in return we are getting NOTHING from them. The N7 edition costs $30 right now at Best Buy, how does that make you feel? I think the price now is about what the game is really worth. We have to stop falling for clever advertisement and we have to show these companies that we keep them in business and we want our money's worth and yes I must admit some of them give us even more than our money's worth for some games. I have to be honest, games like ZELDA, METROID PRIME, HALO, INFAMOUS, RESIDENT EVIL 4 have given us awesome stories and gameplay that will be memorable for years to come. The plot twists the powers, the weapons, everything was awesome. We didn't need any extras, we just wanted a good game didn't we? And we were fine. We have stopped looking for good games and instead we now pay to get an extra skin, or a medal in the game or a weapon that gets replaced immediately by other in game weapons, we traded awesome story telling, plot twists and great gameplay for useless items, useless skins and bad story lines. This is exactly why we must stop caring so much about putting down our money to get items that are just not worth it, and instead allow those over hyped games to be released and await reviews or some rentals, because with the games we have gotten lately we've been really disappointed. AC III wasn't as good as the ads made it look, RE 6 left much to be desired, Medal of Honor War Fighter was horrible, Ghost Recon Future Soldier was short and boring, but all of them offered some extras with your pre-order, and all of them delivered a broken game. And now they want to move us to digital downloads and make used games unplayable. I hope digital doesn't go through, simply because it has no real value. You pay $60 and get nothing in return, you can't resell a game you got on PSN or XBOX LIVE. Physical items have a value, don't let companies fool you, they make money of digital because they do not have to produce a box or transport the item anywhere, but in turn you get nothing. I tend to sell my used games, I make some money back so in reality I am not exactly paying $60 every new game, and as a reviewer that is important because I play a lot to bring you guys reviews. As a consumer however it is just as important, because we can not return these items, we are not allowed to do so even if we are displeased when the product fails to deliver what its ads promise. We have to fight back and show companies that what really is important to us is a good game and getting our money's worth. Who cares about useless DLC. Sell us multiplayer maps that's ok but make it worth our time and money too. Do not sell us incomplete games and then post apologies saying you will complete it but it will cost us $10, Screw You. I'll be happy if you give me what I paid for, I'll be happier if you deliver more than what I paid for and it will make me want to buy your next game, but don't ride on the popularity of the first one or second one and make crap on the next one and give me that, because that will be the last time I will buy from you. I don't know abot you guys, but I will not be buying anymore Call of Duty games, and I am one of those that bought the maps and paid for elite on past games. I am a customer that spends his money on a franchise and I was one of those who used to pre-order. I see now how this has become a problem and companies are taking advantage of me and are taking my money and returning next to nothing for it. If we continue like this, soon we will have nothing but downloadable games, which didn't exactly work for the PSP GO so maybe they should learn a lesson from that, so yeah we will have nothing but downloadable games or new consoles will be made so they cannot play used games and the industry start dying out like it did in the past. Don't buy digital, get that physical disc that has real value, don't pre-order unless it's a game that really contains valuable or collector's items worth the $150-$200 you're paying for it. Don't let this problem escalate because soon games will cost more and deliver less, and we do not want that... do we?

How much do retailers pay for video games? Are video games worth a pre-order? How is this OUR problem? Part: 2

