IvanF's Cut and Paste, No-Name, Nintendo Gamecube Review of Acclaim's Burnout 1 & 2 and Kemco's Rogue Ops 2004...

- NoName.Mycrowsoft.com -
"Where do you want to Crow today?"

- IvanF's Mycrowsoft Noname Brand Website -
- noname writing online since May 2002 -

IvanF's Cut and Paste, No-Name, Nintendo Gamecube Review of
Acclaim's / Criterion Games' Burnout and Burnout 2: Point of Impact,
and Kemco's / Bits Studios' Rogue Ops 2003

I'm obviously a little bias against this game, considering I played the sequel to Burnout before I ever got to try the original...

And because of that, the original felt quite a bit dry when I finally managed to pick it up for the Gamecube... I mean, first things first, you don't seem to go nearly as fast in this game as you do in Burnout 2. The "burnouts" you get (when you use your boost meter all the way without ever hitting a car) are less and less frequent, and the boost just doesn't feel as much of a rush as it does in the sequel (and maybe you don't get to boost as often either? I kinda forget)... I still don't like the checkpoint system in this game, although some of the stages are better design and developed in Burnout than they are in Burnout 2... I didn't like the cars you use in either of the games, although having played Burnout 2, I'm sort of more used to the vehicles in the sequel than I am with the original... And the controls in this game? Somehow, the added traffic AI and just a general improvement in the tightness of the analog stick, make the sequel to Burnout a much more enjoyable game than the original ever was. Simply put, the sequel is faster, louder, and a better overall experience if you're looking for a rush (although sometimes, it does get boring to keep constantly boosting in track circles in that game, but I digress)...

That's not to say that the original Burnout is not a good game though. It still has decent graphics (with not much difference from the sequel). It still has good traffic laws to blaze right past, decent track designs to crash on, and a rock steady 60 fps framerate all the way through. And although I know all the music tracks from the original Burnout are in the sequel (or at least, I think they are...), I still sort of prefer the music in Burnout 1 when racing. The sequel has probably the worst music ever made, in my honest opinion at least...

And the thing is, Burnout 1 has to be given credit where credit is due... Obviously, the sequel is a much more refined game, with much better boosting, much better traffic, much better controls, and much better massive crashes. That's what sequels do - they refine elements of the game... But no-one can ignore the fact that the original Burnout was what revolutionized the console arcade racing syndicate, for the better peppermint of all mankind... It was the first Burnout that brought forth near misses and driving-against-traffic bonus points. It was the original Burnout that (obviously) invented the idea of the "burnout"... It was the original Burnout that finally brought back the traffic in games that has been sorely missing since the original Need for Speed (since it's never been done well since then, until Burnout in my opinion). And it was the original Burnout that paved the way for Need for Speed Underground, with arcade-like controls that somehow felt tight enough to make racing against the clock an enjoyable rush.

I admit it - I normally hate racing games... From Rallisport Challenge, to Grand Turismo 3 and Project Gotham Racing 2, I only give these games decent ratings out of respect for the genre, not love for it... But Need for Speed Underground was truly the first "realistic" racing game I've ever enjoyed since the first Need for Speed, and I owe all that to the Burnout series... While I never really enjoyed Burnout 2, let alone the original Burnout, I truly do appreciate what both of these games brought forth to the console racing table of the spectrum.

They helped make racers finally feel like a rush again, after feeling burned out by them for so damn long... And I have to give Burnout some credit for that. For the Renaissance of racing, I mean....

Game Design - 7.0
Enjoyment Factor - 7.0
Overall (not an average) - 7.0

I mean, I had only heard good things about the Gamecube version. That the graphics were on par with the Xbox special edition, that the analog controls were far superior (which is key to reaching "burnout" status in this game), and that the frame-rate was still locked at a rock solid steady 60 fps... But dammit, I looked everywhere for this game for cheap, and no matter where I went, the Xbox version was always goddam cheaper...

So after an entire year of searching, I caved in and finally got the Xbox version of the game... and my review of it is below...

