Recent reviews by Gene Jacket

If you want Symphony of the Night in everything but name, Bloodstained is Symphony of the Night in everything but name...meaning it's perfect.

Would be the perfect table, if not for the god-awful "super ball"-esque physics that ruin the experience. Pinball FX2 isn't supposed to be a sim, I love that different tables have different physics based on the theme and what feels right, but the ball on the Portal table has no weight to it at all, to the point where any given moment is a total crap-shoot as to what it's going to do or where it's going to go... The table that should have been the most fun, instead becomes the most frustrating and annoying.

I honestly wasn't expecting much out of Revelations 2, after Resident Evil 6 and the original Revelations, the latter of which I personally felt was not the "return to form" that many claimed it to be. That said, Revelations 2 was quite the surprise. The closest in the series I can compare it to is RE5's "Lost in Nightmare" DLC, both in the way they control and the way they focus more on exploration, a little stealth and ammo management over the straight, action-heavy gameplay of RE5 and RE6.

I suppose the highest praise I can give Revelations 2 is that, in certain aspects, it reminded me a lot of the much-loved Outbreak titles. Even if you're a not a huge fan of the series, or an old fan that didn't care for the past few titles, there's a little bit of something for everyone in Revelations 2.

*I can't really speak to the overall story just yet, thanks to Capcom's ridiculous decision to split the game into 4 pieces, making this an episodic release.

EDIT (07-29-14): I decided to go back and check out the game after a lengthy hiatus to see if any of the ridiculous balance issues had been addressed. Unfortunately, these issues seem to be worse now than months ago, when I originally quit playing. Enemy teams will almost always get multiple lines per turn and always get whatever color gems they need to drop at precisely the right time to keep their combos going to 2, 3 or 4x After uninstalling today I can safely say I'll not ever be going back. Marvel really should be ashamed of themselves.

There are a few things you should consider before jumping to Marvel Puzzle Quest: Dark Reign.

1) Do you mind only playing in small, bite-sized chunks?
2) Do you mind spending real-world cash to continue playing?

If you answered "no" to the first question then have at it. You'll have fun building your deck of characters, leveling them up, taking on new challenges, etc. It's essentially the old Puzzle Quest with a Marvel spin, which isn't a bad thing. It's quite fun if you enjoy that type of game and completing challenges and quest lines is rewarding.

If you answered "yes" to the second question then prepare to be sorely disappointed. You can play this game without ever spending a single cent, but you won't have the best characters, won't have enough storage space for additional characters, won't be able to level them high enough to compete in multiplayer events and will always be running short on health packs. Basically, without spending money on it (and not just once, but regularly) you'll never get the most out of it.

D3 and Demiurge took the exact same iOS/Adroid game, complete with it's heavy insistance on rampant microtransactions, and ported it to PC.

It's a rather shameful cash-grab, in terms of milking players for as much money as possible, but underneath all the negatives is a solid, enjoyable game. It's just too bad you have to dig through so much bad to get to the good.

First and foremost, unlike previous Arkham titles, Origins was not developed by Rocksteady Studios. Do not go into Origins expecting the same level of quality, as it simply isn't operating on the same level as previous titles.

Arkham Origins was developed in-house by Warner Bros. Games Montreal, a studio who's only previous development credit is the Wii U port of Batman: Arkham City.

In terms of gameplay, Batman: Arkham Origins apes Rocksteady's games as closely as possible. However, the combat and environmantal traversal systems are fundamentally broken by back-end code changes. The rhythmic, dance-like free-flow combat of past games that rewarded skill, and punished button-mashers, has been re-worked, dumbed-down and tailor-made to appease those who were never any good at Asylum and City, and will immediately irk players who've mastered combat in those games. To counter-act the watered down fisticuffs, WB Montreal has increased the number of enemies that will engage Batman in combat at any given time to ridiculous levels in some cases, which would be fine, if countering actually worked as it did in the original games. You can counter upto 3 enemies at a time, so when a group of 6 thugs all decide to attack at once, it doesn't matter how many time you hit the counter button, you're going to get hit and any momentum you've built up will be lost. You'll frequently be knocked out of a combo after multiple hits by the very assailant you're attacking or an offscreen enemy who's decided to throw something at you.