Yesterday in part 1 of our article, we learned that retailers pay on average about $42 for the $60 video games we buy from them. Today in the continuation of our article we will learn why pre-ordering a game is actually a bad idea most of the time. In the picture above, you can see some of the titles that had the highest pre-orders of the year. I will start with the highest one, Black Ops 2. As a gamer I was a huge fan of Call Of Duty. Modern Warfare 3 actually left me a little disappointed, and Black Ops 2 killed the franchise for me. If you look at the reviews from IGN and Gamespot you will notice that they gave the game pretty high scores, 8's and 9's actually. But if you take a look at the gamer ratings you will see that Black Ops 2 barely hits the 7 mark in a lot of cases, and gets a lot of 6's across the board. Do you know what this means? It means Black Ops 2 was definitely not as good as the scores IGN and Gamespot gave it. I am not saying they are biased all I am saying is that the people have spoken and they are not pleased. I was one of the many people who pre-ordered Black Ops 2 and got it during the midnight release. One day later I had already sold my copy for $20 less than I paid for it. I rated that game a 6 and if you want to know why you can go ahead and read my review on it, believe me there's an explanation for it. The problem here is not that the game is bad, is that we have fallen into this tendency to pre-order games based on the success of the last one and the marketing campaign of the new one. To us, when we pre-order a game what we are trying to say is, this game is going to be amazing and worth every penny on it. To a publisher it says, these idiots will take anything we give them, they are already ordering something that hasn't even come out just based on TV commercials. See when you pre-order a game you're literally giving free and undeserved money to a store, usually they charge you $5 to pre-order but you can pay a game off completely right? Do you know what you get for that? A receipt, that is all, in turn the company who you just gave money to can turn around and make money off your money. That would be like a bank giving YOU say $60 because in 3 months you will give them something worth $60, in the meantime though you invest that money and say make another $60, and you just made free money with no interest. You guys do realize there is no way in hell a bank would ever do this for you. Why would we do it for a game company that does not deliver $60 worth of game to us? Take a look at Darksiders 2, some venues gave it an 8.5 out of 10, but gamers gave it a 6.5! Are you noticing a pattern here? The first Darksiders was pretty good so companies ride that hype and then turn in crap to us, but they see that our pre-orders indicate that we are excited no matter what. There are some awesome games like Borderlands 2 was and I've heard great things about Halo 4 as well and even though Assassin's Creed III failed to impress me, the gaming community disagrees with me and that's ok because that is what this is about, it's not about what all these companies think their game is worth, it's what YOU the player thinks it's worth. It is your money going into it, and lately ladies and gentlemen I've been less and less inclined to spend my money on games, much less pre-order them. I am tired of giving these companies my money and then have a giant turd delivered to me inside a plastic case. When I was younger and had no money for games I knew my choices were very limited by what my parents were willing to buy me, so I had to rely on word of mouth to decide if a game was worth my time. Today we rely too much on the word of a publisher or IGN or Metacritic or Gamespot. You know who I want to hear opinions from? Everyone but them, I want you the reader to tell me what you thought of a game, why is it good, why is it not? Some people raised a point when I was first discussing pre-orders with them. They said "Dude when you pre-order you get more stuff for your game like DLC, or an action figure, or a poster!" Guys I'm sorry but the stuff I have gotten for my pre-orders has in no way affected my enjoyment of a game. Having a few extra weapons that are the exact same as others within the game is not a reward, it's lazy attempt to get at my money. An action figure isn't that great of a reward either, I mean unless you're a real fan of the game this should play no part in your decision to pre-order. Take Batman Arkham City for example. I preordered that game, the special edition. It came with a Batman statue, a movie and art book, the soundtrack, the game, extra Catwoman levels, some challenge maps and extra skins. I'm a Batman fan so the statue was an awesome thing to get. Not having to pay $10 to continue the Catwoman story was great, the soundtrack was pretty good but it was only in digital for and it took me about 30 tries to be able to download it because they had some errors with their page. The extra skins didn't do much for the game and I've never really cared for challenge maps because they do not add to the story of the game. That was awesome for me though because I felt it was worth my money, until I realized that if you didn't have the Catwoman side, the game felt incomplete. There was a part where it just cut you off from some of the story, so you had to spend and extra $10 to get your complete game. Batman Arkham Asylum was an amazing game, but I was angry that other people would get an incomplete game if they bought it used. Why would you give your gamers an incomplete game and then forced them to pay for stuff already in the disc. This has been happening a lot with games lately, if you pre-order you get a code to release things already in your game, if you don't then you have to pay extra cash to get the stuff that you already paid for. You know what? Fuck pre-orders. 90% of the time you can walk into the store the next day and buy the game everyone else got last night. If you want to talk consoles I'll tell you this much. Consoles are always sold at a loss to the company, a console can cost $600 to make, it is sold to the retailer for $400 so they can sell it to you at $500 and make a profit. You think the company takes a loss but they don't. They make it back on their games, and do you know why there's limited run to begin with? Because of the cost involved and the lack of games at a console's launch. A company would lose so much money if it sold a million consoles but it sold no games because there wasn't any. Look at what happened with Mass Effect 3, anyone who has played it knows about the ending, and anyone who didn't heard about the ending, or about the lawsuit the FANS brought up against them for the ending. Sure the lawsuit didn't go through but Bioware listened because it's business was threatened, and what did they do? They fixed their mistake, not before pissing everyone off with the possibility of the alternate ending being a paid for add-on and then decide it should be free, but they correct it. It is in the best interest for a company that you pre-order so they can make more money, not so they can meet demand. I understand that DLC is great for games like COD to get new multiplayer maps or like Skyrim where the adventure continues in the DLC. But when you get DLC that only releases stuff already in your game disc because you preordered, well it gets pretty insulting. Black Ops 2 hardened edition came with an extra zombies nuketown map, some collectable coins and some stuff for your Xbox Avatar or your PS3 background. That was $80, did you know that usually a map pack costs you about $15? The only change in your game was a map which you paid $20 for. The coins and other stuff did not change your gaming experience. They say you get what you pay for, I think that is not always the case. It is just not worth it to pre-order games. Reviews of games are held back sometimes to allow the game to sell and then publish that it's a piece of crap. I rather rely on word of mouth from friends, and family and other people who actually play the game for fun as opposed to business. When I publish my reviews to you guys, it's because I played the game, but the score on the game comes from not only me, but other people who have also played it. I take a lot of opinions into consideration. I think Black Ops 2 made me realize how wrong have I been by pre-ordering a game, and I am not going to tell you that it is always wrong to pre-order, sometimes games are worth the price of the pre-order, like Assassin's Creed 3, I mean you were paying for some awesome items that collector's can really appreciate. The DLC actually added to the game, and even though the game in my opinion wasn't as awesome as it sounded it was a pretty solid performance and it was worth what people paid for it. For the most part though, pre-ordering a game because you think they will run out, or that the game will be great is a big mistake.  If your pre-orders stop, companies will have to work harder on making a game good. I want my $60 worth of game on one disc. I don't want to pay extra to be able to finish my game with a complete story. Add-ons are welcome but they should not depend on a pre-order. If you want a special edition because it has some awesome stuff then I get it, but make sure you're getting what you paid for, you cannot imagine how many disappointed faces I saw with the Care Package edition of Black Ops 2. The quad rotor was really crappy. I know some of you may not change your mind and that's fine, but I would strongly suggest that if you want better games you stop pre-ordering and maybe rent a game before you buy it, specially those that you think you will spend a lot of time replaying just like COD or HALO 4. Overall I think pre-orders should be limited to games that may not see a huge release and you really want a copy off or those that actually come with collector's items that are worth it. Take Black Ops as an example, I loved the first game, but a few days after the release, people were already selling the RC-XD online because it was broken, the quality was really bad, and they paid big bucks for that edition.

