Consoleation Quickie: Vita-l Expense

When I had a chance to spend some time with the PlayStation Vita at E3 back in June, I was impressed. Uncharted looked and felt remarkably like its PlayStation 3 counterparts and the idea of optional touch controls for platforming plus a neat motion mechanic for the sniper rifle mode raised my excitement level.

As time has gone on and more details have come into focus regarding the Vita, that excitement level has gradually been tempered. Some games will require memory cards. PSone games won’t work at launch. The battery life is suspect. Now, word of memory card pricing is enough to make me consider waiting it out as a consumer as prices range from $30 for the smallest (4GB) card up to $120 for the 32GB card. That makes the minimum Vita purchase at least $320 if you want a game to play on it. That’s $110 more than a comparable purchase for the Nintendo 3DS.

I know that I’ve been critical of the 3DS in the past, as have other analysts, but sales are picking up steam here in Q4 and it’s going to look a lot more attractive next to a $250 platform with a not-so-hidden extra expense in the memory card. Even when the 3DS was $250, Nintendo included a 2GB SD card for free. People who want a Vita memory card as part of a bundle can attempt to score one of the early release packages– but that’s $350 and comes with a game that’s not exactly on anyone’s radar. Otherwise? $280 for hardware and memory card with no game.

Not only does Sony have the 3DS to worry about… but it’s also dealing with the effects of booming popularity for smartphones and tablets. The casual consumer market, which has been instrumental in growing the popularity of video games over the last 15 years, is showing less interest in dedicated portable platforms. iPhone and iPod Touch apps and games are significantly cheaper than offerings for the Vita and 3DS. It’s true that a tactile controller is missing from these devices, but the games seem to be more than good enough for most of the casual crowd. Expensive games and accessories, combined with the high cost of the hardware, don’t bode well for expansion of the potential consumer base for the Vita. In fact, Sony may be in a position where it has to count on its loyal fanbase to buy into the Vita and accept that limited success may be as far as the platform goes– at least initially.

I understand that the Vita is more powerful than the 3DS. Expecting it to sell at or near the 3DS price point is too much to ask. I don’t understand the concept of games requiring memory cards to play, especially since the game media is supposed to allow for reading and writing of data. Worse, I don’t understand making a required accessory optional at the $250 price point. Include a 2GB card like Nintendo does with the 3DS, and the argument about memory card pricing doesn’t affect sales. Since a memory card is required for the platform’s big launch games, setting the expectation that Vita will “only” cost $250 is disingenuous.

As much as I hope that I’m proven to be wrong, I see struggles for the Vita in 2012 after an initially strong launch. It’s too bad. There’s a lot of potential and it’s obvious that the Vita is a powerful device, but it’s going to be too expensive for too many. As a consumer myself, my outlook on Vita has been downgraded from “buy” to “wait and see”.

Consoleation Quickie: Worst of the Worst

It’s been about two weeks since I’ve been back in Massachusetts, and thought it would do some good to get out and hit my local GameStop store. I know that many of you can’t stand the chain, for reasons that do– and don’t– make sense, but it was something to break up the monotony of being stuck here at home with nothing to do. I understood that this is a holiday weekend, and fully expected lines and a little bit of chaos. It makes sense; I’ve worked several tours of gaming retail duty during this time of year. I know how things work.

I could not have prepared myself for what I was going to see.

When I arrived, my eye first spotted the cracked glass on the bottom pane of the front door. It looked like someone had taken a bat to it. It looked like a crime scene, honestly. Despite the poor initial impression, I went inside. There were certainly plenty of people in the store, but the space wasn’t small. The greeter did his thing, acknowledging me and handing me a flyer. As I made my way further inside,  it looked like an F-5 tornado had ripped through the interior. There was stuff everywhere. Games strewn all over shelves. Product all over the floor behind the counter. Despite counting five employees (and only two registers), there wasn’t any kind of recovery effort going on. In fact, throughout my 35-minute visit, no recovery took place. (Recovery, for those not in retail, is cleaning and reorganization after busy periods.)

