For a while, I've been hoping that Nintendo would host demos of Wii games that people could download from the Wii Shop Channel. It allows non-gamers to get a taste of more serious games to see if they want to play them. It also allows more serious gamers to test out games and see if they're to to their liking (I would have liked a demo of Spider-Man: Web of Shadows and Sonic Unleashed, to see if the motion controls were good enough). Plus, both PlayStation and Xbox offer demos of their games.

Well, now my hopes have been partially answered. From now through "the holidays," the Wii Shop Channel will be offering free demos of five WiiWare games. Not quite the Wii games I was hoping for, but it's a start. And they chose some good titles to show off. There's Bit.Trip Beat, Pokemon Rumble, My Life as a Darklord, NyxQuest, and World of Goo.

Bit.Trip Beat was as retro, cool, and complicated as I expected it to be. It was also the one I sucked most at. Wasn't interested in it at first, but it's not bad. Pokemon Rumble feels like a beat-em-up with the variety of Pokemon added to it. IGN found it terribly repetitive, but I might be able to handle it...as long as the price tag comes down a bit. I was intrigued by NyxQuest, but now I'm not so sure. The action in the demo seemed too simple, though it might get better as more powers are added. I will say that it looks pretty cool and has a fantastic soundtrack. Unlike other games, there's very little repetition and the soundtrack actually evolves as time progresses. World of Goo was really fascinating, though. A simple premise, but one that develops into something quite complicated as it goes on. And the soundtrack is absolutely incredible.

Anyway, I really hope a lot of people download these demos and encourage Nintendo to offer further demos in the future, hopefully eventually including Wii titles.

Which you can see above for yourself. The big reveal is that Zelda's spirit is separated from her body, and so she joins you on your journey and takes control of the big hulking armor guys. This is the first time this game has actually excited me! The armor-controlling was what I found most interesting about this game anyway, so it's cool to see that it has a story tie-in. Plus, it's always good to see Link bring someone interesting along with him. Let's hope more good details surface in the coming weeks.

I've been intrigued about this game ever since I heard about it, which was way before it broke onto the scene at E3. My brother mentioned it to me, and I found the idea compelling. The ability to summon any object to help solve puzzles? It was quite ambitious and full of fun possibilities. Time went on, more details came out, and it still looked very interesting. It looked interesting enough that I bought it less than a week after it was released. Does it live up to the expectations? For the most part. If you've read any reviews out there, the two points that are most often made are that the idea is incredibly fun and the game is hard to control. The short version of this review is that this is entirely correct. If you're interested in the long version, keep reading.

First, yes, the idea is excellent. The dictionary of terms to choose from is very diverse, ranging from a score of urban legends and mythical monsters to utterly useless varieties of food and clothing. There are several words that end up summoning the same object, but I can forgive them with 22,000 words to choose from. There are only a few words that I'm disappointed aren't included (armageddon and rubber chicken). And what's even more interesting are the interactions between all the objects. It's great to sit on the sandbox title screen, summon objects, and watch them interact. You learn wonderful things, like priests are immortal, dragons are the strongest creature (though its health can be worn down by anything eventually), and doppelgangers steal whatever you have. The system of characteristics applied to objects is obviously very deep and well thought out.

The only problem with the dictionary comes when the object you want doesn't turn out as you expect. For instance, I wanted to cross a gap and bring someone with me (so I couldn't just use a jetpack), so I tried using a bridge. Unfortunately, the "bridge" was too short! It took some trial and error before I found that a "drawbridge" was long enough to suffice. Little discoveries like this can either be frustrating or catalysts to brainstorming.

Such a deep dictionary system can only do so much, and for Scribblenauts to be a great game, it must also have interesting puzzles to solve. That's...where it falls a little short. Puzzles are hit and miss. Some of them are genuinely very interesting and challenging, giving you open-ended problems (e.g. spikes that will crush the starite if you move towards it) that tax your creativity to think of a way to solve it. However, lots of other puzzles fall into ruts, giving you a lot of the same obstacles over and over. I can't remember the number of times I had to cross a high obstacle, fight through a swarm of monsters (or summon something to fight for me), or come up with three things to satisfy a random person.

The ratings system for puzzle difficulty is a little wonky as well. There is no real learning curve, and you can find three-star puzzles in early worlds and one-star puzzles in later worlds. (This offends the anal in me, though I recognize that some people might not find this as important.) Also, it doesn't seem accurate, as I've been stumped by two-star puzzles and breezed through four-stars.

