The Bouncer -
March 20, 2001 - Chris Jones
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed
within this column are those of the participants and the
moderator, and do not necessarily reflect those of the
GIA. There is coarse language and potentially offensive
material afoot.
Ok, yes, it's a boring title, unless you read it in your head as being
said by that guy at the title screen: "The Bouncer!"
Don't say we didn't warn you.
In one week (and one day, depending if it actually shows up when it's
supposed to) we get to play ZOE and the MGS2 demo.
I don't think there's anything more I can add to that statement.
Incidentally, full Bouncer spoilers are possible from here on out. I mean it.
Onward.
| Entertaining
and frustrating, in one convenient package! |
| Okay, I managed to squeeze in a couple of playthroughs of the Bouncer in
between endings for Shadow of Destiny.
The Bouncer is categorically the most entertaining/frustrating game I have
played in the last 5 years. The fighting is nice, the graphics are awesome,
and I'm a sucker for any game with Dolby Digital 5.1 support....but there
were three glaring flaws:
1. The loading text that says...oops. I blinked. Its gone.
2. Fighting a boss two or more times in a row without being able to recover
in any manner strikes me as a crime against videogames. Even Final Fight
has a provision for this (extra lives, continues).
3. As you "may" find out after your second playthrough (or reading a
magazine review), maxing out characters one at a time is the quick road to
frustration. Either split up the duties between characters, or hope for a
miracle when you fight the last boss for the third time in a row.
I learned lesson number 3 only after many painful hours of fighting that
battle over again. Finally giving up, I took the easy road and restarted
from scratch, with nary an improved character to be found. Finding the
Philosopher's Stone must be easier than fighting Dauragon again.
KZ |
What The Bouncer boils down to for me is one giant, shiny tech demo. The graphics are beautiful, and while it's easy to dismiss graphics as being secondary to the gameplay and story, once you realize that this is what FFX will look like, if we're lucky, you will want to kiss the nearest Square employee full on the lips for developing on the PS2. This game has more nifty graphical tricks in any one FMV than all of FF8 or 9 combined, and even though I often didn't care what was actually happening to the characters, I always enjoyed watching it happen.
At the same time, it's unquestionably an unfinished product. As a fighting game, it's far, far worse than River City Ransom - as far as actual gameplay is concerned, it's anemic to say the least. I don't need pressure sensitive combos (analog buttons, aside from the Dreamcast's triggers, don't seem to amount to much) but I would love to have a straightforward jump kick. Or the ability to use weapons. Or interesting terrain to fight on. Or multi-character, free flowing battles, instead of a long chain of one-on-one fights.
And then we've got the difficulties KZ points out, which suggest to me that this game simply wasn't given enough development time. Stick it back in the oven for half a year, add more features to the existing core, and play test the hell out of it, and you'll have something really special - but as for now, all you've got is a not-even ambitious failure with some great highlights.
| You sure you're not
thinking of River City Ransom? |
| Good day Mr. Jones...
Ah, The Bouncer...one word comes to mind...underwhelming. Now, am I the
only one that was expecting the next generation of Streets of Rage? I was
sorely mistaken. I was expecting a good old school ass whupping, thug
throwing, lead pipe beating, punch garbage cans and get hamburgers to
restore your health good time. But what did I get? A bunch of FF8 clones
and some crackpot story line that I could care less about. I mean, how
many of you out there found you spent more time pounding the "skip story"
option than the faces of the enemy? I found it hard to get into the game
when the stages consist of two fights and then the scene shifts. I mean,
I love Square, and own the vast majority of their games....but this was a
huge let down. They've ventured into other genres besides RPGS before,
ranging from the good (Einhander) to the....well, terrible (Ergheiz). But
this is one time I wish they'd have stuck with what they're known for.
Maybe I'm in the minority, I dunno...
