???

It might be kind of interesting to play a game where quickloading was allowed to undo decisions you've made, but it starts gradually making the gameworld more and more unstable, and your avatar slowly starts to remember the actions he's undone and has a hard time reconciling them with the current reality until he just goes completely insane and the player slowly loses control of the protagonist, as the protagonist rejects the player's intrusion on his life. It might not go over well with players though.

Street Fighter IV

I haven't been posting here because I've really only been playing Street Fighter IV. I was never really into fighting games before this one (mostly because I was terrible at them) but I decided to really try to learn how to play SF4. And now I like fighting games I think. I'll probably even pick up King of Fighters XII.

Gears of War 2

Comparing games to food can be interesting. It can't necessarily be applied to any game, but the titles that can be compared can make criticism or compliments easier to convey. For example, it is often better to enjoy a meal with company, much like how playing games cooperatively makes them much more interesting.

Some games are a crazy mix of everything, like a chicken pot pie or a stew. Open-World games are typical of this sort of thing. Lots of different sorts of activities, but the way it's cooked blends the flavors together.

Some games take something traditional and focus on it, perfect it, and season it just right, like a good steak. The indie community and shooter(horizontal/vertical, not first person) people tend to be the best at this sort of thing. The concepts are classic, but every now and then there's the right amount of spice to really liven things up.

First Person and Third Person Shooters tend to fall into the hamburger category. There's a lot of different varieties, but you basically boil down to the same thing. They'll get you through, but some of them may not be the best things ever to consume. Don't get me wrong, I love hamburgers and I love these games, there's just a lot of shit in both categories.

Gears of War 2 (with an exception for one of its modes, Horde, which is quite excellent) is pretty much the McDonald's Big Mac of video games. Like the Big Mac, it's mostly bland and tasteless. The game feels like it's designed by committee to appeal to as many people as possible, and lacks any sort of "chef's touch". Globally, both the Big Mac and the Gears of War series are seen as representative of American taste and interest.

Fast food has its place in society, even. It's not as cheap as cooking at home, nor is it nearly as good, but it's quick and there's no cleanup. There's nothing particularly wrong with having fast food, much like there's nothing particularly wrong with playing Gears of War 2. It's just a mostly forgettable experience with no real substance to take away.

Outside of the food analogy, there are a myriad of other problems. Level design, for example. Gears 2 dots its landscape with cover placed purely to serve gameplay, instead of having areas cleverly designed that would have it naturally. The problem is prominent in the underground areas of the game, with inexplicable flat rock formations just so the game has cover that it can provide you, especially in comparison to the act that follows, which features a fortress with retractable cover on its approaches which the enemy will try to lower. Many checkpoints

Despite all this, Horde mode is incredibly worthwhile, and probably one of my favorite co-op experiences of 2008. It's intense, focused, and well designed. If only the rest of the game were as interesting.

Ahhh well, there's always 2010 and Gears of War 3.