I think another big problem with the game is that, despite the deep dictionary system, it doesn't force creativity. You can use a lot of the same items over and over to solve most of the puzzles. There is a mode that forces you to come up with three different solutions for each puzzle, but that just results in you using the same set of items over and over. There is also a Merit System which gives you awards for doing certain things within levels, but I'm torn about it. First of all, half of them are just boring "write two [insert category here]". Second, the other half are for doing random things, some of which happen in the course of the puzzles and the rest of which don't. The problem is that puzzles are not the best place to experiment with random stuff, as you run the risk of messing with your objective and having to restart the puzzle. Perhaps if you could see the names of merits beforehand so that you at least knew what to aim for.

In that regard, I see Scribblenauts best as a community game. Though people fall into their routines, everybody's routine is different. Every time I read about someone else's adventures in Scribblenauts, I learn about some new item or strategy. It's how I found out about wings, teleporters, and shrink rays, among others. I think the game is most enjoyable when you can share your discoveries with others. (There is a Scribblenauts wiki that has already sprung up.)

Oh, and the controls. They suck. Since it's all touch-based, there's tons of opportunities to mis-tap something and accidentally wreck your plans or kill Maxwell. Also, every time Maxwell isn't on the screen and I want him to move to where I tap, he doesn't, but every time Maxwell isn't on the screen and I don't want him to move to where I tap, he does. It gets very aggravating and has caused tons of swear words from me. It also bugs me that a rope cannot be attached to something if part of it overlaps the background, causing lots of swinging ropes around before you can attach it.

The physics can also be disappointing. Stuff that I want to be heavy (like a "statue," for instance) is never heavier than a Starite. And sometimes things bounce around a lot more than expected or things with ropes tied to them jump around randomly.

My last concern is about replayability. Sure, you can go through each puzzle three times to come up with three different solutions, but even that only adds so much. There is a level editor, but it doesn't allow you to create levels anywhere near as complicated as the levels in the game. You can't make tripwires, gates with switches, or overly complicated AI adjustments (I can't make the dragon want to eat the Starite). Maybe I could come up with some interesting levels, but it feels very limited.

Verdict: 3 out of 4 stars. As I was playing this game, I kept coming across annoyances, but they weren't enough to counteract the enjoyment value in this game. There are enough interesting puzzles to give your brain a workout, and the concept itself is just so much fun to play with. If there were a sequel, the major adjustments I would like to see are overall better puzzles and a revamped control scheme, but this game is still enjoyable as is.

It came! It came! My copy of TMNT: Smash from eBay finally arrived, and I've immersed myself in it for the past couple days. So, here are some early impressions of the game.

Arcade Mode (standard single player; think of it like Classic in Smash Bros.) sucks. The story is a bastardization of the comic book that came with the game. The comic had a cute intro, a nod to an oooooold comic book character, and references to arenas in the game. The game cuts it down to just Splinter saying "Let's have a tournament!" and Shredder saying "Grr, I have the Fugitoid." It's also really short. The bonus games are a cool touch, though, and help break up the fighting.

The controls are...complicated. One big difference from Smash Bros. is that timing can be just as important as direction in getting certain moves. I'm...starting to get the hang of that. I'm also having a hard time getting the diagonal directional inputs, especially the upper ones. Early experiments just had me jumping. I think the key is to press the control stick just a little bit, but that's hard to do in the heat of battle. If they had the ability to turn off tap jump, like in Brawl, then I think the control scheme would be much more accessible. As it stands, though, you can simply button mash and still do pretty well.

The announcer is annoying as hell. Everything just has this fake level of enthusiasm layered onto it. I try to block him out as much as possible.

The added mechanics are quite nice. Stun can help alleviate the lag after a move (e.g. after a down-air) or just shake up the gameplay rhythm. The aura is actually very helpful for finding yourself in the middle of an intense fight (especially on stages that zoom out a lot). Wall attacks and swinging attacks are lots of fun and add new strategies to stages. Grabs feel a lot more responsive (e.g. my wife never grabbed in Smash Bros., but she loves doing it in this game). And all the new mechanics have nice visual and audial cues. There's a sound effect when someone is stunned, a white glow when someone's invincible, a yellow glow when they can teleport out of a combo, and a red glow when they're about to die. The system feels very well put together.