Stay tuned for our part 3 on this article on the problems that prices and pre-orders are creating for gamers and why. Remember to share us with your friends, and see you all with the last part soon.

How much do retailers pay for video games? Are video games worth a pre-order? How is this OUR problem? Part: 1

I can't remember the exact prices of video games in the NES, SNES and Genesis era, but I remember Street Fighter 2 Turbo was about $80, Chrono Trigger was $70 and I remember paying $60 for Mighty Morphin Power Rangers The Movie game for the SNES. Times sure have changed since then, where retailers seemed to have found a standard price for games. $60 is what we pay today for a new game, $50 for the Wii ones, but the Wii U has also joined the $60 club. I know what you're thinking right now, you're thinking that when we had games at $80 a pop, $60 doesn't seem to be that much, we're getting a bargain here. Actually we're not, cartridges were more expensive to make and these extra costs were passed on to the consumer. These days it is not as expensive to make copies of a game on a disc and put it on a store shelf. Granted the plastic boxes are made out of plastic which is petroleum based and paper has gone up in price over the years, but it still doesn't compare to the work that went into a cartridge. Now that we've reached this $60, how much does it really cost a retailer like Wal-Mart or Gamestop to buy a game? Well unfortunately the prices vary according by source, but there is some information that gives us a number that seems to be in the ballpark. First let's talk numbers, according to some websites the cash received for a game breaks down like this:

20% goes to the console maker, such as SONY, Microsoft, Nintendo

20% goes to the retailer. Wal-Mart, Gamestop, Toys'R'Us

15%  goes to the marketing company

15%  goes to the developer

30% goes to the publisher

This seems to be the standard, but don't be fooled. The developer doesn't always get the short end of the stick, take games such as Black Ops 2, Halo, Final Fantasy and even Zelda, where they have proven to be a success every time a new one comes out. In this case developers get a much better cut of the earnings because the publisher knows those game will sell a lot more copies than an average game. Now what I am about to say next may BLOW your mind, but believe me it's the truth. Retailers are the ones that get the worst deal when it comes to the prices of video games, well retailers and us consumers of course. On average, a retailer gets about $12 for every $60 game you buy from them. Sure you think $12 sounds like a good deal right I mean they pay about $48 for a game and then sell it to you for $60 it seems like a nice profit, only it isn't. From the information we have gathered, retailers like Wal-Mart may get a better price just based on the volume of games they buy from the distributors but it is not that much of a difference, maybe they make $15 off a game instead of $12. Still they are almost forced to sell these video games simply because companies like SONY and Microsoft say, if you don't sell our video games and consoles, you can't have our TV's, Computers, MP3 players, Printers, etc. You get the idea. Now you may say, well Wal-Mart has a lot of money, Amazon.com does too and Gamestop steals from us with their prices on used games. You would be surprised on how untrue this is. Wal-Mart is the most successful retailer in the world and hey I mean we do get a lot of cheap stuff from them don't we? We're focusing on video games here but let's look at the big picture, a friend of mine just bought a TV at Wal-Mart for $178 a 32-inch flat screen for his room, this was on Black Friday so ok it's a little cheaper than usual. About a year ago I bought a 42-inch TV for $540 to me that was incredibly cheap and that was just a normal sale. If Wal-Mart wasn't paying for video games, I would've probably pad way more for that TV or maybe it would not have been in stock. Now let's take a look at Gamestop, they are all about Power to the Players, which yes you and I believe it's a big fat lie. They give you $20-$30 for a brand new game if you resell it to them and then turn around and make a nice $25-$30 profit on it when they put it back on the floor as a used game, and sometimes they make even more when they have $40 games that they give you $3-$5 for and still sell for $35. Gamestop though doesn't get the same deal Wal-Mart does, and they only sell games, a few other things but not the type of things parents rush into Wal-Mart or Target for. Gamestop is a business that needs to make a profit, and yes I admit that even I believe it's abusive at times, but you know what is much worst? Companies like SONY wanting to not only make the future consoles unable to play older console games but they want to make them unable to play used games at all. This would effectively kill the Gamestop business strategy and we would have to buy NEW games at all times. Do you see how this becomes a problem for us? If not, let me give you some information, first of all you have to consider that you would be paying $60 for a game that may be a stinking pile of shit "Duke Nukem Forever" "Resident Evil: Operation Raccoon City" I actually enjoyed this last game, but the majority of you didn't by the comments I have heard and I get it, I am not exactly the biggest Resident Evil fan, but you know what? we all paid those $60, Duke Nukem was reduced to $10 almost right after it's release. I don't know about you but Gamestop is starting to sound real good right now. I don't mean to say it's the best or only way to get money for your games, heck I sold Black Ops 2 one day after it's release for $40 to a friend. Why did I do this? I hated the game but I had already used the NUKETOWN code so it only seemed fair because he may have to pay for it later. Gamestop would have given me about $30 store credit and even less in cash, but now I understand why they do it that way, and like I said it does not mean we have to go to them, but imagine if you could only play new games on your consoles because SONY or Microsoft said so? Would you still play video games? I sure as hell wouldn't. I am a PS3 fanboy big time and I don't hide it, I hate the VITA with a passion though and I think the Kinect is the best Motion gaming platform right now. I am not PS biased just because I like their current system better than the others, but believe me if SONY decides that the new PS can only play new games and other systems remain the same, guess who's not going to be a PS fanboy anymore? This guy right here writing this article. I guess at $42 I can understand why $60 has become the industry standard to the consumer, but what happens when you pay $60 for a game that's worth $5? Remember when Dead Island came out? How the game would constantly delete your progress and there was no patch for the longest time? Did you know that if you open a game and you take it back to Wal-Mart claiming it doesn't work they will only give you another copy of it, they won't return your money? When I buy something and it doesn't work I expect my money back, I lose faith in a product and this is how our problems start with games, because readers let me tell you we're being spoon fed turds and we've been letting it happen for too long, which brings me to my next point, why isn't it wise to pre-order a game. 

Stay tuned for Part 2 or our article to find out why we should not pre-order games and how because of our consumption we have created a problem for ourselves as gamers. If you have any thoughts or comments be sure to post them down below.

