Old Japanese PC gaming Box Art

"I'm going to bust you up, Dragon!"

Not actually a Takarazuka Revue production

Today's whether is partly cloudy with a chance of sorcery

Big pointy double pauldrons is...a choice

This group of adventurers need a better armor smith

Death Cannot Die

Back in January of 2012, I mentioned in this very blog the possibility of HUNK making an appearance in Resident Evil 6.  Obviously that never happened, but just because it didn't happen in that game doesn't mean it won't happen in a future one.  Case-in-point, he has made appearances in the the RE2 remake and RE4 remake.  In the latter though it was only as part of the "Mercenary Mode" and thus non-canonical.  Even so, I like to reiterate a few things I wrote about him back then as well as mention a few new things I learned about this mysterious character since then.

Starting with something new to me, the code name "HUNK" is actually an acronym for "Human Unit Never Killed."  However, the character is usually mentioned in-fiction by his nickname, "Shinigami".  That's the Japanese version, which directly translated to English means "God of Death".  It's important to note that there is such a deity rooted in Japanese folklore and Buddhism, but in a classic case of Capcom doing poor translation/localization work the most accurate term in English would simply be "The Grim Reaper" or more colloquially "Mr. Death".  This actually has interesting implications when you consider his first appearance as the "4th survivor" of the Racoon City incident.  "Four" in Japanese being "Shi" which is also the root word for "death".  It's sort of like how the Fatal Frame series in Japan is called Project Zero since the word "zero" in Japanese is "Rei" which can also mean "ghost".  Anyway...what else do we know about this deuteragonist of sorts?

As it turns out, not much.  HUNK apparently trained on a private island owned by the Umbrella Corporation. There he was cited as being a highly capable individual who eventually earned his nickname due being the sole survivor of several missions.  I heard it suggested that HUNK may not actually be one individual, but an amalgamation of several people.  The few times we've seen his face it appears that he's a rather nondescript short-haired, clean-shaven Caucasian adult.  So, it's hard to say definitively one way or the other.  Personality-wise, he is very pragmatic and mission-focused.  He rarely speaks and when he does it's only ever about the task-at-hand.  Personally, I like to think that he might have been a chiropractor at one point since he's sometimes called "Dr. Death" rather than "Mr. Death".  At the very least he seems to know how to manipulate spines (or more specifically other people's necks).  Of course I don't have any real evidence to back that up, but I think HUNK's appeal comes from the fact that he is such an enigmatic character - you instinctively fill in the blanks with whatever seems like a good fit to you.  If nothing else, he's the only playable character in the mainline Resident Evil games that is dressed appropriately for the situation.

So, I have to wonder if Capcom will ever flesh out this character's backstory the way Disney did with Boba Fett?  It could be interesting.  Certainly there have been rumors of a game in the Resident Evil franchise centered around HUNK.  One wonders though if they will turn him into a villain or more of an anti-hero.  Either way, I look forward to playing as him again.  

War on the Moon

Begun, this cheese war has...

Nectaris (also known as Military Madness) is a long-running series of turn-based strategy games set on Earth's moon, Luna.  As you can probably guess it's sci-fi and also hex-based.  Gameplay is similar to Advanced Wars, but less cartoonish.  Nectaris first released on the TubroGrafx-16 way back in 1989.  Ten additional entries in the franchise eventually followed on platforms such as DOS, Windows, Game Boy, PSX, XBLA, PSN and smart phones.  It's interesting to note that the game never got a proper sequel, but rather revised ports that made small incremental improvements and iterations on the basic concept.  