Again– I get that this is one of the busiest weekends of the entire year for GameStop. I went through it last year, plus did two seasons for FuncoLand in 1998 and 1999. I know that it’s crazy. I expect to see a bit of chaos. But what I saw went beyond chaos. It was a disaster with no clear leadership or acknowledgement. I had a difficult time understanding how conditions like this were allowed to occur– or continue. It was poor enough that I was compelled to complete the store survey and communicate how appalled I was. I’ve been to many GameStop and other gaming retail stores during the holidays over the years. I’ve worked in some and shopped at others. This store was the worst that I have ever seen, even during the busiest of holiday times. That’s not hyperbole. That’s a fact.

I suppose that I shouldn’t let this bother me, but it does. Maybe it’s my experience in retail that makes me care so much. Maybe it’s because, as a consumer, I was horrified by what I saw. It may not be fair for me to criticize a store during a big weekend like this, but this was the worst of the worst.

Hopefully steps can and will be taken to turn the store around, but as for me, I won’t be going back.

Wrong Direction

There is nothing wrong with change, if it is in the right direction.

– Winston Churchill

I realize that online connectivity and console gaming were destined to be intertwined. The XBAND modem, the SEGA Channel, and then the rollout of the Dreamcast in 1999 with its built-in 56K modem were signs that change was going to happen. Console video game players were eventually going to have to accept connectivity, and this current console generation has preached that it’s all but required to have the full intended gaming experience.

I don’t have a problem with online connectivity in that it can serve a purpose. Bugs can be fixed if you’re connected (although this has been overdone, as I mentioned in my last post). Online play can allow players to find opponents (or partners) at any time instead of having to rely on having people over. In its originally intended form, downloadable content can extend the life of a game by adding levels, characters, quests, and more. The change from a purely offline to generally online environment, in and of itself, is not bad.

I do, however, see problems with how intense the change has been. The previous console generation can be thought of as a loose transition to online importance. We saw the birth of Xbox LIVE as a service and the PlayStation 2 had some online functionality, although it wasn’t at all organized. We were taking some steps a generation ago, but we’ve since taken a giant leap and have overlooked the consequences that the change has triggered. We see games launch with bugs, only to be excused because connectivity offers a quick fix instead of shipping the game as bug-free as possible. We see arguments that content is being stripped from retail games, only to be resold as DLC for added expense to the consumer over and above the $60 price point. We see online services and accounts getting hacked with increasing frequency.

Change is fine, but I don’t think that it can be said that it’s entirely in the right direction.

I know that I talked about the problem with patches in my last entry, but it’s disturbing to me how accepting that the community is of this trend. Reviewers, more often than not, seem to give the benefit of the doubt to patches rather than calling out publishers and developers for shipping a game that doesn’t work as well as it should. Skyrim is a great case in point with all of its associated glitches and issues, and yet it stands at a 96 on Metacritic. NINETY-SIX. I understand that online connectivity gives developers and publishers the ability to fix problems, but whatever happened to the goal of getting it right the first time? I appreciate the scope and size of the game, but giving a pass to a game because it tries hard isn’t the point, to me. In cases like this, connectivity has become a crutch instead of an advantage.

The news about Ridge Racer for the PlayStation Vita and its dearth of content in favor of DLC reignites the discussion about how DLC affects retail games. Issues with weak content versus numerous DLC offerings is nothing new for Namco; look at Beautiful Katamari and Ace Combat 6 for the Xbox 360 for prime examples of content that probably should have been included in the initial purchase. Beautiful Katamari was probably the most egregious example, with more than a few stages locked behind a DLC paywall. I can understand publishers looking to make some extra revenue per user, but in Ridge Racer‘s case on the Vita, three courses and five cars included on the release is an absolute joke. Compare that to the deeper overall package for Ridge Racer 3D for the Nintendo 3DS. There are nearly four times as many cars in Ridge Racer 3D, and four separate courses on the first stage of the Grand Prix alone! Instead of getting loaded with content, we get to pay more for additional content for Ridge Racer on the Vita. It can be argued that connectivity encourages developers and publishers to leave stuff out for post-launch, rather than packing as much content as possible before shipping and then delivering more after a few weeks. It’s change in the wrong direction.