Movie Review: 007 SKYFALL

Wow! If you want to see a good movie right now, 007 Skyfall is your movie. When I sat down to watch this movie, the first thing I said was, the only thing that is predictable in 007 movies is that he will sleep with someone and of course I was right, but see that's the beauty of it, you have no clue what to expect in the movie and that was awesome. The movie starts with Bond chasing a man down in Turkey because he has stolen a computer hard drive that contains the names of every NATO agent that has infiltrated terrorist organizations. In the ensuing chase Bond and the thief end up fighting on top of a moving train and in order for the thief not to escape, M order Bond's back up to shoot the thief except Bond is in the way of the shot, still M orders the shot to be taken, Bond is hit instead and a funeral is held for him. This is just the first few minutes of the film, after this the action only gets better. I will not spoil anymore but I will say this much, the introduction of new characters is very welcome and there are some surprising and very unexpected yet equally welcome moments in this movie. James doesn't really used gadgets in this one and honestly it wasn't bad at all. Bond is known for his amazing gadgets, but the lack of them in this movie did not affect the overall Bond experience. This movie takes a nod at the classic Bond films, it makes the relationship between Bond and M seem very realistic and sort of a mother-son relationship, you can see M really has faith in Bond even though her professional demeanor doesn't allow her to show it and the same goes for Bond towards M. You also get some of James's back story, where he comes from and why was he made an agent. This movie really touches the humanity in James and M and the ending is the type that will be memorable to all, the entire movie is like this. Even the new villain played by Javier Bardem is awesome, he's smart, and psychotic at the same time but not invincible, he has elements most of us can identify with, like the need for acceptance. This villain doesn't want money or to rule the world, his point is very specific even though he has done many other things to reach the goal he has for himself. Skyfall is a movie that doesn't disappoint, it's a good story, great action scenes, and an ending that is sure to shock and awe everyone.

Drake's Reviews Score 9.5 out of 10

Game Review: Call of Duty: Black Ops 2

It's only been 2 days since the release of Black Ops 2 and messages have been pouring in for a review, so here it is just for you guys, buckle up because this may be an unpleasant ride.