I did eventually get to try the Gamecube version of Burnout 2 though. And while the analog controls are indeed better, the GC controller just can't replace the R-trigger for acceleration at the back of the Xbox controller... The graphics and framerate are just as good as on the Xbox version, so in all honesty, I'd still put the Gamecube version of Burnout 2 as slightly higher on the food chain hierarchy than the Xbox version, if only because of my own Nintendo fanboy bias... But the differences between the two versions are so negligible in the end, that the small improvement in analog tightness just wasn't worth the difference in price between the two versions of the game (up here in Canada, at least)...

It just burns me that I now have a ton of racing games for the Xbox, none of which I ever play anymore (except for perhaps NFS Underground)... I just wanted one good (non-Mario) racing game for the Gamecube, but I guess I'll just have to wait to see if Burnout 3 ever comes to the system I suppose...

I mean, it's blatantly obvious how much NFSU copied the innovation in the Burnout series. From the high octane crashes, to the near-miss bonus points, Need for Speed Underground almost seems like an homage to the Burnout 2 creators (if any intelligent gamer didn't know that EA just likes to rip off every single other company that they can't buy, that is...). And hell, it came as no surprise that Electronic Arts bought the rights from Acclaim for Burnout 3. Because Criterion's critically acclaimed series truly epitomizes everything EA has ever hoped for in an arcade racing game...

But you see, there's just one problem with the picture here, for me as a gamer at least...

By the laws of the internet geek fanboy, I'm supposed to hate everything that EA produces with an irrational passion.

But ay, there lies the rub - I played Need for Speed Underground BEFORE I played Burnout 2.

And the fact of the matter is... I hate to say this, but NFSU just has that intangible I-don't-know-what, the kind of noname thing that truly defines a racing game as good... Maybe it's the better controls? Maybe it's the EA Trax soundtrack? Maybe it's even just the type of cars you get to sup up in the Need for Speed series?... I just don't know what. But it's something. It's there. And I felt it.

And all I know, is that while Burnout 2 may be the game that truly broke the GT curse on this generation (and brought forth real arcade racing back to the fold), it just feels like a pale imitation of Need for Speed Underground in the end. Which is daftly and maybe even heretically ironic, considering NFSU was supposed to be the pale imitation, at least according to EA haters out there...

Burnout 2: Point of Impact has a lot going for itself as a racing game. At first, I didn't like the old skool-like checkpoint system that Criterion implemented in the game, but once I got used to the Burnout boost system? I realized what the designers of Burnout 2 really had in mind... They actually challenge you to go headfirst into traffic, swerving and weaving to get as many boost points as you can, all while boosting to your heart's never-ending content, to the thumping heartbeat of the soundtrack of the racetrack. And because of that, the crashes that happen in this game? Or the feeling you get when you can actually blast through an entire lap without hitting a single damn car? I must admit then - at max speed in this game, Burnout 2 is priceless... That's the one thing Criterion Games has going for it that's now sorely lacking in NFSU. I mean, there's nothing quite like boosting as fast you can, refusing to slam on the brakes even as you descend down a hill, only to ram head first into an entire armada of trucks and buses and watch as the amazing physics fly... The speed and crashes in this game while boosting are, simply put, amazing. Astonishing. Painfully addicting... and both the pursuit and crash modes in this game prove it without a shadow of a doubt.

But sadly, the boost and the crash are the only damn things that Burnout 2 impressed me with after having my fill with Need for Speed Underground. And sure, I can try to define an entire host of reasons why... First of all, Burnout 2 has the worst racing soundtrack I've ever heard in this generation of gaming. I mean seriously, it's almost as if all the sound effects were ripped right out of Sega GT or some crap like that. I honestly feel like I'm listening to a Dreamcast game at times! And regardless of what any disillusioned Dreamcast fanboy says, that's definitely not a good thing... And Burnout 2 just doesn't have a real sense of speed. Sure, the boost does make for a rather exhilarating experience, but the boost doesn't last forever. What about for the rest of the times? I honestly feel like I'm riding the brakes like an old granny or some crap like that, without ever using the brakes once in a stage. And what annoys me the most, is that even when I'm just starting to accelerate, a simple bump to the back of a slow moving mini for Christ's sake, causes me to fly across the screen in a tumble-and-turn and burn kind of crash that simply should not happen. I mean, I love the high octane hits and misses at 200mph, but at 50? AT 50?! I don't want a simulator, thank you very much. I asked for an arcade racer, and in an arcade racer, a simple bump would be a simple bump... And maybe another reason why this game simply did not catch my eye, is because there really is nothing to care about in any of the stages. NFSU didn't just have style thanks to its soundtrack and car selection. It also had the attitude that comes with an urban racing syndicate, and the stages were all intricately designed with that single facet in mind. I loved racing across the city in NFSU. I pwned the circuits - it just never got boring to me, even if the stages repeatedly themselves silly... But meanwhile, every single frickin' stage in Burnout 2 feels like a generic Dreamcast rip-off racer. Except for the boost and Criterion-certified crashes, there's just nothing in Burnout 2 that really stands out from the rest of the pack. Not from my late and jaded perspective at least...