Then we come to hacking. I understand that hacking is a peril of being online. Identity theft happens all the time, not just on the PlayStation Network or Xbox LIVE. The problem that I have is that we are so accepting of this and the best that the industry can do is to remind you to change your passwords and be vigilant. Worse yet, more and more content is becoming online-only, so unless you go out of your way to buy cards at local retailers, you have to chance your credit or debit card to get that DLC or arcade game that you want. GameTrailers and Spike TV gaming personality Geoff Keighley just had his Xbox LIVE account hacked and is offline for almost a month during Microsoft’s “investigation”. It happened to another friend of mine on Twitter recently, too… and I’ve read about it happening to more than a few other people recently as well. We allow connectivity, online commerce, and online delivery to be so instrumental to the console gaming experience, and yet we just accept it when we get hit and lose that ability when criminals attack. Stuff happens, right?

I understand that going backwards isn’t an option. Console gaming has barged through the online door with a battering ram, and constant connectivity is here to stay. Still, it’s hard for someone like me who has been playing console video games for decades to not look back on generations past and consider whether we’re really better off now. Sure, the graphics weren’t 1080p and the sound wasn’t Dolby 7.1. I know that games “back then” were simpler and, at times, not very mature. I also can’t help but to think back to when connectivity wasn’t a requisite. I remember when games were consistently full of content when they shipped rather than skimming a few things in lieu of making a few bucks later. I still can fire up my PlayStation or PlayStation 2 and just play a game, rather than waiting for patches and DLC checks.

I’m not sure what it will take for this change to constant connectivity and online presence to find the right direction, but it’s important to the future of the industry that it is found– and soon.

Consoleation Quickie: Version 1.01

I finally got my hands on the Metal Gear Solid HD Collection this past weekend, thanks to a decent trade-in promotion. It’s the first new game that I’ve picked up since Sonic Generations back on November 1st, and I was excited to get it since I’ve been a pretty big fan of the Metal Gear franchise since playing Metal Gear Solid 13 years ago.

When I got home from the store, I was looking forward to popping the disc into my PlayStation 3 and seeing how the games looked in HD… but upon reading the disc, I got the message that I’ve seen way too many times over the course of this console generation:

Version 1.01 found.

A 60MB file for three games that already existed.

Combine that with my slow internet speed, and the required update took long enough to kill my enthusiasm and I shut the console down when it was finally over. I haven’t turned it back on since, and am not sure when I will. It was a complete buzzkill… almost like some sort of penalty for wanting to play games from the last console generation on a new platform.

We’ve come to just accept that updates– including ones that occur the day that games hit stores– are the way it is. This is after years of console video gaming when publishers shipped games knowing that they had to get it right the first time, or else risk defective returns and consumer backlash. Bugs in games from generations past were frowned upon and negatively affected not only reviews, but consumer experiences. These days, we expect bugs in our games because a patch or update will inevitably fix most problems. It’s as if the responsibility to ship bug-free games has faded and is no longer recognized.

When I’ve talked about my stance on this, I’ve run into pretty staunch defense:

• “You don’t NEED to update.”
• “Get a faster connection.”
• “Without Day One patches, games will be repeatedly delayed.”
• “I’d rather constant patches than a permanently broken game.”
• “Deal with it.”

I get that sometimes things can get missed and that constant connectivity allows these things to get fixed without returns or recalls. It’s a great tool, but why do we see this so much and so early? It’s like DLC in a way. Good intentions at first, but has become overdone and questionable as time goes on. Games like Skyrim, for example, get shipped with bugs that get explained away because of the game’s size and scope… then forgiven because of a patch that not everyone can access. Sure the game is big, but PS3 owners seeing performance issues because of save sizes got through QA? Really? Look at the 100+ MB Day One patch for Battlefield 3 on the Xbox 360. Why is this even excusable? Even high-speed internet users endure a window of waiting instead of being able to get into the game that they just spent $60 on.

Oh, it’s just how things are. I see.

 

Consoleation Quickie: Happy 10th Birthday, Xbox!

What a difference 10 years can make.

