Editorial: Creating The Ultimate Superhero Game

Well it's that time of year again, blockbuster season.  Yes that magical time of year where Hollywood starts cranking out one big budget movie after another in hopes to take our money, I mean entertain us.  And inevitably there will be Superhero movies as well, in fact there already has been a few already.  But with all these fantastic movie choices it seems odd that when it comes to Superhero games you are stuck with either Batman or Spider-Man.  Sure there are the occasional alternatives like Infamous, the surprisingly good Wolverine game, and Injustice.  But There is yet to be that definitive game when it comes to superheroes.  So today I'm going to lay out some aspects gathered from some of my favorite superhero games, and how to combine them into the ultimate experience.

Sandbox

First and foremost we need a sandbox environment.  Luckily most developers have already figured this out by now, if you're gonna give us powers, let us play around with them.  For those who don't know, a sandbox game is one where you are given an open world where you can explore and do missions rather than forced to do levels one after the other.  Although I would love to have a new location, perhaps an entirely new location...that isn't a dark run-down city.

Multiple Powers

For a licensed superhero game this isn't a necessity.  But for a hypothetical "ultimate" superhero experience why not.  This has been seen seen before, from MMOs, to Infamous, to even the Lego games.  Basically what I'd like to see is a game that lets you choose your powerset, then unleash it on your enemies.  Maybe even make a boss immune to each power option so that players will be forced to fight smart, or better yet...

Multiplayer

The staple of of the modern videogame, mutiplayer turns even the most boring game into an afternoon of awesome.  Obviously I'm not after an MMO here, in fact what I have in mind is more along the lines of the Fable series, where each player has their own unique character and can unlock stuff, but only player 1's game is affected.  Call it a Team-Up, or sidekick mode, plus with the above idea of a boss that is immune to each power, a second character would be perfect.  Or maybe even expand this to 4, or even 8 players to create a super team of your very own.

Different Playstyles

This is the first item on the list I haven't really seen in a game, and admittedly it may be asking too much, however this is a hypothetical game so whatever.  Anyway in the game Infamous Second Son the hero can gain 4 different powers, however they all play essentially the same.  What I'd like to see is different controls for each power.  Imagine a game that let you choose Spider-Man, Batman, or Delsin; all of which played exactly like their respective games, in fact all those games have the same basic level design so in theory it would all mesh really well.  Plus it adds more depth to character creation.

Character Creation

Kind of a no brainer at this point in gaming, even Arkham and Spider-Man have alternate costume options.  But for a game where you create your own superhero character creation is a must.  Thus allowing those who want to wear tights and capes to do so, or players can opt for a more modern look, or even go without a costume if they feel so inclined.

Moral choices

Something Bioware has perfected, making choices that affect the game's outcome.  There are the obvious "should I kill this person" decisions, but what if you had to also make a choice between saving a love interest or a bus full of kids, real hard choices that define people.  Thus players can play the Boy scout, the psychopath, or anything in between.

Secret Bases

The last thing needed for the ultimate superhero game would be a lair for the player to hang out, store trophies, and change their appearance.  Or even take it one step further, use in game currency to order things like weapons, costume pieces, vehicles, or decoration and have them delivered to the player's base.

Anyway, this is what I would love to see in a definitive Superhero experience, have any ideas of your own?  Feel free to leave a comment below.

Editorial: X-Men vs The Avengers

       At Comic-Con a comment was made that the Guardians of The Galaxy could in fact take the Avengers.  This got me thinking; just who is the strongest team of film supereroes?  The more I thought about it I realized it ultimately came down to two teams, Disney/Marvel's Avengers and Fox/Marvel's X-Men (DC needs to step it up and release Justice League already).  So after examining the powers and rosters of the teams in the movie I hope to finally put this question to rest.

X-Men

       First up we have the X-Men, if you count the First Class team there are 3 different X-teams to grace the silver screen (More if you include the TV movies).  But for this fight I'm going with the original roster simply because they have experience and the more powerful roster for this bout.  At their peak the team includes Cyclops, Jean Grey, Storm, Wolverine, Rogue, Beast, Colossus, Angel, Shadowcat, and Iceman.  So a few more members than the Avengers.  A few members didn't make the cut based on the fact they never officially joined the team, so they aren't included.

Pros

       The obvious advantage this team has is numbers, with a roster of 9 field members they are the largest superhero team on film that I can think of.  Another plus they have is how well they work together, considering the Xavier institute is a school many of these guys have worked together since childhood and know how to complement each other in battle.  The last big advantage is the diversity of powers they have, not one member doubles up on powers making each member unique.