The characters are loads of fun. I enjoy playing as all of them. Raphael probably will be my main. He fits my style of jumping in and wailing on people, and a lot of his moves maneuver him around the stage (I'm thinking of his up-air and Side-B). Leonardo may be my second, as he has some fantastic moves. He's got a fun throw (over the shell!) and projectiles. Mikey's got speed and fun moves. Donatello is my wife's character, so I don't play with him much, but damn if he doesn't have range. Splinter is a surprisingly strong character with a lot of interesting moves that carry him around the stage. I feel like he rewards the person who, like him, spend a lot of time training and learning his possibilities. April feels a little weak, but she has speed and Kirby's Final Cutter! I like playing as Casey the least, but I admit that he has good range and is the only character who moves realistically through the air.

Paragraph break for sanity. Shredder handles much better than I thought he would. His moves are powerful, but he moves around pretty quickly. I thought he would be clunky like Bowser, but I was pleasantly surprised (he might become one of my favorites). And he has a damaging taunt! I'm not as impressed with Karai (especially after Turtle Dojo raved about her so much), but she has speed, a nice sliding-forward move (B-), and a killer "throw". The Foot Ninja is loads of fun, quick and brutal (feels like some great spotlight on an overlooked character). I don't like Nightwatcher as much as I thought I would, but the chain whip mechanic is still good for attacking all around yourself and a few good distance attacks. Utrominator is a freaking tank! I don't understand why the people at Turtle Dojo dump on him so much. He's got some great range, especially with his Down-A and getting-up attack. Sure, some of his moves are slow and can be interrupted, but since they have great range, it's best to pull them off from afar. And his throws are BRUTAL! Ninja Rabbid...has some great moves. I have to admit, he's a lot of fun. I don't mind him at all, though it'll get old once two more are added into the mix.

The stages are fantastic. They're so diverse, ranging from standard rooms (Dojo), to multilayered rooms (Turtle Base), to combinations of indoors and outdoors (Western/Castle), to changing experiences (Cruise Ship/Train), and they all look very rich and detailed. The only huge annoyance is the insta-death-gators. They feel cheap and can take away all the hard work of trying to get a KO (or just stay alive). I also like how you start in a random position at the beginning of each match, not a standard one like in Brawl.

I haven't tried Wi-Fi too much yet (I'm trying to get better first), but I did play a couple matches, and they were very smooth. With two players, there was just a managable amount of lag. It got a little worse when a third player joined in, but I'm still willing to give it more chances.

One more annoyance is that the winner-determining system sometimes glitches. In last-man-standing matches, sometimes the winner is the one who is KO'ed the least number of times (and since stage hazards don't count as KO's, the first person out can win because they're only KO'ed once). And sometimes, it inexplicably chooses the wrong person. But I'm not too worried about how many wins I have.

Oh, and the controls when selecting players for a match can be convoluted.

Damn, that's long. The short story is, I'm really enjoying this game, though I still have a way to go before I'm really good at it. Single-player gets tiring after a while, but hopefully I'll be able to spend hours playing people online, because the true fun of any game like this is the multiplayer.

So, I've lately discovered that I have a great fascination with fighting games. This is a little odd, as the only fighting game I own is Nintendo's Super Smash Bros. series, but I spent a chunk of time when younger playing Mortal Kombat with my friends. Something about a complicated combat system just appeals to me. However, when looking through fighting games out there, there are certain aspects that I'm looking for, and they direct me in ways that go against some of popular opinion.

Here is what I'm looking for in a fighting game:
- Interesting characters: I don't normally judge a game based on aesthetics, but if every fighter looks bland and the same as the next (there's one in particular I'm thinking about here), it fails to pull me into the experience.
- Interesting attacks: Just something other than simple punches and kicks. This ties into the characters, because if every character's basic attacks are the same, then it doesn't make much difference which character you're playing as or against.
- No fancy inputs: I don't want to have to memorize a bunch of button sequences that are completely different from character to character. This also ties into the attack scheme, because if complicated sequences are the only way to compete in a game, then it's much harder for me to get into it.

And now, here are some examples of fighting games that I never want to play and games that I'm looking forward to adding to my collection.

Games I won't play

Street Fighter


I know that Street Fighter II is responsible for launching the fighting genre in the 90's and that the fighting game community lauds it as the best game ever, but I hate Street Fighter. A lot of it ties into the points I made earlier. The characters all look the same to me, just a bunch of bulky men and a couple bulky girls.The combat system is entirely punches and kicks, requiring you to memorize input sequences in order to compete in this game at all. I played a little Street Fighter II at an arcade last weekend, and I got my butt handed to me by the computer. I didn't even damage him in the first round. That doesn't encourage me to get into this game, so though I acknowledge its influence and respect the opinions of others, I will not play this game.