The idea of fighting a conventional war on the moon presents some unique factors that could make for an intriguing strategy game.  For one thing, Luna's gravity is only 16.6 percent that of Earth's.  This means a M1 Abrams tank only weights about as much as a fully-loaded F-16 fighter jet.  Additionally, the diameter of the moon is only about a quarter that of Earth so the horizon is roughly twice as near assuming you are standing on a flat plain.  The lack of an atmosphere means providing adequate cooling/heating for vehicles is tricky and would almost certainly involve highly vulnerable radiators (A.K.A. glowing weak points).  Guided munitions would require some alterations to implement effectively as well though, oddly enough, more conventional weaponry like guns and rockets would work mostly the same.  Perhaps because of that last factor, Nectaris (despite being a game about Lunar warfare) has a fairly bog-standard lineup of combat units.  There are two types of armed moon buggy, two anti-aircraft vehicle configurations (flak and missile), three types of infantry (light, heavy, and motorbike), seven kinds of tank (running the gamut from light to heavy with the biggest able to engage flying targets), two types of unarmed transport (one flying and the other ground-based), three dedicated aircraft (fighter, bomber, and a hybrid of both) and two types of mobile artillery (rocket and gun).  Other than that the only other units are mines and fixed gun emplacements.  Mines are a bit out-of-the-ordinary in that they only serve to block enemy movement until cleared away by concentrated weapons fire. Tanks lack scoops on their treads which seems strange considering how silty Lunar soil is.  That's a minor quibble though compared to the aircraft which (aerodynamic appearance and all) look out of place to me.  Considering the aforementioned battlefield conditions, the line between moving on the ground and through the sky should be much blurrier.  There's no reason why infantry or even certain vehicles couldn't be outfitted with jump jets to hop or skip across the surface, though using them too liberally could entail certain risks such as being out of cover and more easily detected by radar.  On the plus side, popping up could provide units with better line-of-sight given the short horizon...not to mention a temporary height advantage. 

"Robbie" infantry in the foreground
engage "Bison" tanks in the background 

All the versions of the game have a main campaign that is divided up into 23 combat scenarios in the original, but expanded to 32 in the PSX update.  Newer versions also come with a editor that lets players make their own scenarios.  Objectives usually consist of wiping out all enemy units while capturing factories.  Like Advanced Wars, these buildings can only be taken over by infantry units, but (in a twist on convention) can only repair and provide storage for existing units rather than produce entirely new ones.  There are also sometimes prison camps which act like home bases in that they must be defended or captured.  Units can only engage foes in adjacent hexes, the exception being the missile-equipped anti-air unit and the two types of artillery which can hit farther out.  These long-range units come with the familiar caveat of they can only move or shoot, but not both in a single turn.  Unit experience along with terrain, flanking and supporting bonuses all apply to combat resolution whenever two units engage each other.  In particular, the PSX port of the game has the option to switch from the universal top-down tactical view to dynamic combat cutscenes rather than being limited to a fixed-camera split-screen isometric view found in other versions.  The moon, with it's high-contrast landscapes, has the potential to produce some impressive visuals under these sorts of circumstances.  Sadly, the explosions don't seem to account for low gravity conditions and for some reason every battle is oddly similar in terms of flat lighting.  There's also a surprising scarcity of craters...oh and there's sound on the moon which isn't right.  I wouldn't mind if they fudged it a bit though (watch the Lunar combat scene from the 2019 film "Ad Astra" for an example of how it could be done well). 

I know it seems like I'm being unfairly down on Nectaris, but it's because there are a lot of squandered opportunities that could have helped make it standout.  I think the lack of creativity and unwillingness to apply real science kept this IP from achieving much in the form of distinction from mechanically similar Japanese strategy games out at the time like Hybrid Front and the Daisenryaku series.  Hopefully, someone will come along and tackle the premise with a bit more gusto in the future.  As for the Nectaris IP, it's held by Konami so don't expect them to do much with it anytime soon.  