Cons

       Even with the teams incredible powers, they still can be taken down one at a time if outmatched.  Another downside is that the public is against mutants, not a huge deal in a fight, but when fighting a team like the Avengers the public opinion may need to be considered.  The X-Men are also all still human.  Meaning they have human limits and can still be killed by conventional weapons.

Avengers

       The Avengers are the product of 4 years of  build up, and they certainly didn't disappoint.  The roster is Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, Hawkeye, Black Widow, and Hulk.  A group brought together by a shadow organization to fight the treats ordinary people simply weren't equip to handle.  For the sake of this battle we will take everyone at the point they are at now, so Iron Man through Iron Man 3.

Pros

       Perhaps the biggest advantage the Avengers have is that they are resilient, able to overcome incredible odds simply by refusing to give up.  Another advantage they have is the power levels of the members, unlike the X-Men some of the Avengers are borderline unstoppable.  The next major advantage they have is training; half of the Avengers have military training that is vastly superior to anything Xavier's Danger Room can cook up, and Thor was raised fighting giants and monsters across the 9 realms.  Lastly the Avengers have the backing of SHIELD, meaning resources, technology, and even backup if needed.

Cons

       The biggest con the Avengers have is that they spend little time acting as a team and usually do things their own way, the best example being Iron Man.  Also because of the SHIELD overview the Avengers have a bit of a trust issue.

The Fight

       Against each other we start with who has the best leadership, in this case I believe Captain America can out strategize Cyclops,  partly due to the numbers being easier to control with a smaller team, but also because Captain America has military training and a super soldier formula allowing him to process information faster than Cyclops.  But this won't have a huge effect on the fight until later on.

       Next we move on to heavy hitters.  The Avengers have Thor and Hulk, both of which are incredibly powerful, however Rogue provides a bit of a wildcard, in the films she can take abilities and memories of those she touches, does this transfer affect non-mutants?  I don't know but for the sake of an epic fight I say yes.  So Rouge ends up Hulking out early on in the battle, taking Hulk out of the fight.

       Because a nullifier does exist in cannon for mutant powers SHIELD would have access to it, the problem being how close you have to be in order for it to work, but Hawkeye's arrows would be perfect for getting the "Cure" into the X-Men, this would take at least 1 X-Men down, probably the untrained Angel, evening the score.  Of course this won't work more than once.

       After one loss on each side Cap will try for a shock and awe by taking the X-Men's big gun Wolverine.  As the movies have shown he can't be stopped, but he can be restrained or taken off the board.  Add the fact his bones are laced with metal all that needs to be done is Thor hits him, really hard, into a large body of water.  Then Cap moves on to the next target, the hulked out Rogue and has Iron Man fight her.  Because there is no skin to touch Iron Man is able to get in close with a Hulkbuster armor (or whatever the equivalent is in his movie armory) and simply wear her out until the Hulk powers wear off, then incapacitates her.

       Cyclops, seeing the fight being lost then has the X-Men pair off with an enemy to divide and conquer, like in every other X-Men film and  Storm battles Thor, Iceman is up against Hawkeye, Colossus battles Hulk, Shadowcat fights Black Widow, Cyclops battles Captain America, and Iron Man fights Beast.

       Thor easily is able to best Storm, and is a little insulted she claims to control the thunder.

       Black Widow's superior fighting skills allow her to out maneuver Shadowcat until she makes a mistake, Black Widow wins her fight.

       Colossus battles Hulk to a standstill, but as time goes on Colossus simply isn't able to keep up with the relentless attack from Hulk and is defeated from exhaustion.

       Iceman fares better, able to keep the fight at a distance Hawkeye is unable to get an arrow past the Ice barrage.  Eventually he runs out of arrows and Iceman is able to beat him.

       Iron Man's armor proves to strong for Beast to penetrate, and even with his heightened abilities he is unable to beat him.

       As for the leaders, Cyclops is trying to keep the fight at a distance with his optic blasts, but Caps shield is protecting him.  He slowly moves in closer until a hand to hand fight breaks out.  Doe to his increased physical strength and training Cap is able to incapacitate Cyclops.

       Seeing his entire team defeated Iceman surrenders to the Avengers knowing he can't take them all.