In November 2001, Microsoft was making its console gaming debut with a machine that sported a larger-than-life controller and on-board hard drive. I was interested, but kept my distance for a few years. At the time of the Xbox launch, I was focused more on my PlayStation 2 and was awaiting Nintendo’s Gamecube. Games like Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 2X, Shenmue II, and Crazy Taxi 3 were enticing, but I was skeptical for some reason… even after my radio show colleagues had attended E3 in 2001 and raved about the platform.

When I finally took the plunge in early 2004, I realized that my skepticism was unfounded. The PlayStation 2 had impressive library of games, but there were limitations that the Xbox blew by– and I’m not even talking about online play, which I avoided. Exclusive games like Links 2004, Fable, Jade Empire, and the Project Gotham series impressed me. The hard drive changed the gaming experience for me as memory cards were a thing of the past and custom soundtracks were more than a novel idea. ESPN NFL 2K5 for the Xbox used the hard drive to store replays, which enhanced the presentation.

By the time 2005 had rolled around, the Xbox had become my console of choice. While I still played games on my PlayStation 2, the Xbox had won me over. I preferred (and still do) the Dual Shock controller over the Xbox controller (even the smaller and better revision), but most multiplatform experiences were more enjoyable for me on the black and green box. I had been won over.

10 years have now passed since Microsoft debuted the Xbox, and a significant role reversal has taken place. Microsoft now dominates the sales charts here in the United States with the Xbox 360 and Sony is in their rear view mirror with the PlayStation 3. Such a change might have seemed crazy even 5 years ago, but it was Microsoft’s strategy with the Xbox that planted the seeds of the company’s eventual success.

Many Xbox games still hold up even today, and building an Xbox game collection is relatively inexpensive. It’s certainly on my list of consoles to get as I expand my collection of older game consoles and is worth considering if you’re looking to play games on a tighter budget. 10 years may seem like a long time, but the Xbox has aged pretty well and still has plenty to offer… especially if you missed out on it.

The Numbers Game

There has been a significant amount of griping over video game review scores recently. Reviewers seem to be on the defensive to readers, publishers, and developers as they attempt to further justify a number that 1,000+ words apparently could not. Games with review scores less than an 80 average on Metacritic are presumed to be bad (or worse), leading to weaker sales and denied bonuses from publishers to developers. A number– not words, opinions, or viewpoints– has become the sole focal point for a game’s quality and the discussion revolving around each game.

It’s an unfortunate trend that we’ve allowed ourselves to fall into, in all facets of the community.

I understand that video game reviews serve different purposes to different people. My notion that reviews serve as a tool to assist with purchasing decisions carries over from the days before the World Wide Web and smartphones, when video game magazines like Electronic Gaming Monthly, Video Games & Computer Entertainment, GamePro, and others were the only way we could get any realistic feedback about an upcoming release. There were obvious purchases, of course, but many other games weren’t easy to decide on. By taking a look at a couple of each month’s gaming magazines, I was able to devise a budget and decide which games to buy and which games to rent or pass over. If there were the theatrics that we see now– such as blacklisting, firing reviewers due to low scores, review embargoes, and other questionable events– readers like me were oblivious to them because they weren’t public.

There were numbers back in those days, of course. Some magazines had shorter reviews (like EGM, for example), and others went with longer pieces. The number was only part of the equation back then. The words meant something. Perhaps this was because there weren’t thousands of video game magazines, as compared to the huge number of video game review portals and websites that we see today. We read reviews because that’s what we had until the following month.

The landscape is different now. It’s all about the number, and the words are secondary. The games themselves are tertiary.

Just in the last couple of days, I’ve seen content from Jim Sterling, Patrick Garratt, and even gaming comedy act Mega64 about the drama surrounding review scores. While the pieces are all interesting (and even amusing at times), the controversy surrounding review scores is pulling attention away from what are supposed to be the main attraction right now. What about the games? In a span of less than three months that has provided so many quality experiences, we’re talking about numbers. It’s not completely dominating the discussion, of course, but the fact that the topic is sharing the spotlight at this time of year is disappointing.