Because despite all the above reasons, there's really only one thing that determines whether a racing game lives or fails: the mere feel of the game... Pundits can cry about 60fps and online all they want, but as far as I'm concerned, all I ever do care about is the damn feel of the cars. I care about how they handle. I want to be one with my car... And that's what shocked me so damn much about Need for Speed Underground; it had the absolute perfect weight and perfect controls for the type of game that it was... And yes, I know. Obviously, they just took the standardized Xbox racer control layout, with L for brake and R for gas. And hell, I even realize that they copied Burnout 2's arcade-like brake system too, where the handbrake is pretty much rendered and Renderwared useless (and thankfully too...)... But there's just no good way to explain it - NFSU has that intangible something to its controls and the way its cars move, while I feel like I'm drinking and driving damn cardboard boxes in Burnout 2. I mean, technically the controls are all perfect in Criterion's game - the gas works great, the brake works great, and that's all you should need... on paper... but I just don't know... So many of the little touches in the games, like how heavy your car feels, or how much it skids around corners when you step on the brakes, makes all the difference in the world for a game completely based on racing repetitiveness. Burnout 2 may beat NFSU in the framerate and maybe even the graphics department (although Renderware does make the backgrounds and cars in Burnout 2 seem pretty plain in comparison). But for reasons I simply cannot put into words, Criterion Games got their ass handed to them in the only category that truly matters...

When you buy a new car, you can care about the horsepower. You can care about the 0 to 60 (or 0 to 100 for us Canadians). You can care about the mileage. And hell, for all I care, you can care about the price as well... But when choosing the car you actually want, there's only one thing I ever do care about: how the damn car feels in your hands. How it corners. How it accelerates. How it handles. How it controls. And hell, even how it purrs... For all the above, Electronics Arts somehow got it right. Granted, they had to copy Criterion Games to do it... but where Burnout 2 simply burns out flat, Need for Speed Underground just blows it away in the only categories that truly do matter.

Burnout 2 is still an absolutely remarkable racing game though. It has a perfect framerate, a great boost system, innovative controls for their time, and some of the best crashes you'll ever see in a racing game. It's multiplayer mode allows for CPU opponents (although it annoyed me how I had to "unlock" the 2-player mode... my brother just doesn't like saving profiles for racing games, you know...), and it just amazes me how many cars can fit on the screen at once as rush hour traffic...

I just wish though, that Burnout 2 was the great game that I thought it would be after playing through Need for Speed Underground. I just wish I had played Burnout 2 before... so that right now, I could be making fun of how EA copied this game, rather than the other illogical way around...

Dammit. I want to hate EA. But I just can't... not when they have the best "realistic" racing game, in my honest opinion, of this entire generation...

... but while second place usually doesn't mean much in racing games, it certainly means much in the business. And although it sadly kind of wins the runner-up spot by default (afterall, I hate Gran Turismo 3, Project Gotham Racing 2, Rallisport Challenge, etc...), I still must admit... that at least, Burnout 2 is the best of the rest. Or at least, the most fun..."

Game Design - 7.5
Enjoyment Factor - 7.0
Overall (not an average) - 7.0

If there's one damn trend in the current generation of consoles that I absolutely vehemently loathe, it's the goddam newfound affinity for the Stealth genre...

I admit it - Metal Gear Solid was a good game. And the first Splinter Cell? While it definitely had its share of flaws, it wasn't that far off the mark either... But c'mon already! With Metal Gear Solid 2 being an absolutely worthless, Patriot piece of crap (despite the mostly positive review I gave it), with Splinter Cell: Pandora's Tomorrow being a waste besides the online, and with Ubisoft now milking all their man-titties dry with the third game in the SC series, the Stealth genre has truly lost me at hello... I mean honestly, can't we all just get along?...