Dragonmastergill |
Although I have no documented proof for thinking Square works this way, I do think it's the case that Square often makes games that are little more than practice runs for techniques that show up in latter, better games. Parasite Eve's a prime example of this - the more realistic graphics and character movement showed up in spades in FF8. Brave Fencer Musashi and FFT play like less evolved versions of Dewprism and FM3 as well. I do think it's the case that Driving Emotion and The Bouncer were designed as more or less throw away games while Square got a handle on the PS2 hardware, which should mean good things for FFX... but on the other hand, it also gives Square further to fall if FFX is less than spectacular. They've had two strikes already, and they'll be out on the third one.
| We're still wrestling
with the prototypes |
| As I'm absolutely positive that you'll be receiving tons of letters pouting
about how awful The Bouncer is, and just as many praising it for all of it's
glory, I thought I'd write a letter that is neither here or there.
It's funny that the first and second Square releases on the PS2 have been a
racing game and Tobal.., uhm, I mean The Bouncer. Square has stated, like
so many other money minded companies, that only big name games sell. Yet,
their first 2 games released on what was one of the most hyped machines ever
were a complete departure for the company.
First off, The Bouncer has amazing graphics. I'm not talking about the
FMVs, I'm not even talking about the real time cut scenes. I'm talking
about how well crafted the models in the game are. The artistic talent to
create such detailed and proportional characters is practically unmatched,
except by Namco.
The story is completely unoriginal and often times, extremely cheesy. That
said, I enjoyed it. If you like Ghost in the Shell, or Battle Angel, then
The Bouncer definitely has some charm. I think Han Solo makes a few
appearances using Kou as a body double, but Kou is likable because of
that.
I'll skip passed how awful the loading is and how stupid it was of Dream
Factory not to include a load option when you die so that you have to load
the intro, then the title screen, then the options and head straight for the
game play.
Tobal + Tobal 2 = The Bouncer. Some of the animations used in Tobal have
been re-used on some of the characters. Thankfully, Dream Factory has
allowed you to SAVE your character stats, which is one of the reasons I'm
still playing The Bouncer.
Overall, The Bouncer hasn't really left a big impression on me as a game
play experience. It was neither as innovative as it could've been, nor as
interactive as it should've been. This game has really only made an
impression on me with the wondrous models crafted by the wizards at
Square/Dream Factory.
The Bouncer gives a brief glimpse of what we can expect from FFX in terms of
cut scenes and graphic quality, my appetite is definitely growing. While I
enjoyed 'playing the action movie, ' for the price I paid for The Bouncer, I
think I'd rather WATCH an action movie, it's much cheaper.
Graeme |
Ah yes, now we get to The Bouncer's story. Someone once told me that the number one reason they hate Hollywood is because such great tools and techniques get wasted on stories that first graders would consider childish. The same thing almost always holds true for video games, with The Bouncer being an obvious exception. Did it bother any of the production staff that all these people with links back to the obligatory Big Evil Corporation just happen to hang out at the same bar? Nope. Or that three heavy duty bouncers are three too many for a nearly empty bar? Nope. Or that there's enough backstory here for a 5 or 10 hour movie, all of which is only vaguely touched on, which makes it worse than if it had never been mentioned at all? Nope, of course not. The gameplay and length problems could have been overlooked if the story had been worthwhile, but alas, 'twas not to be. Which is my big sore point about the game, no question.
| Buy... er, I mean rent |
| Dear Chris,
You just said:
"Yep, tomorrow's topic is The Bouncer, and if you haven't played it yet,
don't complain to me - just go out and buy it, you'll have it finished by tomorrow
afternoon, promise. See you then."
You're telling me to go out there and purchase The Bouncer? Gadzooks!
-Fares
|
Yeesh... I did say that, didn't I? Never mind.
| Return of the gray gunk |
| Jesus Chris,
Yesterday you commented upon stories that lack a clear moral compass,
where characters act to look out for their own interests rather than the
greater good. You said this leads to "morally uninteresting gray gunk."