       Meanwhile as the fighting has been going on Jean's powers have been causing problems for herself.  Unable to hold back anymore she becomes the Phoenix.  The Avengers prove to be no match for her and call in support.  Tony analyses the Phoenix and comes up with a way to beat her.  SHIELD support arrives armed with Destroyer and Chitauri guns (See Item 47 short).  Seeing no other option Cap recruits all non-incapacitated X-Man into the Avengers for support.  The Avengers distract Phoenix as Thor and Hulk move in with a cure arrow, unable to focus on the more immediate threat the plan works and Phoenix is "cured".  Victory goes to the Avengers.

Final word

       I know some will disagree with my choice of winner, but honestly I feel that the Avengers simply have more powerful members, at least in the movies.  But please feel free to leave your comments below.

Editorial: Comic Books and Aging

       It's been a few weeks since I posted anything, I hate Spring Quarter.  Anyway I thought today I would bring up my biggest complaint with comics books as a genre, okay that's not true, DC's ridiculous need to reboot every few years is worse.  But today I would like to go over the annoyance of how characters stop aging once they reach age 30.  This wouldn't be such a big deal if younger characters didn't age, but they do, and eventually they are the same age as their idols.  To make matters worse the narrative of comics is that they go on for years, and often bring up things that happened in the past.  But the always say it was only a few months ago, which doesn't work if you create new characters, then age them multiple years.  The most obvious example of this is Barbara's paralysis in 1988, the New 52 claims this was 6 months ago, but in that time Damian Wayne was born, raised to be a killer, and became Robin.  Not bad for someone less than 6 months old.

       Sure it's understandable that given their powers some of these characters will live longer.  For example all God characters such as Thor, Hercules, and even Wonder Woman can live forever so long as they are not killed.  The same goes for characters with healing factors like Wolverine, who is already over 200 years old.  Also characters like Nick Fury and Superman can live longer than others, Superman because of his powers, and Fury's infinity serum.  It has also been put on record Hulk will far outlive Banner as well.  But what about all the characters whose powers don't affect aging?  Batman for example has been around for decades, fathered 3 adopted sons and 1 biological son, half of which are roughly his age now.

       As a child of the 90s I have lived through many a child hero, all of which are destined to be the next generation of heroes.  Except that next generation never happens, in truth they end up aging and are then more often then not overshadowed by older heroes.  So what happens to the futures we are often seeing in comics them?  Futures that in many instances should have happened years ago.  For example Spider-Man can't lead the Avengers if Iron Man never retires.  Interestingly enough the X-Men are the only ones to address this issue.  By killing off Xavier they left a role that needed to be filled by his pupils, which they did.  Creating a new Mutant power struggle not based on Racism, but who is actually willing to join with the now far more accepting populace.

       Though it is true my favorite heroes are the oldest of their respective universes, and with them aging in real time I may have been denied them in their glory days, but as I said before, new heroes would have raised up to fill their shoes, so instead of Clark Kent and Steve Rogers, I may have gotten Christopher Kent and James Barnes.  Though these are bad examples because as I mentioned before, these characters actually don't age normally and may actually still be active today.  So better example, rather than Bruce Wayne and Tony Stark we would have Terry McGinnis and Anthony Stark Jr.

       Though the most annoying thing about this utter neglect of time has got to be technology and pop culture.  If you read a comic from the 90s there are no cell phones, no Facebook, no Obama.  Yet a comic from 2013 not only has all of these things, but technically they are still in the 1960s with them.

       I may be reading too much into all of this, so I will leave it to you the readers to decide for yourself if our heroes should remain ageless or not.  But I for one would love to see the Titans and Young Justice from my youth go on to become the Justice League, except Superboy, who cannot age.  Or how about the Avengers led by Steve Roger's grandchild.  Have something to say on this topic?  Feel free to leave a comment below.

Edtorial: Netflix orginal series

       This may come off as a bit rantish, but I've been watching the series that Netflix is doing.  Their model is to gather information as to what their subscribers are watching, then create a series using actors and directors that are popular and writing it in a way that resembles popular series.  In theory this is an awesome idea, but in practice it can be rather hit and miss.  Their first series, House of Cards, was great it used one of my favorite directors, actor, and was written as a political mystery.  Thus it comes out to be great.  However it did have its flaws as well.  I'm not a huge fan of the irredeemable hero, I find the lack of character development to be boring, this is especially disappointing when you take into account David Fincher is known for his character development.

       The newest series, Hemlock Grove, has filled me with mixed feelings.  The series does werewolves almost right, the mystery is intriguing, and the acting is good.  But the first episode is done by Eli Roth, who is a terrible director even by low horror movie standards.  The rest of the series has some writing problems as well, mostly dialogue issues, but some of the characters have personality changes at the drop of a hat that contradict things they usually do.  I haven't finished this series yet, but I am enjoying it.  Its nice to get away from the excessive vampires that plague the networks and put another supernatural creature in the spotlight.