"Nectaris" is Latin for "Nectar", but the name comes from the
"Mare Nectaris" region of the moon in which the game takes place

Best Video Game Movie

Now that the new "Super Mario Bros. Movie" is in theaters, I think it's a good time to dredge up that age-old question, "what video game films are worth watching?"  There are a surprising number to choose from.  Off the top of my head I can think of adaptations of the following: Wing Commander, Resident Evil, Alone in the Dark, Silent Hill, Mortal Kombat, Street Fighter, Tomb Raider, House of the Dead, Hitman, Postal, Max Payne, Warcraft, Assassin's Creed, Sonic the Hedgehog and Doom.  Some are closer to the source material than others.  A few (mostly stuff Uwe Boll directed) have next to nothing to do with their respective video games outside of the name.  To me though none of these motion pictures are objectively very good examples of the medium and rather than trying to find the least worst of the bunch to recommend, I think it's better to look further afield.  Specifically, how about movies that aren't about a particular video game, but instead true to the spirit of playing video games?  Let me show you three examples that I think stand out from the rest.

"Edge of Tomorrow" was originally based on a Japanese novella (or "light novel" as they are called in Japan).  At the end of the science fiction war story featured in those pages, there is a brief disclaimer by the author in which he mentions how his inspiration for the book came from playing old and very hard 8-bit games as a child.  To summarize, he basically states that because he could essentially continue or restart indefinitely,  every enemy and boss in the game (no matter how challenging) was ultimately doomed to defeat because they must always follow the same patterns and present the same weak points.  It's certainly true, as long as the player is willing to refine their skills and learn from mistakes.  It's a viewpoint that is prominently featured in the film's tagline "Live. Die. Repeat."  Sometimes I look back on games I completed years ago such as Golden Eye on the N64 and wonder "how did I manage to unlock every last bit of content and clear every challenge?"  Well, it turns out practice, patience and basic muscle memory can take you a lot farther than you might think possible...and applying that principal to reality could very well net similar results.

"Scott Pilgrim vs. the World" actually did get a side scrolling "beat 'em up" adaptation after hitting the big screen.  So I suppose you could say it retroactively is a movie about an actual video game.  That technicality aside though, the film is really based on a series of graphic novels.  The story is about rock music and romance as much as it is about gaming, but at it's core the character of Scott Pilgrim is a boy who has been immersed in video game experiences for so many of his formative years he views life through the lens of video game mechanics.  Every rival is a boss to be defeated (who then bursts into coins), every successful action awards points along with chiming sound, when he says he's "getting a life" he grabs a spinning pixilated image of a 1UP out of the air.  It's all very referential (I think a theme from The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past plays at some point), but unlike "Ready Player One" the references aren't there simply to be nostalgic.  Instead, they serve as a way to communicate a particular feeling or idea to people who have played those games and had those experiences.

"The Last Starfighter" is an interesting case of wish fulfillment.  I'm sure some of us can remember times when a family member or acquaintance told us that playing games had no real-world benefit.  The question this film postulates and then explores is "what if it did?"  It's an odd mix of old meets new.  The author of the screenplay openly admits that he got the inspiration for the script based on Arthurian legends except instead of a sword-in-a-stone, it's an arcade game machine.  In a case of fiction meets reality, there was a prototype made of the "Starfighter" arcade cabinet which has since gone on to become the Holy Grail of arcade collectors everywhere.  For better or worse though winning the game doesn't get you "recruited by the Star League to defend the Frontier against Xur and the Ko-dan Armada."  However, reality marches ever on and with the rise of drone warfare in places like Ukraine, one wonders if there is a dark truth to the notion.  Gunstars aren't drones and drones aren't Gunstars...yet, but maybe someday the two will meet after a fashion.

There are more examples I can think of..."Ender's Game" the movie actually dovetails nicely with "The Last Starfighter" in some respects (the novel that predates the film actually features some truly surreal passages involving the titular main character playing a video game during his free time at Battle School), but I think that's enough for this blog entry.  Hopefully, my point about video game movies doing their best when not drawing from a specific IP has been made clear.  No offense to those who enjoyed seeing Mario on the big screen though... 

RE4R

El Residente Malvado 4!

If you were to ask me what my favorite genre is I'd probably say survival horror, but recently I've been feeling less confident about that.  Signalis, Callisto Protocol and to a lesser extent even the Dead Space remake all failed to garner my interest.  Thankfully, the remake of Resident Evil 4 has reinvigorated my fondness for these kinds of games and reminded me of why I like them.

