Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... | Newsweek.com
Full Post
Posted Wednesday, December 19, 2007 12:13 AM

Our Xbox 360 Correspondent Selects His Game of the Year--And In a Shocker, It's Not Halo 3

Rolf Ebeling
 Call of Duty 4: Modern Combat, developed by Infinity Ward and published by Activision

At Newsweek HQ, most of our colleagues are either boomers in name or boomers in spirit, which means there haven't been many serious gamers among our ranks. But from the increasing number of game-related conversations we've had with our office mates, it's clear that this is starting to change. Our de facto Xbox 360 correspondent Rolf Ebeling, who in his day job is the creative director for Newsweek.com, posted here back in October about how Electronic Arts' Skate triggered his boyhood memories of the birthplace of modern American skateboarding. In today's entry, Level Up's foremost Halo fanboy and online multiplayer aficionado explains why his uneasy reaction to the single-player experience of Call of Duty 4: Modern Combat has made it his Game of the Year for 2007.

I play games to vent. I feel weird admitting that, given that I'm an adult and should just gracefully accept life's real challenges and focus calmly on real solutions. Sometimes, though, firing a fake incendiary round into a group of fake goons and watching them fly into fake walls...well, there's a real satisfaction in that. Playing my own pop psychologist, the primary reason I've burned through two Xbox 360s is to keep a tenuous hold on my childhood and teenage years. It's the same reason I'm stupidly happy when I'm fish-tailing my mountain bike around curves, or how I can listen to "The Queen is Dead" over and over again and never really get tired of it. For that, I feel little or no guilt.

But another part of why I play is to have an experience that's insulated from the consequences or limitations of my current reality. For an hour or two, I'm can free myself of life's responsibilities (job, family, being a law-abiding citizen) and barriers (time, gravity, vulnerability to melee attacks) and put a serious hurt on somebody who deserves it (the Covenant, that sniper over flag three, whoever just ground their heel into my last nerve today). I can overreact spectacularly and get Achievement Points for it.

Advertisement

The very idea of Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, the franchise's first foray away from the well-trod World War II genre, has had me drooling for the past few months. Shamelessly, I pestered N'Gai for a copy so I could unload serious ordnance on whatever got in my way (sorry, it's been a long year). At first, the game certainly delivers on the taboo appeal of emptying clips and setting off claymore mines in a present-day setting--for which, I believe, it owes a debt to Electronic Arts and Criterion Studios' underrated first-person shooter Black. However, as I venture further into the solo campaign--and in a first for me, I've yet to hit the multiplayer maps in any depth--a sensation alien to my past experience with first person shooters has settled in: unease.

The game feels too real in parts. By "real", I mean my mass-media informed view of actual combat, not firsthand experience. You're forced to weave your way through cramped Middle Eastern alleys while chunks of concrete kick up around you from rounds of ammunition pounding into what insufficient cover you have. You watch soldier after soldier slump the ground in a trench because of your skill with a sniper rifle. You get stuck in a cable network's newsroom floor held hostage, cowering behind someone's desk, knowing you don't have enough shells to fight your way out. You can nit-pick the dialog AI (please stop telling me to "pick up the Javelin" every 5 seconds--yes, I saw it, I'd prefer to take out the snipers first, thank you) or look too closely at the visual tricks used in the environments (the static sky is little more than a well-done old-school matte painting), but the gnawing sensation I get from COD4 is this: shooting and being shot at must be unbelievably scary and awful.

A colleague recently asked me for a list of best rock albums of the year. I surprised myself by not picking the recording I enjoyed or played the most, but rather the darkly ambitious "The Good, The Bad and The Queen" (if you haven't yet heard it, the sprightly political centerpiece of that collection is called "Kingdom of Doom."). I have a feeling that my favorite movie for 2007 will end up being "No Country for Old Men." The hushed desperation of Tommy Lee Jones' retold dream of his father--not to mention Javier Bardem and his "captive bolt" pistol--will stick with me longer than the ridiculous laughter that "Superbad" brought forth from me. Listening and watching these two pieces of art, it's impossible not to be reminded that things are not OK in our world. Their skilled escapism brings you closer to reality.

For creeping me out so successfully, I'm picking Call of Duty 4 as my game of the year.

You must be a registered user to comment.  Click here to register.  Already a user?  Click here to login.