Mortal Kombat


I'm a little on the fence with this one, since I played it when I was younger, but it doesn't have much going for it. The characters are more interesting in this game, but the combat system is the same boring punches and kicks, requiring knowledge of special moves to do well. If I happened across a copy of I or II, I might keep it, but really I'm not too excited for this series anymore.

Games I want to play

Super Smash Bros.


My favorite fighting game series of all time, and it will probably remain so. This game has everything going for it. The characters are very interesting and filled with nostalgia. Everybody's attacks are unique, but they all use the same control scheme. You can pick up and play any character, but you still need to spend time to really become good with that character. Add to that the percentage-based knockout system, the diverse items to shake up gameplay, the huge variety of stages (so many other games have basic flat stages that look pretty but never impact gameplay), and the increase of single-player modes added with each new game, and it's an addictive experience. I've played tons of multiplayer hours of this with friends.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Smash Up


I haven't played this game yet, but I bet I'm going to love it. I'm a huge TMNT fan, so I love the characters (issues with roster size notwithstanding). Like Smash Bros., every character has unique attacks but all use the same control scheme. Add to that a decent online mode, items, and unique and detailed stages. I sure that I will play the hell out of this game when I get it.

Soulcalibur


I didn't think that I would like this game at first, but after playing it, I really enjoyed it. I think the biggest draw for me is the 8-Way Run system. It takes traditional 2-D fighting and adds a 3-D subtlety that allows you to avoid attacks. Tying into this is the different fighting system, which is based on horizontal attacks (that hit even people who are sidestepping) and vertical attacks (which, if they hit, hit several times). There are still attack combos to be learned, but they aren't necessary to gameplay. And the great variety in the characters comes from their unique weapons.

BlazBlue: Calamity Trigger


I've haven't actually played this one yet, so I'm not entirely sure, but it looks very interesting. The character roster is ridiculously varied, and the attack system is unique to each character, though there are a couple input combos that can be learned. The main thing is that it just looks so amazing. I'll want to test it out first, but it looks very interesting.

No, this isn't another Olympics minigame competition. Now that I've been playing through the classic Sonic games recently, I've gained considerable perspective on the classic rivalry. Mario will always have a dearer place in my heart, but now I can appreciate the things that Sonic did well. Here is my breakdown of the two franchises (and note, I'm only talking about the 2-D games; I think everyone would agree that Mario transitioned to 3-D much more gracefully).

Level design: The biggest difference with Sonic's levels is that they're more sprawling and branching. Though it makes for a shorter game (assuming the same development time), it means that you can take a slightly different route through the game each time you play it. Mario games, though they have a small amount of exploration for bonuses, typically require you to take a specific path through a level. This provides more focus to the levels, that you must figure out how to get past every obstacle. Sonic games, otherwise, will sometimes allow you to backtrack and take an easier path.
Winner: Depends on your preference

Level environment: Let's face it, Sonic games just look better, especially when you get to Sonic 3. Stages are detailed, and backgrounds are complex.
Winner: Sonic

Combat system: Mario's combat system is very simple. Just jump on enemies to defeat them. Where the variety comes is in the behavior of enemies. Some enemies can't be jumped on, some turn into sliding projectiles, some regenerate, some bounce you off, and more. Sonic's combat system is more complex, requiring you to be curled up in order to defeat enemies. This is slightly less intuitive (and was tough to get used to when first playing years ago), but does allow for some cool moves. However, enemies are much less varied, mostly differing in which areas are vulnerable.
Winner: Mario, by a hair

Boss battles: The first two Mario games had the same boss battle repeated at the end of every level. Super Mario 3 had the same two bosses repeated with just different attack patterns (plus the final boss, which was different). Even Super Mario World, though it had different bosses, repeated them several times. Yoshi's Island was the first Mario game to feature unique boss fights. Sonic, on the otherhand, always had a variety of boss fights. Every boss had a different attack pattern, and part of the challenge was figuring out their pattern and their weakness. It's clear that Sonic had the more complicated bosses, and Mario was a little late to the party in doing the same.
Winner: Sonic

Powerups: Mario has a rich variety of powerups, enabling you to do everything from fire projectiles, glide through the air, swim more easily, throw hammers, and turn into a statue, each accompanied with a whisical transformation in the character. Sonic only had shields until Sonic 3, which added shields with different properties. The abilities they granted were certainly useful, but they were few and far between and didn't offer quite the same difference and whimsy that Mario's did.
Winner: Mario