Black Ops 2 is a direct continuation of the story from the first Black Ops, yes it looks like its in the future but you actually play as Alex Mason from the first game right after the end of the last game and you also play as his son David Mason for the future missions. It's pretty clever how they connect the stories from father to son because they linked them up very well and proves for an interesting overall story. The problem with this comes in the form of Strike Force missions, which are mission in which David Mason directs soldiers in a battlefield to protect targets such as buildings or machines, or to attack and dominate a target. The success of these missions alters the ending of the game, the bad part of this is that the AI for the strike force is really bad at it's job so you have to take control of the soldiers or machines they provide for you in order to be successful. In addition to this, Strike Force missions are only available for a limited time between campaign missions so you HAVE to do them as they come out or risk losing them. Also if you fail one you cannot got back and redo the mission therefore altering your ending whether you like it or not, and the mission are not exactly easy either. The best way I found to complete them was to divide my forces into two groups if I had to defend two out of three spots, and to do this constantly as your forces get killed and help is not exactly quick to arrive while enemy forces arrive constantly. If you're on the offense the best bet is to send all your forces to attack a single point and then move on to the next one for quicker mission success as you are timed for offensive missions. Oh and also make sure you take over soldiers or machines at all times because the AI is not exactly good in this game. Moving on to multi-player, what can I say? It is not impressive, see now you have a 10 point system to equip weapons, add-ons and perks. A weapons is 1 point, a perk is 1 point, etc. The problem with this is when you have to forego certain elements that were readily available for you in other games. For example in the first Black Ops I used the perks Ghost, Hacker, and Sleight of Hand, which effectively made me invisible and a horror to machines controlled by the enemy. My weapon usually had a red dot and a silencer to further add to my play style and I had my sticky grenades, my claymore and concussion grenades. In Modern Warfare 3 they changed this to where you could only carry either a grenade or a claymore or a bouncing betty etc. Your weapon also had to level up to get your red dot or a silencer and your perks were divided, if I wanted to use the same type of style as Black Ops I was no longer able to do so, as Ghost was divided into two perks, Sleight of Hand was divided into two perks and Hacker wasn't useful anymore. In Black Ops 2, Ghost is divided into 4 perks, Hacker is back and so is sleight of hand but it has been changed a bit. With the 10 point system I cannot use grenades of any kind if I want to play in the style I am accustomed to and it's still not as effective as it used to be. Let's add to that that weapons have to be leveled up to get what you need like a red dot or a scope, and also I can no longer silence my weapon and put a red dot on it if I want to play in my play style and the fact that weapons such as submachine guns can kill you across the map now with a few shots yet assault rifles are taking forever to take a guy down. Call of Duty has always had problems with the balancing of weapons but this is ridiculous on a match yesterday the final kill was a guy shooting another guy at point black range with a shot-gun, it took 3 shots for him to go down, yet the same guy had just killed another guy with a sub machine gun in about two shots to the body, even the guy with the sub machine gun called BS on the game saying that honestly it was unfair the way he killed the other guy and then saw himself getting shot 3 times with a shot gun at that distance. The maps for multi-player are not that great either they seem uninspired and bland over all, and lets talk about grenades too, I've seen them blow up next to other players and even in front of me and not kill me, the accuracy on the guns is also horrible they jump so much sometimes it takes a full clip to kill someone if they a couple of meters away from you, and the spawn points are horrible, where I've had an entire team spawn right behind me after I've killed on of their team mates or I've spawned next to an entire team so I immediately got killed again and I am not the only one this has happened to either. The zombies mode has been changed but I have to be honest I am not a fan because it seems pointless to me to play survival mode, in Black Ops 2 this has been changed to somewhat of a story mode but I haven't really gotten into it so I can't say much about it, the time I did play it seemed better but I was alone so if anyone has more information on the TRANZIT aspect of it I would appreciate if you comment on it, the survival mode is back and GRIEF mode is fun, you play against another team and against zombies and the team that has surviving members wins, you cannot kill the other team, you can only fight zombies and perform actions that unleash more zombies on the other team. Black Ops 2 makes me feel as if the COD franchise died with the first Black Ops, MW2 was a great game and Black Ops actually topped that in my opinion. MW3 changed things way too much but it was bearable until the spawn points started changing and made you get killed easily because enemies would spawn on you or behind you or vice-versa. Black Ops 2 seems to just have taken the bad elements and threw them together to make a game, while some of the changes are welcome over all the game is flawed and could probably use a patch or two to fix some of the major problems. The 3D in the game is pretty awesome, but I did have problems with it in the beginning and had to change the settings in my system because the game wouldn't recognize my TV as a 3D TV yet my others games did just fine, but honestly it looks just as awesome as it did for Black Ops, except in campaign mode where the videos don't seem to be in  3D only the gameplay.

Drake's Reviews Score 6 out of 10

Game Review: Resident Evil 6

Many people were left with a disappointed look on their face after the last Resident Evil game Operation Raccoon City. I actually thought it was a good game as before it came out it was explained that it was not a normal RE game but more of a side story with more shooting elements as it was about a team of Umbrella Operatives on a mission to destroy evidence that would place the blame on Umbrella for the zombie outbreak, it was expected of them to have heavy artillery and overall the story wasn't that bad. With Resident Evil 6 it looks like CAPCOM utilized some of the elements of ORC and meshed them together with what made the Resident Evil franchise so popular, the end result was not as awesome as expected. Resident Evil 6 lets you play as 3 different characters, 4 once and finish the game and 7 if you take into account that you can play as the partner of each on of the main characters. The story takes place from the perspective of Leon Kennedy, Jake Muller and Chris Redfield. Each one having a main story on a new zombie outbreak but with interconnecting story lines. The different viruses used to create zombies or B.O.W.'s are now usual in the black market and the main characters pretty much deal with them as their daily job in one way or another. Pretty much the story of RE: 5 but a little bit more expanded. This time around though, zombies vary from one storyline to another, in some they are still just walkers, in others they are actually smart and use guns as well as mutate to become stronger. This is actually and interesting concept as it gives variety to the game, it does have it's downsides however. The story of RE:6 is great the problems start when you're playing as what counts as a soldier who is constantly running out of ammo in the middle of a fight, where clear head shots do not kill your enemy in one shot and where it seems that the point of the game now is to shoot a zombie once then straight up have a street fight with it. The whole point of the other games was to avoid being touched by these creatures, the whole point of this game is to go "Leeroy Jenkins" on their butts. Now throw in a bunch of quick time events from 4, a bunch of videos between missions, unclear directions that get you instantly killed many times if you can't figure out how to get across a gap or in a room etc. and you have a major disappointment on your hands. RE:6 is not bad, but it tries too hard to be good. The meshing of elements from what has made the series great is not a bad idea, but when you over do it, it tends to break the game. I've heard countless people complain that it feels like you jump from quicktime event, to running out of ammo, to video, to quicktime event to lack of ammo again. Just the first mission with Leon feels this way, it's not memorable because it all happens too quickly and there's a quicktime event right at the beginning and two or three videos, and then the game starts. The game also seems to have many instances of walking on floors that are constantly breaking, if you see in the video you get to see Jake muller jumping from one wooden platform to another and then another and another. Truth is this happens in the first mission with Chris too, jumping gaps, getting on roofs enemies that you can't see, easy loss of health and believe me I ran out of ammo a few times yet the enemy has an endless supply but they don't drop it when they die, not often anyways. They also tend to mutate a lot, and therefore you must spend more ammo on the mutation and while shooting then then beating them up is pretty much a sure kill it's kinda hard when there are 10 other guys shooting at you and also your characters get tired of hitting so they kick zombies slowly in the shins. Once you get used to these elements is not a bad game, but it gets frustrating. The AI for your partner is not that great either while it has it's moments in helping you fight, it tends to let you die just as much instead of rescuing you, if you play with a partner online or locally though the game really shines as not only does it add to the fun you have a partner you can count on and believe me this is the single most redeeming quality in this game, this is the main reason to play it, it is a good experience. I know it sounds like I am complaining a lot about RE:6 but I have to be honest in my reviews and while it sounds like there is a lot of negative the game is not a bad one, but it takes some getting used to.