        Now is where the ranting begins, why are these series so dark?  I do enjoy a dark story every now and again, but they're saying that with all that's on Netflix people are only watching the dark and mature series rather that the series that are so popular on television.  Hell Game of Thrones, my favorite series on television right now mixes in lighthearted humor that really makes the series great.  More importantly this means that a majority of Netflix subscribers are disturbed possible sociopaths.  There also seems to be an abundance of sex in these series, meaning again, that a majority of Netflix users watch shows that do the same.

       So here is me trying to reach out to the Netflix users of the world to band together and attempt to diversify Netflix original programming for the next show they do, perhaps a buddy cop show, or a sci-fi epic, or even a standard sitcom.  Basically something I can watched with children present, as I often do when I watch television.  Seriously, I'm running low on shows I can watch with my young relatives.

       I don't have a problem with adult content, in fact I welcome it every now and then, however the downfall of the movie channels has in my mind always been that the shows start to become a way to simply show boobs on screen and usually sacrifice good writing in the process.  What I'm trying to get at is that I don't want Netflix to fall down this path, and they should learn to mix things up before it becomes too late.

       Do you as my readers have any thoughts on the matter?  If so feel free to leave a comment below.

Editorial: Why An Abrams Star Wars Is A Bad Idea

       First and foremost, I am a huge Star Wars fan, when I was 5 the original trilogy were my favorite movies, and I'm ashamed to say that Episode 3 was my favorite of the series, but the rest of the prequels sucked.  So I was really excited when I learned their was a new trilogy on the way, and giving us the fabled Episodes 7-9 that were part of Lucas' original plan.  So even with that I feel a little uneasy about JJ Abrams directing the next Star Wars, and in this editorial I will convey why I feel this way.

       First Abrams is already in charge of a major science fiction series.  I understand that Star Wars and Star Trek are two entirely different franchises, but I feel a director should only be in charge of one major series at a time.  Call me old fashioned but I like to group the movie with the director, and I'm sure the maybe three people on Earth who don't know Star Wars and Star Trek are different franchises might get confused and lump them together.  Everything else on this list will tie in to this fact.

       Abrams has a very unique visual style.  That is to say he enjoys lens flare and and either very gritty of very clean, with not much middle ground.  Star wars on the other hand needs the middle ground, and the side ground, and any other ground for that matter.  What was unique with the original Star Wars trilogy was that the worlds were all unique and had a very different feel to them.  As for the  lens flare Abrams can't get away with them on many of the planets, for example the forests worlds such as Endor and Kyshyyk.  Or even on some ships, imagine if the Millennium Falcon had lens flare, it would lose all of its charm and would probably not be the legend it is today.

       Another problem I have with an Abrams directed Star Wars is that Abrams has a tendency to get bored, and it becomes obvious in his shows when he reaches this point, either that or he simply runs out of ideas, remember Fringe's last season, or Lost?  Since Star Wars Episode VII would be his 3rd science fiction epic, we're already racing the clock as it is.

How It Should Be

       After hearing all of that I want to tell you dear readers how I feel a Star Wars movie should be handled.  And for the record I won't say take it away from Disney, because lets face it Disney's track record is amazing.  They bought Marvel in 2011, and every movie, television show, and comic done since then is thanks to them, and it's not like they can screw up Star Wars more than the prequels did.  So with that in mind lets continue.

       Let's start off with a director shall we, I already made it clear I don't think Abrams is right, but then who is?  I feel no one director is a good idea for this project, what I mean by that is make it a collaborated project.  When the studio was first looking for a director all of the candidates had the same excuse, they were afraid of failing in this monumental task, even big names like Wheden and Snyder.  So this is an easy fix, use multiple directors all lending their signature to the film, bringing together Snyder's incredible visuals, Whedon's script  writing and humor, and even Tarentino's fight scenes.  True getting directors as big as these to work together may be difficult and expensive, but the fact that its Star Wars should make it easy to finance with fan support, actors actually wanting to be in it, and studios willing to fork over a massive budget in order to get the film made.  Of course the names I mentioned are simply examples, but I feel they are good examples.

       Take the focus off the original characters.  This may be the biggest selling point for Episode VII, the original cast is returning.  However I feel that the story of the Rebellion is over and its time for new heroes, especially since the original cast has gotten older.  This is not to say I don't want them, I do, but put them more in the background rather than center stage.