Water levels: They're a pain in the ass in both games, but for different reasons. In Mario, it's because of the different physics involved and the inability to beat enemies without fire power. In Sonic, you have to breathe every thirty seconds or you drown. Whatever game you're playing, water levels are always dreaded.
Winner: Neither

Mulitplayer: It wasn't until over twenty years after the first Mario game that cooperative multiplayer was introduced in Super Mario Galaxy, and that was in a very limited form. Sonic 2 introduced a sidekick that a friend could take control of (because he was dumb as rocks on his own) so that you could play through the game together. It added a great new depth to the experience.
Winner: Sonic

So, in conclusion, I can see why the two franchises fought so fiercely in their time. Both had their strong points, and some of them can vary based on personal preferences. As I said, I prefer Mario games, for as much reason as nostalgia as everything else. However, I appreciate the Sonic games for what they did well, and I'm glad to have played them.

Let me preface this: I love the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. I remember eating TMNT cereal while watching the cartoon on Saturday mornings. I own every Turtles comic that Archie published (not the main series, but I love it). I also love the Smash Bros. series. So, when I heard that they were making a Smash Bros-style game featuring the Turtles, I was immediately excited. My fiercest hope at that time back in January was that it would be a good game worthy of purchasing and playing into the ground. Now it's been released and...I still don't own it. It burns me inside, but I don't have the money right now. However, I have immersed myself in videos, reviews, and forum posts about the game, so I feel like I have a decent basis to talk about the game a little.

First, all the positives. It sounds like a good game worthy of purchasing. Aside from the reviewers who can't get over the similarities between this game and Brawl, lots of other people have been enjoying it as a fun game. Some are whining a lot about how powerful throws are, but there are just as many people who say that, with practice, people will get better at breaking out of grabs. It seems like people (check out www.turtledojo.com) are treating it as a serious fighting game. The controls are an interesting mixture of traditional and Smash Bros. They're a little more complicated, with diagonal inputs, but all inputs are the same across characters, so you can pick up and play as any character. The added mechanics, like wall-climbing and additional attack properties, add more depth and differentiate the gameplay. The powerups seem interesting but (hopefully) not overpowered. The stages look dynamic and detailed, though I'm not too keen on the crocodiles (we'll see if that changes with gameplay). And the online sounds like it runs a lot smoother.

But there is a negative: the roster. It's a huge disappointment, all around. First, THREE Rabbids? This is a Turtles game! I wouldn't have minded having one Rabbid as a fun cameo, since, as a small and light character, it'd fulfill a role that nothing else in the TMNT universe can, but three of them feels lazy and self-serving (and the Splinter Cell Rabbid is a reference to another Ubisoft game). Second, there are so many deserving characters that were left out of the roster. We didn't get Bebop and Rocksteady, Leatherhead, Baxter Stockman, Triceraton, Slash, Hun, Ninjara (my own secret hope, a nod to Archie fans), or any other characters that were more deserving over multiple Rabbids. Third, it feels like this game only honors the last couple years of Turtles history. Was this supposed to be a 25th anniversary game? The only reference to the original comics is Fugitoid and the Utrominator (though those were also included in the 2000 cartoon), the only reference to the 80's cartoon is the Technodrome, and there are no references to the Archie comics or any other comic variations. This no longer feels like a love letter to TMNT fans. Finally, it stings so much more since the official website strongly implied that there would be a twenty character roster, and instead we only get thirteen TMNT characters, all of which had been revealed a month before the game was released. Anyone hoping for particular characters (including me) felt incredibly let down.

Am I still going to buy the game? Of course. I've been obsessing over it for the past month, watching every video I can, reading forum posts describing techniques that I can't fully understand yet, and already planning out my button configuration and which fighters I'll main. And, in the videos, it looks really cool. The roster is a big disappointment, but I can look past it if I view it as the first game in a series (after all, the original Smash Bros. only had twelve characters). I can't wait to get this game; I'm sure I'll play it into the ground for about six months after I get it (that's about what I did with Brawl).

P.S. I will have an in-house rule, that any Rabbid not controlled by a human that appears in a match must be immediately slaughtered. And, if there is a sequel, there better not be a single Rabbid.

Greetings all! This is a new venture of mine, to post my ideas about video games and whatever else I want to the world. You can visit my website http://cere.bravehost.com to read my fanfiction and my Backloggery to browse through my video game collection. Expect this space to contain reviews of video games, as well as discussions about various video game topics and whatever else I feel like talking about.