Discussions pertaining to how to fix the review process have been ongoing for some time, but we’re just spinning our wheels. Dropping review scores is an ideal, but isn’t realistic. Reviews without scores attached to them tend to have lower credibility than reviews that do, and publishers actively support review portals with scoring to satisfy various metrics. It’s also not feasible at this point to demand a wider scoring scale after months of accepting the 7-10 scale that Metacritic has set forth. Rewriting the review scale would lead to potentially damaging results for publishers, developers, and gaming press alike. We can say all we want that 5.0 or 50 is average, but Metacritic just doesn’t see it that way. Arguing that Metacritic has too much power won’t change anything either, given the importance that all facets of the industry have allowed the aggregator site to build.

I’m not sure that there’s a fix for the numbers game, which is a shame because there are lots of great words being written behind those numbers that are generally being ignored. The words are, at least in theory, what keeps the numbers game from being arbitrary… but if nobody reads them, what’s the point of the process? That’s arguably the biggest flaw of all, and until we can teach people to slow down and equate those words to the numbers like we did years ago, the controversy will never go away. The numbers will win.

Good News, Bad News

After one of the most challenging weeks for me in a long time, I am finally back home in Massachusetts. It took nearly five days of driving and several sketchy stays at hotels to get here, but I’m now with family and have been unpacking what belongings that I could save.

This post marks the first one that I’m typing from the laptop that I’m going to be using sporadically. It’s certainly different than the desktop that I’d been using for over two years, but I’m rebuilding my bookmarks and setting it up for easier use and navigation. I certainly have a lot to catch up on, and I’m looking forward to writing more often now that I’m getting settled.

All of my consoles survived the trip. I spent time with the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and Nintendo 3DS on Monday and everything checked out. My current HDTV is about half the size of the one I left behind, and its resolution is 1080i maximum, but it is fine for basic gaming. I played a bit of Sonic Generations on the 360, and then played through the final 2 chapters of Back to the Future on the PS3. I haven’t yet tried gaming on the PlayStation 2, but DVDs have been working fine on it. Many of my PS2 games are still packed away in boxes and I’ll be trying to find an affordable storage setup for them in the coming weeks.

Unfortunately, there’s a bit of bad news.

I do have internet access, but my speeds are very slow. Slow enough, in fact, to make me consider whether my 360 and PS3 are even worth using at this point. Going from 40Mbps (which I had in my apartment in Arizona) down to slightly more than 1Mbps with family here in Massachusetts means that downloadable titles are all but impossible to consider and that DLC and patches could take hours to download. With so many titles requiring patches right away, this would lead to long waits before even getting to play these games. It’s a worst-case scenario, really… and one that I’ve been critical of for a long time.

I’m now one of the people that’s basically left out of current gaming because of substandard connectivity.

I’m certainly going to investigate my options and upgrade my speed if I can, but this is one of those situations that makes me wonder if perhaps going back to “older” platforms is a better overall solution. I’ve tossed the idea around for awhile and now it seems like a very possible scenario. If today’s video games all but require constant and expensively fast internet connectivity, and if this trend is going to continue moving forward, there are going to be cases like mine where choices have to be made. Is it worth owning and playing current-generation consoles when connectivity is a problem? Arguments can be made on both sides.

On the plus side… older games are less expensive, don’t require patches/DLC/internet to play, and can quickly be amassed to form a decent collection. My PlayStation 2 experiment over the last few months has proven this. On the negative side, there aren’t any new games or advances coming for legacy consoles and older tube-based television sets are becoming harder to find. My writing would take a decidedly different turn as I would talk more about what was than what is, and there isn’t necessarily an audience for that.

I think that the unfortunate assumption made here is that the console gaming industry simply makes the assumption that potential users have access to fast internet speeds and understand that they need to spend a significant amount of money every month to maintain those speeds. Sure, some may consider it an “entitled” attitude to question spending more money to make most games work right, but I’ve always thought it to be an unfortunate trend. If you don’t have at least a 20 Mbps connection, today’s console gaming environment isn’t for you… or for me, either.

I’ve got some thinking to do over the coming days.

One for the road…

I have been playing Sonic Generations this week, and wanted to share a few thoughts on it before I go back into blogging silence for the trip.