       Probably the most important thing a new Star Wars movie could do is simply have George Lucas around as a consultant.  I realize its his fault the prequels sucked, and Red Tails was also bad, but he did create the original trilogy back when he wasn't only interested in making money.  Therefore he does have an insight into how the characters should be, so why not listen.

       Well those are my thoughts on the matter.  However no matter how well made the new Star Wars ends up, it will be over hyped, this is the nerd Holy Grail after all.  But I am interested in hearing yor thoughts, feel free to leave a comment below.

Editorial: List month problem

I had intended to do a month of lists in March, but I was far busier than I originally thought I would be.  So I'm calling it off and I'll try again later.  Look forward to more reviews from me in the future, and the list I completed but have yet to post.

Editorial: Saving Superman

       Taking a break from the Halloween theme for the month I decided to write my first editorial article, where I rant about something that either annoys me, or I find interesting, in this case both. 

       Superman is one of my favorite superheroes, second only to Captain America.  Which is why it pains me so much that I haven't enjoyed his comic since the new 52 started.  Just to clarify, Action Comics can be good, but Superman's main series is horrible, its like the creative team over at DC sat around and thought, "How can we destroy Superman?" 

       First I would like to say the costume isn't the problem, Superman has changed his costume before (anyone remember the electric suits?  No, its for the best then).  The problem is that they decided to crap all over everything that made Superman, Superman.  First his marriage to Lois was removed, not only that, but now there is no relationship between them at all.  Jimmy is now his roommate, which actually could work, but all his relationships with regular people are that they are just there.  Every time I do read an issue of Superman, he seems to pull at least one new power out of nowhere, for example this month was a prelude to an event, so I picked it up, Superman can now use his super hearing to figure out the shape, size, and speed of an approaching danger.  He then combined his heat vision and super breath to gently transport people three miles away.  The sad part is all of this would work in an alternate universe, like Marvel's Ultimate series, but this is DC's main universe.

        Next they took away his job, but more than that the turned the Dailey Planet into a farce.  Clark's only job there is to cover Superman, if he tries to do any other story, he gets in trouble, if Superman is gone for a week, while he is on vacation, he gets in trouble.  And now he is an internet news blogger, so basically what I'm doing right now.  Lois is the head of the television department, and even has the balls to ignore Perry and text during a meeting, things Perry would never stand for.

       The writing style of this series is atrocious, its like it was written out of time, everything is narrated, which nobody has done in decades, so why reboot the series to make it more modern only to write it in a style of the 1950s.

       The biggest problem however is that every other Superman publication is good.  Smallville comes out once a week, and is the most traditional Superman series available, which is ironic considering the whole time it was on television fans complained.  The Earth One series is even better, but you only get one volume every few years, and in fact in that series he even has the red underwear.  Even other New 52 titles know how to get Superman right, he is the toughest hero around, and not even Batman has lasted more than a few seconds.  So why does the monthly Superman series suck so much?  My theory is that the reason Lex has yet to make his debut is because he is secretly the head of the creative team. 

       So how can he be redeemed?  The answer is simple, first reboot, something DC does every few years when they realize they need a clean slate.  Then get a team that knows Superman, or is known for working on stories that would work with Superman.  Next reverse all the changes made to his character, Martha made the suit, there is chemistry between he and Lois, and Jimmy is his friend.  Hell if DC doesn't want to reboot they could simply dive into the more personal side of Superman, and his relationships with those around him.  An interesting way they can do this is bring up the fact that Clark and Lex grew up together, and are friends, this could even be an interesting story arc in itself.  Though DC may have already considered some of this, because Scott Snyder and Jim Lee are now doing their own Superman title, combining DC's greatest writer and artist in one title, he's even getting  better suit.

       Though a lot of what is wrong with Superman today I feel can be blamed on the movies, I know they are the comic nerd Holy Grail, but think about it, only two of them are any good, and even those two are considered cheesy by today's standards.  Plus they are responsible for giving Superman some of his strangest powers, like time travel, or making copies of himself, or whatever the hell that "S" thing was in Superman II.  Then Superman Returns was released as a sequel to a film franchise the target audience never saw, and was boring.  But again I feel DC is fixing that and now Zack Snyder is making the reboot, and really he is one of the only directors that can make the large amount of CGI needed for Superman look good, and with Nolan's help this should become my new Dark Knight.

       While we're on the subject of Superman I want to bring attention to Volume 2 of Superman Earth One, my favorite Superman book of all time.  Volume two is to be released next week, so Halloween, and if the last one was any indication, it is set to be one of the better Superman titles available, just look at the cover art.