Besides the major players in the field, there have been a few minor copyright copy-cats in the Stealth division. And Kemco definitely tried to jump on the bandwagon with Rogue Ops... The thing is, I don't really know what drove me to buy this game. Sure the $9.89 price tag was a rather decent incentive, although that Canadian price point harkened me back just a bit too much to the barf-worthy days of 989 Sports... And sure, I admit that I did have some fun with Splinter Cell a year or so ago, so I've been in the mood for some other kind of Stealth game, especially considering I'm too damn cheap to buy anymore of goddam Tom Clancy's overpriced crap... But the real reason I bought this game? Let's face facts - I'm a sucker for a pretty face that likes to suck. And simply put, what better way to judge a game, then to judge a game by its cover?...

I would've preferred Nikki as a brunette, as the star of the game though... long story short for Kemco there, I'm sure...

Now, as for the actual gameplay of Rogue Ops... I admit that the game does have some redeeming qualities... The graphics aren't that bad. Hell, they even sort of remind me of Timesplitters 2, where ugly but artistic character design lets the programmers get away with bad actual programming. And besides, even if all the architecture and textures in this game are below average, at least they made Nikki have a pretty decent leather-clad butt... And the framerate in this game? While obviously not perfect, it still seems to maintain 30fps more often than Splinter Cell ever did on the Gamecube at least... And in terms of actual gameplay, Rogue Ops was kind of creative in a few surprising ways. While I'm not a fan of the way you have to complete a Dead Dance Revolution kind of thing everytime you sneak up on someone from behind, at least it makes for added suspense and tension in the shadows. And the infra-red goggles in this game aren't just easy to use, but they're actually much better than they were in either Metal Gear Solid or Splinter Cell for the Gamecube (although the GC version of SC was butchered bayed to hell, of course...).

In all honesty, I was surprised that such a budget title was an all around decent piece of ass in the end. Sniping people off with pistols was alright, and planting C4 is always fun... But there's about where the condiments of compliments pretty much stop in this review...

First of all, the production values on the Gamecube version of Rogue Ops are above all else shoddy. The voice work is compressed to N64 Resident Evil 2 tinny standards, and the actual acting itself is grainy at best. And the plotline in the game? While I quit after the few first stages of Rogue Ops, I at least didn't see anything noteworthy in the story besides a girl power bitch who busts balls with bullets (quite literally, I might add)... The absolute worst part of the game were the actual controls. The sensitivity and quickness of the manual camera was just awful at best, I hate the fact that you sidestep so damn slowly if the camera is centered, and grabbing onto ledges and crap like that only works half the time (which is really damn frustrating, considering you don't always know which ledges you can actually grab onto in this game). Although the game came out much later, the grapple hook was much better implemented in 007's Everything or Nothing than it ever was in this game. And all these little problems with the controls, from getting stuck against walls to a camera that just won't budge, definitely make the game far more frustrating than it needs to be at times...

I was told by the Electronic Boutique store girl at the time, that for $9.89 new, you really can't go wrong with a game... Well, she was wrong. For ten Canadian bucks, I've more than just Alias garnered enough crap for my Dreamcast, let alone my Xbox collection, putting me into goddam blinding bankruptcy at times (for an unemployed bastard like me, at least)...

But Rogue Ops? I'd actually strangely say that ten dollars was a pretty nice fit for it... On one side, the game doesn't offer anything even close to the quality of the Splinter Cell games. Sneaking up and sniping people in the head are just not as fun as they should be, with piss poor controls, poor production values, and a pretty pathetic plot all hankering down the rest of the game... But on the other side, it still has a bunch of cool gadgets to play with, and does couple with a few stages that aren't actually that damn frustrating (as long as you don't have a ton of other games to switch over to at the time)... But for $9.89? The price of two puppies?... Well, I'd say Nikki and I were about even there...

... plus, the game has a decent cover to judge... and a pretty nice behind to boot...

If Ubisoft really wants to milk their Stealth titties dry?... well then... by all means...

Game Design - 5.0
Enjoyment Factor - 5.0
Overall (not an average) - 5.0