Add new comment

History:
It's been 2 years since Quantum of Solace, and there were negative reviews left and right, and it was hard to find the fun of Quantum of Solace considering it was competing against blockbuster titles of the end year like Call of Duty: World at War (which was ALSO made by the studio at the same time they were making Quantum of Solace), Fallout 3, Grand Theft Auto 4, and Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots. It wasn't till this slow year, and it was only a matter of time, before Activision would release another James Bond game since EA Games lost the rights to the James Bond title and Activision picked it up. This year, I felt there was less competition for a Bond game to compete against other mainstream titles like Call of Duty (again), Fallout: New Vegas (which half-way flopped), and Medal of Honor (which also flopped). It's safe to say, this has been a tough year for the 4th quarter in Video games, but I felt for the James Bond franchise, it was a great step forward.

Summary:
I don't usually care about the story in a game considering I don't play games like I watch movies/read books. The story in Blood Stone isn't anything unique or spectacular, it can get deep if you want to collect all the intel hidden through out the game and you can find out what connections this bio-weapons terrorist has with a casino owner. This game features both a solid singleplayer and an entertaining Multiplayer. The story unfolds and acts like a non stop action packed, espionage, James Bond film which leads me to say: This is the best Bond EXPERIENCE since Goldeneye 64. I felt more like James Bond than I did any other game, and I understand why this game was set in 3rd person, because it feels like the game's reminding you, "Yeah your doin' all this cool stuff, and your James Bond, now drive this Aston Martin DBS." My first time through I couldn't wait to see what came next the same way I was when I was watching Casino Royale, and every other James Bond, it pulls you in.

Why do Critics bash this game?: I usually try to not to compare my reviews to others, but I can see why critics (such as Game Informer and IGN) gave this game such mediocre reviews instead of placing it up 'there' with anticipated games. For starters, it doesn't do anything unique or completely different from most games. The cover based combat, and even the controls are ripped straight out of Uncharted. The focus aim is exactly like the... well placed slowed down shots in Splinter Cell: Conviction. But how does Blood Stone execute these rip offs? I felt like Bizarre Creations did an excellent job. The cover based combat works well in Multiplayer, and works exceptionally well in singleplayer, I love the addition of being able to just vault over objects unlike in games like Gears of War where you have to take cover, press up then press A again. I didn't like SC:Conviction, so seeing as how they ripped off Spinter Cell for it's focus aim, and both characters in the game are spies, I felt like it was a slap in the face, and a brilliant one because I think the focus aim in this game is far easier to use and better. You simply press LB (hold it if you want to track the enemy) and press fire, rather than selecting targets awkwardly and then pressing a random button like Y. Not to mention you don't lose your focus aim until your killed (in multiplayer) or till you hit someone.

The driving sequences are most exciting and offer a good challenge, they were very linear however. I felt like I was driving in a box and at times I wasn't even hitting walls, I was just getting too far off course and the game has invisible walls, which I thought gaming had matured from. But it's really no big deal considering you have to do everything right, and whenever you execute the level right, you'll sit back, watch the game load and remind yourself, "that was pretty frickin' cool." The biggest complaint I had was the game was too easy on easier difficulties with combat. There was an auto aim feature (where you generally aimed at your target, and it'd snap to him) which I hated in Red Dead, and I find it only useful for games like COD. I like a challenge so I tried Agent first (hard), unlocked 007 (hardest difficulty) and found that the best experience for the game was on Agent. It's not to challenging, but not your every day walk in the park.

Mutliplayer: Hands down, the biggest flaw of this game is it's lag. The client servers suck, there are far to many ties when shooting someone or hitting them (so basically you'll shoot someone to death and he'll shoot you to death too, or knock each other out/melee). There are only about 3 weapons that dominate this game, Sub-Machine Guns, Assault Rifles, and your fists, other than that, everything pretty much is useless unless your good specifically with them. Overall there aren't a lot of people playing Multiplayer, and I've never played any other mode aside from Team Deathmatch and Last Man Standing. I'd imagine Goldeneye has a large Multiplayer community, because the Wii has the smallest online community of the consoles, and there are better multiplayers too chose from in the opinions of most other gamers.

I found Blood Stone, a very fun game to play, a change of pace from the rest of the mainstream titles. And considering I felt this was an off year for video games, I found this to be the one game that was overlooked.

On a scale of 1 - 10:
8 out of 10 (Above Average)
I would recommend this title to gamers of all kinds who are looking for a change in pace in the gaming market. It can entertain hardcore games, and kill time with Casual gamers.