Navigating around Gotham is also a major issue that will be immediately apparent to anyone who's familiar with past titles. The areas of Gotham that eventually become Arkham City are essentialy the same, save for the fact that Batman's grapnel gun doesn't seem to work on roughly half the buildings anymore. The same goes for the areas new to Arkham Origins, which unfortunately isn't as well laid out and seems designed to be as unmemorable and bland as possible, which leads to easy confusion when trying to discern where to go next as every building looks the same.

Story wise, the game fares a little better. There are some genuinely interesting ideas at play in Arkham Origins, mostly concerning one villains psyche and relationship with Batman, but too few of them get fully fleshed-out. The entire setup of the game, the worlds best assassins all out to get Batman all at once, makes up roughly 10% of the total game and fans of certain characters (deathstroke especially) will feel cheated by how little actual screen-time they get (some aren't even featured in the main storyline at all, instead remanded to menial side-quests).

Finally, I'd be remiss for not mentioning the voice acting. By now everyone should be aware that neither Kevin Conroy or Mark Hamill reprise the iconic roles of Batman and Joker, respectively, despite the fact that they've become synonomous with those roles after playing them for more than 20 years. Replacing them are Roger Craig Smith (Ezio of the Assassin's Creed series) as Batman and Troy Baker (Booker of Bioshock Infinite/Joel of The Last of Us) as The Joker. Smith is fine as Batman, if completely bland and forgettable. Troy Baker is the star of the show here, chanelling as much of Hamill's Joker as possible while still giving it his own flare and completely owning every line. It's a remarkable highlight in an otherwise unremarkable experience. Much of the supporting cast from previous games has returned, playing the same characters (such as Martin Jarvis as Alfred and Nolan North as Penguin) and most do a respectable job with the largely terrible dialogue they're given. Special mention should be given to actress Laura Waddell, who plays Tracey (one of Penguins henchwomen) for doing possibly the absolute worst, cartoonishly awful Cockney accent ever recorded. It's astounding how bad it is, moreso considering Ms. Waddell is, in fact, british herself.

What you're left with is a game that wants so badly to be a true Arkham game, but lacks the fundamental understanding of what makes Rocksteady's entries so good. I'm sure there's a studio more than capable of equalling what Rocksteady built with Asylum and City, but WB Montreal isn't it, a sad fact that's readily apparent in nearly every aspect of Arkham Origins. Do yourself a favor, just play through Arkham City again while waiting for Rocksteady's return with their next Batman game sometime in 2014.

Addemdum: I did not mention the numerous glitches and game-breaking bugs that I was plagued with during my initial playthrough of Arkham Origins, as they've largely been fixed thanks to post-release patching. I am told the game still has it's issues, though they're relatively minor compared to what players experienced in the first few weeks of release.

There's nothing I can say about Borderlands 2 that hasn't already been said by better writers.

I don't know that I've ever been so completely enamored with any gaming world (and I've been a mildly obsessive gamer since Christmas of '85 when I received my NES). The eclectic cast of characters that populate Pandora, the phenomenal (and often hilarious) writing and voice acting that bring it all to life, the vibrant art style, varied enemy types, rock-solid shooting mechanics and endless pursuit of the best gear possible make Borderlands 2 my absolute favorite game of the past 10 years, and that's coming from someone who's generally not real big on shooters.

I cannot recommend Borderlands 2 highly enough.

When I first heard About Sleeping Dogs, it sounded like just another GTA clone. I've never beena fan of the GTA series, as they tend to sell themselves as serious action games, but are often just as over-the-top and wholly unrealistic as Saints Row. However, as I looked into it more, the story and setting sounded interesting, so I gave it a chance.

Sleeping Dogs, to me, is everything GTA should be: An open world crime game with an incredibly gripping narrative and characters that feel like real people. The melee combat is precise and engaging, and while shootouts are rarer, the mechanics are excellent. Vehicles cotrol better than those in GTA, and each one has it's own individual feel and learning curve.

GTA may have reinvented the genre, but in my eyes Sleeping Dogs refines it to near perfection.