I’m glad that I was able to get Sonic Generations. I’m only a couple of bosses in (about 6 stages or so), but I already have a bit to say about the experience. On the plus side, the game really is a love letter to Sonic fans. Revisiting classic stages with new layouts has generally been great. The difference in gameplay between classic Sonic and updated Sonic is noticeable, and each poses unique challenges. Playing through Speed Highway or City Escape with the classic Sonic character shows some creativity as both stages maintain their Dreamcast feel but are adapted for a more 2D style of gameplay. Taking new Sonic through Green Hill and the Chemical Plant puts a new spin on those stages and focuses more on speed, almost like a race. The visuals are colorful and active, and the game is fast. The framerate is about the same as it was in the demo (a shade under 30 frames per second), and it does chug lower than that on occasion, but it’s generally not a hindrance. The music is fantastic as familiar themes and songs are remixed and reimagined.

Unfortunately, as I’ve progressed through the game, more problems have been popping up. The stages with new Sonic are getting frustrating as more precise platforming skill is needed, but undermined by the focus on speed. The second boss battle starts off great, as Sonic must approach and attack the creature from different angles and points of entry. When it reaches its climax, however, the focus shifts heavily to platforming and use of Sonic’s homing attack to make certain jumps. The last jump has to be just right, or else Sonic falls to his death. Boss battles should not be determined by one lousy jump– and yet this one is. This was after another leap in difficulty in the Seaside Hill stage. The curve is uneven, and that’s disappointing.

While more flaws and the overall frustration level are slowly increasing, I’m still liking the Sonic Generations experience overall. There’s a lot of replayability here with challenges for each stage and a grading and scoring system that encourages multiple playthroughs. There are secrets to find, tons of content to unlock, and genuine “Wow!” moments for fans. I’m one of the rare Sonic fans who liked the Sonic Adventure games as much (if not more) than the original games on the Genesis/MegaDrive, and the nods to those games that Sonic Team put into Generations– at least so far– made me grin like a little kid. This is a family-friendly game with wide appeal and a slightly lower price point makes it an attractive holiday gift possibility. I’ll be posting more on this game after the move in complete and I get to spend more time with it.

On a personal note, it’s the night before I wipe my hard drive and sell my computer after over three years of use. Coincidentally, this is the computer that I started Consoleation on back in 2008, so it’s fitting that I write this one last blog entry on it before it goes to its new home. I’m breaking down and packing up all of my consoles and associated games within the next 24 hours as well, so I’m going to be generally offline and relatively game-less for the better part of the next 10 days. Thankfully, those days will be filled with packing, cleaning, (hopefully) selling what I can’t carry, shipping the last wave of boxes to my new place, and then the daunting drive back to Massachusetts– and the place that I lived before moving here to Arizona. There are a lot of  changes going on, and it’s a lot to take in. I’ve been preparing for this, but the finality of it all is really hitting home and will be worse when I pack my games up.

I want to thank everyone for their well-wishes and positive thoughts. I’m looking forward to getting through the next couple of weeks and getting back to some semblance of normalcy. I have a lot of other topics to write about and share once the move is complete, including a take on the VGAs that I just couldn’t get to tonight.

Look for new writing in a couple of weeks. Until then, enjoy the November rush of games!

Pinballistik Review (PlayStation 3)

With a revamp of Zen Pinball due in a few months on the PlayStation 3 and the impending release of Pinball Arcade from Farsight Studios around the same time, Creat Studios has thrown its own set of flippers into the pinball arena with Pinballistik. Creat has some interesting ideas at work here, but the execution is  unfortunately a step backwards for the genre with poor ball physics and vague table objectives that kill any semblance of table and scoring progression.

Buying Pinballistik ($4 on the PlayStation Store) includes only one table, called Circle The Wagons. The table has a Wild West theme and has its share of ramps, drop targets, and capture holes. There are several table goals that players can accomplish, but it’s not always clear how to do so. Some are obvious; for example, the Royal Flush mode is triggered by lighting all of the spinners and then hitting the Saloon ramp shot to get the ball to a smaller upper playfield where a series of drop targets guards a capture hole. Others, like the Revolver Multiball mode, aren’t at all intuitive and almost require players to read the instructions to figure them out. This was a problem with some of Zen Studios‘ early pinball tables, as well. Unfortunately, Creat didn’t do their homework when working on table design, and it shows.