Drake's Reviews Score 7 out of 10

Game Review: Assassin's Creed III

The AC series has just delivered it's third installment of the main storyline. In AC III you play as an assassin by the name of Connor Kenway in mid to late 1700's USA, the period of the American Revolution. You guys know we hate giving out spoilers but we must discuss some of the game's story so that our final score for AC III can be back up by facts. The game starts with Desmond, his father and two other characters trying to find a temple in New York. Desmond is in possession of the Apple and uses it to gain access to the temple, in doing so he activates a timer that counts down to the end of the world event which will take place on December 21st, 2012. Desmond then starts going crazy or at least what looks like he's going crazy and gets put back into the animus where he goes back to the 1700's into the character Haytham Kenway the father of Connor. From here the story develops a bit until you end up in the mind oc Connor Kenway and his involvement in shaping US history alongside some of the most famous people in US History like George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Paul Revere, and many others. This is however where the problems start with Assassin's Creed III. I will focus first on the negative aspects to then show you the redeeming aspects of the game. First of all the interaction with famous figures is rather bland and not very well developed, just like the personality of Connor. It makes the game feel like if Ubisoft wanted to throw in as many important figures as possible without giving them much development, it feels almost like an video game "easter egg" instead of a well thought out storyline. The game also has some glitches, some that don't allow the story to progress because you can't progress in certain missions and must restart your game, getting spotted when you are perfectly hidden, and even getting attacked for no reason without causing and alarm are some of the few I can mention. Stealth has also become a problem, with the simplified parkour style of just running and having Connor do everything without inputs, your jumps can be unpredictable, landing you in a spot you did not intend to jump to or something along those lines. Now lets get into the good aspects of the game, because it does have them and they are many. First let's start with the Naval Battles, they add a good amount of fun to the game and they are not just shoot and destroy oh no there is skill involved in driving your ship through narrow channels, chasing the enemy and avoiding a shipwreck. The game also has many hidden elements like a mission from famous pirate Captain Kidd, and now you can train your assassin recruits straight out of your menu without the need of a safe house. The game also avoids the whole buying or property to get money, that is done all out of your Home front where you can recruit artisans to make things for you and to sell. Combat has been changed a bit too, it is more fluid but it is also harder to make it fluid, you have to time your attacks and parries in a precise manner or your attacks wont connect. Also the game world is vast, maybe not as much as in past games but it is interesting to see how the country developed and Ubisoft created a world where you can feel as if you were there. Lastly I would like to add that the plot twists are not only good but very well executed and will leave you wanting more, sadly this is the main problem with AC III what it does well it does it very well but the same goes for what it doesn't do so well, it makes the game feel incomplete almost as if they wanted to fill up a gap while they deliver the real story.

Drake's Reviews Score 7.5 out of 10