I guess we do see things differently. For me, this is exactly the kind
of storytelling games desperately need to revitalize them, because it
forces the player to make choices about what they think and feel. The
Ogre Battle series is famous for this, along with its spiritual siblings,
FFTactics and Vagrant Story. Disregarding the wealth of main plotline
examples of this "moral grayness" found in these games, I'd like to draw
attention to a line uttered by an inconsequential enemy group leader, in
a filler battle of Tactics Ogre, as he dies. He says "If I had only
gotten the reward money for killing you, I could have saved my daughter."
This has nothing to do with the plot, and the daughter is never
mentioned again, but it makes the player think. Killing him allowed me
to further my goals, but what about this man's child? She'll now suffer
because of me. I didn't just kill some anonymous servant of evil, I
killed a man who loved his daughter enough to risk his life for her. For
me, this is the kind of thing that makes a game like Tactics Ogre
memorable, and a game like Final Fantasy IX feel like so much pretty
fluff. From a fantasy book standpoint, this is why Jordan's Wheel of
Time is much less interesting to me than George RR Martin's Song of Ice
and Fire, a series that has been criticized by some for the same kind of
"moral greyness." What is uninteresting to me is a story that uses black
and white moral truths to keep all the characters in comfortable good and
evil roles. I enjoy the escapism aspect of games and the fantasy genre
greatly, but just because I want to escape reality doesn't mean I want to
escape the concept of emotion as well.
Van Veen |
I really should have qualified my remarks better yesterday. Everybody and their dog seemed to want to tell me that game X was just the kind of game that I was talking about, even when it really wasn't. FFT and Vagrant Story are prime examples of this - both have pseudo-bad guys with complex motivations, but the main focus is on the ultimate darkness that threatens to destroy the world, and there's little doubt that the hero is the good guy... if perhaps a bit ruthless, in Ashley Riot's case. I'm not trying to say either of these games is uninteresting, far from it, but neither one was really what I was talking about
When I said such stuff descends into grayness, I was really talking about genres that have been doing it for years - detective fiction, for example. If the "bad guy" is merely after justice that the law can't provide, and the "good guy" is in the grip of corrupt higher offices, and isn't really that interesting in and of himself, then why do I really care about their conflict? Whoever wins, at some level, everyone loses. But again, that's only when all you ever see are those kind of stories - a straight on conflict, when it's put together in the middle of the "pretty fluff" you talk about above, is incredibly refreshing, and Tactics Ogre's a prime example of this. It's all about variety - just black and white is boring, just gray is worse. But if you've got a full spectrum of stories being told, then you're doing ok.
And that's my last heavy-handed metaphor for today, promise.
| ...and the geezers
shall show the way |
| This is a week late, but I wanted to be heard.
One of the topics a few days ago was the future RPG makers. I wanted to point
out that in the April 2001 issue of OPM, Hiromichi Tanaka (producer/game
designer of FF Legend 2, Secret of Mana, SD3, Xenogears, and Chrono Cross)
mentions his crew for Chrono Cross had the highest median age of any
development crew at Square.
Chrono Cross was one of the most brilliant, innovative, refreshing RPGs ever
made, and it was crafted by 60 somethings.
Give old people a break, eh? Or maybe just RPG god Tanaka-san.
Ian Q. |
Hey, I've got no problem with old people in gaming... although I will say that if your statement is true, it might explain a lot of what I felt about CC: beautifully produced, well designed, very interesting... but somewhat empty, lacking the creative spark that turns an excellent game into a truly great one. I admit this is a statement of pure opinion, but Matsuno's games have made me feel like I was seeing the work of someone who really wanted to shake up the gaming world, and that drew me way, way inside the game. Chrono Cross, while every bit as good as you say it was, didn't do the same thing, and that may just be because the designers were a bit too complacent.