Specifically, the thing that always draws me into the survival horror subgenre is the need to harbor resources while still trying to complete objectives.  In the RE4 remake, that aspect of game design is in full effect.  Even the most basic weapon at the player's disposal, the knife, has a finite amount of times it can be used before it breaks.  Everything requires resources whether it be ammo for guns, herbs for health, or pesetas for repairs and upgrades.  Carefully stockpiling those items for when they are needed most is very much front-and-center here.  Having stated that, the gameplay isn't all that different from the original.  

Some noteworthy changes have been made to level layouts and, by extension, encounters.  In particular, there are some fun side missions that the player can engage in at their discretion.  Enemy types are largely unchanged.  Boss encounters, on the other hand, have been improved significantly.  A few things have been cut, such as the gondola ride, one minor out-of-left-field mini-boss battle, and the QTEs.  Overall, the changes represent welcome improvements over the original, but where the remake really shines is in terms of story.

While seen here as a mod for the RE2 remake, I kind of like Ada's tactical outfit
 more than the iconic red dresses she is known for wearing

Pretty much all the characters in the RE4 remake are fleshed out in greater detail by giving them more of and arc or backstory.  In particular, Luis and Krauser are much better in this new interpretation of the "Las Plagas" incident.  Sadly, one character is only marginally better.  While it's certainly a good call to have an Asian voice actress playing the role of Ada Wong this time around, the performance just feels off to me. Maybe I'm wrong here, but I always saw Ada as one of those classic "femme fatale" characters from pulp action stories and spy thrillers.  The problem is that archetype feels kind of antiquated now days.  I'm just guessing here, but the writers on the RE4 remake might not have known what to do with her in terms of updating the character which could have been the reason why we ended up with a somewhat lackluster performance.

How the heck did that wrench ended up in there?

Generally speaking, the moment-to-moment gameplay is extremely polished thanks to some well refined mechanics.  Which difficulty setting to choose when first starting the game though is a bit harder to pin down.  Just to illustrate my point, the first boss battle of the game ("Del Lago") is actually the most fun to fight on hardcore mode, but overall the balancing for the RE4 remake is kind of weird. Standard mode is pretty brutal unless your bringing upgraded gear from a previous playthrough.  Even then, I think some enemy types are a bit too hyperactive at times. It's pretty dang hard to line up the precise thermal scope shots required to take down "Regeneradores" on anything other than the easiest difficulty setting because they're so squirmy...at least if you are using a controller (and I say that as someone who got "S" ranks on all the shooting range challenges). Enemies, in general, are so aggressive and bullet resistant on Hardcore and up it's actually a better strategy to not use the environment much.  Just take a quick potshot at one foe before making a hasty retreat.  Then let the lot of them pile into a prearranged killing zone wherein you can chew your pursuers up all at once using shotgun blasts, piercing firearm shots and a liberal amount of explosives.  Hence, one could say easier settings allow the player to utilize the combat arenas in fun ways while harder settings force the player to rely on duller, but safer strategies.  Additionally, once you get the rocket launcher nimble but weak enemies (like infected dogs and oversized bugs) become the hardest to deal with in the game.  Meanwhile, big monsters and bosses are a complete cakewalk.  Granted, a lot of what I just pointed out might be intentionally designed that way for reasons I fail to fully understand.

I think a good way to wrap up this mini-review is with the question "what's next?"  I'm not talking about DLC for the remake of RE4, but rather which game the team is going to tackle next.  Resident Evil 5 would be the natural progression while Resident Evil: Code Veronica is the next biggest old game in the franchise that would benefit the most from the remake treatment.  The thing is though both of those games were conceptually not very good and as such might not be worth the effort.  Personally, I prefer the third-person perspective Resident Evil games over the first-person ones, so I hope that Capcom keeps making new games along the lines of the RE2, RE3 and RE4 remakes.  Maybe it's time for an original story?  Who knows...only time will tell.