Member Comments

Posted By: Webnet (December 29, 2007 at 7:51 PM)

@BaddMutha and Joeboy101

Rather than give you the direct nitty gritty of the story I consider it more engrossing to give hints at what is happening.  Playing through Gears of War and learning about small bits and pieces of the the past and looking at the environment's decay builds a sort of cinematic feeling.  In the Matrix 1 you know what happened and why it happened but you don't know about all the things that are happening.  In Gears of War your in hell and you learn about how you got there by the dialog, not a lazy cutscene that explain all the mysteries.  Whether Epic was able to fully accomplish that is up you.

With Call of Duty everything is explained in the game engine and left me quite interested in the world.  I became engrossed with characters like Griggs, Gaz, and Captain Prince early on and I feel like Infinity Ward did a great job with that aspect.  They explain the backstory extremely well by letting you play through it, which is why I wish quick time sequences and too action packed cutscences should die.  I love watching a great video as much as the next guy but I want to play a lot more than watch.  Call of Duty did a great job at this and other developers should take notice.  

After saying all this I have to say that Half Life 2, Episode 1, and Episode 2 are my games of the year.  I want a game that makes you care about the characters by developing them throughout the story.  - SPOILERS - When Eli died I felt like I lost someone I had known.  When Alyx was injured I felt I had to save her because I didn't want to see her die.  There were so many moments in Half Life that showed amazing game development.

Call of Duty is fun and I still log on to own people on Xbox Live.  I loved the story and all the different sequences it threw me into.  But the best experience I have had all year has to be playing through Half Life 2 (EP 1 + 2).  The way they told the story was amazing.  I want to learn about the universe and the characters, I am even going to go back and play Half Life 1 because I can't get enough of Gordan Freeman.


Posted By: BaddMutha (December 19, 2007 at 2:42 PM)

@Joeboy101

I agree with your points. Interactivity during what may have otherwise been a cutscene is a tactic I hope more and more developers embrace. One of the best examples that comes to my mind is the Half-Life series. The player never leaves Dr. Freeman's perspective; not to deliver a cutscene or relay story bits. It results in total immersion in the game world, and they perform the feat very successfully. It is up to the player to determine how involved they get with the story. Those who care can examine the extremely detailed environment for story clues (i.e. newspaper clippings, the ramblings of passersby, television stations), and those who simply want to experience the shooter aspect of the game can do just that. It demonstrates excellent game design by a very skilled design team.

As someone from Bungie (in some long-deleted ViDoc) said, would you rather watch some awesome event happen or take part in it? Half-Life and CoD both allow the player to experience story points while still completely immersing the player in the world and the character. We're seeing what will hopefully become a widespread and effective gameplay mechanic in its infancy today.


Posted By: joeboy101 (December 19, 2007 at 11:59 AM)

@BaddMutha,

Oddly enough, your in luck. More develoeprs, it seems, are using the gameplay engine for thematic sequences without taking the player out of their perspective. For example, though a mediocre game, The Darkness had a very cool scene relatively near the beginning where you visit your girlfriend, talk with her, sit down with her on the couch and watch 'To Kill a Mockingbird' together. You don't have to watch the whole thing, but kudos to the developer for actually having the entire movie for watching.

No combat, no danger, no frantic rush or strategy even needed. Simply an interactive plot point used to develop characters. The result? When your girlfriend is placed in danger later, its not just 'your girlfriend'. You have a context to place the situation in and that ends up internalizing the emotions involved to a much better degree. It keeps the player engrossed in the game while advancing the plot in a very personal nature.

This has been seen in RPGs for a while now due to their heavy plot nature and need to advance storylines irrespective of combat happening. First person shooters though are only coming around, but the affect it can have in the game, especially when done well, is very striking. Infinity took it to the next level in CoD 4 by using innovative ways to advance the plot, but while keeping the game moving. The AC-130 and Ghillie Suit missions are prime examples of where the player's perspective is shifted to view the plot from other angles and characters. Movies do this too, but when married to an interactive nature, scenes like the opening coup make a far greater impact than just reading a background and set of mission objectives.


 
The Peek
 
 
SPORTS

Luxury stadiums are on the rise. A top seat can cost $150,000. Beer costs extra.

Sponsored by
 
 
 
 
Sponsored by
 
 
 
loadingLoading Menu