Yep, gonna get plenty of flames about that one...
| Attack of the Insane
Post Script |
| You, the guy who sang for The Monkees,
I saw the commercial for the bouncer last night, and I can honestly say
that I'm so damn sick of Square pandering to my age group. I hate my age
group. When you cater to a pre-existing standard, you're really not giving
anyone what they want. Now, I know nothing about the Bouncer besides what
the main characters look like, but this is more of a commentary about
Square's protagonists. Is anyone else sick of playing as characters who
look like they belong in they next up and coming boy band? Does anyone else
want to play as a 60 something fat balding guy? Hell, give him a bazooka,
he'll be fun to control, I don't care, but the next character that I "role
play" as better not be someone that cock-blocked me at a frat party I never
bothered to go to.
War and Strife,
-Sickpigman
P.S. FFX. 3 character parties. What gives? That was the one thing all of
us agreed on, we need AT LEAST 4 characters in our little adventurer's
group. The PS2 can render 50,000 anthropomorphic cubist paintings running
down a disco lit hockey arena, so there's no excuse for such a low
character limit. Director's freedom? These people just need to feel our
discipline. They think they can do whatever they want and we'll buy it, but
we just have to take a stand. We can stand together though against this 3
character dictatorship though. Look at what we did to Axl Rose. No one
cares about him anymore, no one wants to buy his album, we showed them that
we care about those little shiny plastic discs that our players eat before
they destroy our eyes and ears. Those players want quality. Those players
want 6 character parties. And don't go on about your "I liked FFVIII, I
trust Sakaguchi" mumbo jumbo, because you saw what happened last time. They
bombed pearl harbor. Where's trust got you now, Mr Jones? That's Davy
Jones, and you're your own locker. And my PS is longer than my actual
letter. That's cause I'm an American, born free. Take that, Sakaguchi. Give
me 5 players again! And make one of them Rydia. Then I'll die happy, in
Chris Jones' locker, or maybe on top of his toilet. |
I'm not actually going to attempt to answer this one, I just want to stand back and marvel at its strangeness.
Wow.
| Ending on a high note |
| Big, bad, agent man,
I rented The Bouncer this past week, and I thought it was surprisingly
good. First off, the game isn't as short as every one has been saying. All
those claims of "You can easily beat it an an hour and a half your first
time through" that pretty much every person online have been making are
completely untrue. Sure, the game clock when I beat it was about 1:45
minutes, that's hardly representative of the time it took me to finish. It
really took me just shy of four hours. Even my fourth time through the game,
when I was playing through with built up characters, it took almost two
hours. The only way you could possibly beat it in an hour and a half your
first time through would be to skip all the cutscenes (and even then it'd be
very hard) and why would you want to do that when you haven't seen them
before?
I just find it very hypocritical when every one bashes The Bouncer for
being short while Onimusha, which according to the GIA takes 4-5 hours to
beat, have their short length mentioned only in passing. Supposedly Onimusha
is immune because it has an extra dungeon and the second time through you
can play in a panda suit. A panda suit!
C'mon. The Bouncer is fun to play through at least three times, because
you can see more of the story each time as you play from three different
perspectives. It evens has the equivalent to Onimusha's extra dungeon with a
survival mode. Plus there is a multiplayer mode.
-BadMonkey |
Everything you say is true, but it's probably worth noting that you only rented it, and thus probably don't feel the same sense of resentment that other people who shelled out $50 did... but that's probably our fault more than yours.
Closing Comments:
Video game fashions. By all rights, people who do the kind of things game characters do should be sensibly dressed in tough, durable, not terribly attractive clothing, but the women always manage to end up wearing high heels and impractical skirts, and the guys end up with hair styles that would require a bottle of hair gel a minute to maintain. Am I completely insane for wanting to see these people in blue jeans, or what? What would you rather they wear? Let me know, and I'll see you tomorrow.
-Chris Jones, amazed they went to all that trouble for a robot
|