Ball physics are a major problem in Pinballistik. The ball feels like it has very little weight to it, which leads to rates of speed that you just don’t see on an authentic pinball table. It’s more difficult than it should be to line up or plan shots, and even when your positioning is right, the ball sometimes doesn’t carry the momentum it should into ramp shots. There are also too many instances of the ball jumping off of the table or strangely kicking back into play from the outhole back through an outlane. Worst of all, the frequency of balls shooting down the middle or down through an outlane to the drain seems a bit high. Pacing is almost punitive, like a pinball machine at the local arcade that wasn’t level and seemed to steer balls down the side.

The poor physics model is exacerbated when playing Pinballistik‘s Battle Mode. In this mode, two players face off on an extended variation of the table at the same time. One player controls the flippers on the left side, and the other player gets the flippers on the right. It’s a big challenge to track what’s going on, as balls fly all over the table– and sometimes from your side to the opponent’s side, or vice-versa. It’s chaotic, which might be what Creat was going for. Unfortunately, with floaty physics and so much going on at once, it feels like a battle of attrition rather than a challenge to score well. Having a ball drain can take points away from your score, and when it’s out of your control, the experience just feels unfair.

Speaking of scoring, don’t expect very high scores when playing Pinballistik. Unlike Zen Pinball or Marvel Pinball, you won’t see scores in the billions here. My scores average between 2-3 million, and considering my averages in just about every other pinball game available, that’s low. This isn’t necessarily a fault. High Speed and Pinbot, two popular pinball tables from the ’80s, routinely had high scores average less than 10 million. It is, however, a problem when the low scores result from a lack of directed scoring opportunities. It’s possible to just keep the ball alive with flippers and randomly hit things to rack up scores, but the best pinball tables have clear scoring opportunities… and Pinballistik simply doesn’t have these unless you do a pretty intense read on each table’s feature sets and how to do things. It doesn’t feel intuitive at all, and that’s not fun.

There are two other DLC tables that you can add to Pinballistik for $3 each, but neither one is a marked improvement over Circle the Wagons. In fact, they’re arguably worse. Sector X is a dull sci-fi table that has even more vague objectives than Circle the Wagons. Made of Money is a table all about glitz and cash, with a somewhat interesting lower playfield that breaks up traditional play when triggered. Sadly, neither table fixes the pacing as balls drain far too quickly. The Battle Mode for the Made of Money table has a “Change Sides” sequence which can take you by surprise, but with so much going on, it seems that all you can do is keep tapping the flipper buttons and hope for the best.

Visually, the tables look decent enough. The level of detail isn’t on par with the other pinball games available, but the themes are varied and the tables are colorful. There are several camera angles to choose from, and the animated dot-matrix scoreboard is authentic with different animations that occur based on actions from the table. There’s no slowdown to speak of, including during multiball situations. One detractor is that there are some playfield effects that can sometimes interfere with keeping tabs on the ball. On the Circle of Wagons table, for example, a dust storm that can be triggered completely obscures the middle of the table and can hide the ball. This can make for late reactions as the ball shoots down towards the flippers and can be costly. Target overlays, like UFOs, mounds of cash, or Can-Can girls, don’t always work well and can redirect the ball in a negative way.

The sound is probably the best part of the package, surprisingly. The music for the Circle the Wagons table feels like it could have been pulled from a Wild ARMs game, which is not a bad thing. Table sounds like flippers, bumpers, and drop targets are generally authentic. There’s some sporadic voice work, and a few familiar sound samples for those with a discerning ear… such as a sound effect lifted from Nick Arcade on the Made of Money table or a sample of Offenbach‘s Infernal Galop (from Orpheus in the Underworld) for the Can-Can mode on the Circle the Wagons table.

If Pinballistik had come out before Zen Pinball, it might have been perceived as a better experience. It’s far from unplayable, but it’s also a giant step in the wrong direction when compared to the other pinball options available. Even with some unique modes of play like the flawed Battle Mode or setting timed or score goals to change up the usual “lose all of your balls and it’s game over” mentality, the game’s flaws win out. Unless you’ve tired of Zen Pinball, Marvel Pinball, and Pinball Hall of Fame and just have to have a new pinball game to satisfy your steel ball cravings, your quarters are better spent elsewhere.