Left 4 Dead

My apologies for this disgustingly late review. Not only have I been procrastinating a sickening amount but now the SEQUEL for this game has come out and it is truly late. I am as sorry as you are indifferent.

Valve at last made the jump the consoles with this survival horror installment (originally based on the zombie servers on CS:S), even if it's at the sacrifice of a reliably likable fanbase.  With the somewhat suggestive pun in the name, you play as one of 4 survivors in the zombie apocalypse in an unknown city, relying on each other to get the group to each iron-doored safehouse and eventually to a rescue vehicle. This takes place in the same formula on 4 different hour-long campaigns: No Mercy which involves a rush to a hospital roof, Blood Harvest taking place on a farm, Dead Air on an airport and Death Toll along a highway. Playing on your own, these aren't fantastic due to an element of repetitiveness and pretty stupid AI, however provided you have Xbox Live or even just another controller for split-screen this is where the game comes to life in co-op form. You'll find yourself in plenty of 'L4D moments' in a similar way to Battlefield in which incredible or hilarious things that could only ever happen once are just bound to happen. For example, while I was playing co-op on Blood Harvest some annoying kid on my team thought it would be funny to not go in the Saferoom so as to not trigger the checkpoint and start the next area. We shut the door on him. A hunter (basically a zombie ninja) jumped on him, pinned him to the ground and started tearing him to shreds as he lay helpless. We left him to his fate.

This is not the only multiplayer mode as there are also Survival and Versus. Survival is literally a case of 'you're going to lose, it's just how and when'. You're cooped up at a lighthouse with 3 allies an infinite zombie horde approaching, and you stock up on weapons, explosives and health packs and hope for the best. You're given a clock to see how long you can last, however this isn't always bursting with fun as the lighthouse is the only map and it tends to be too simple. Versus, however, is the real Left 4 Dead experience in my opinion. 4 players play as the Survivors, and another 4 as Special Infected: these types are Hunters, Smokers and Boomers, each with varying weaknesses, strengths and attacks. The Infected may respawn but the Survivors do not, so they really have to rely on each other to survive, moreso as some of the Infected are now being controlled by humans and can use their attacks strategically and tactically. Unfortunately being an Infected is plagued by a horribly long respawn time of between 20 and 30 seconds twinned with a tiny amount of health so it is usually less frustrating being a Survivor, but it is a great mode anyway.

What Valve also do suitably in a co-op aspect is the way you have to use your supplies efficiently. You start off with a fairly poor main weapon (pump-action or SMG), one pistol and a health pack. You can heal each other and sometimes their need is more than yours so to keep them alive you have to sacrifice your own lifeline, definitely contributing to the Survivor feel of the game and an odd fraternity to your allies; people you've never met usually. Throughout the campaign you gain better weapons, a second pistol, pain pills - temporary health boost for desperate times - and an explosive. Explosives do mass damage and these can really save you and your teammates when the situation looks grim but, like health packs and pills, the campaigns aren't overflowing with these so you might not be able to get another for a while and you really have to think about using it before you mindlessly throw it at the nearest thing that moves. 

Left 4 Dead does NOT have the best online community as a lot of them are kids just buying the game as another blockbuster to cash in on, and this can sometimes mean they're more interested in getting an achievement than reviving you, but I can't knock Valve for making such a brilliant co-op game. Provided all 4 survivors are you and your friends, you've got a unique experience that you can't replicate in any other game, save Left 4 Dead 2. Yes, the AI are plain silly and the campaigns could have had a little more variety than just different environments, but with a good connection and a headset, you stop noticing and focus more on your survival from the near-endless swarm of bloodthirsty undead. 8/10, but knock off two stars if you haven't got Xbox Live or a buddy to play with.

Call of Duty World at War: Nazi Zombies for iPod Touch

Shoutout to Rob Wells for brutally forcing me to play this and review it. I'll keep this quick.

As far as handheld consoles go, the iPod Touch is probably the most limited, usually keeping to simple motion-controlled games based on dodging objects or solving puzzles, which is why any FPS is either bad or pretty impressive considering the platform it's on. So despite my somewhat violent hatred for Call of Duty, for an iPod game I was still pretty impressed with the Touch version of Nazi Zombies.

If you remember before all the DLCs when it was just Nacht Der Undertoten, that's what you get on the iPod Touch, and I mean that to the letter. Everything from the Help Room and upstairs to the Mystery Box, it has everything. While in comparison to what you'll get on a full console I don't find that much fun, on a tiny thing made to just play music it's brilliant. The controls are based on look, run, aim, fire, and CONTROL which fixes barriers, opens new areas and activates the Mystery Box. You realise that this is really all you need and it becomes a challenge you really want to work at before long. 

Graphically it's also impressive for an iPod, it matches roughly PS2 quality which really isn't too bad. Take into account the selection of weaponry AND the fact it can be played with friends over WiFi and you've got yourself a top of the range iPod game. DLCs of all the other maps are said to be coming out so this really has everything you need for the full Nazi Zombies experience. I would say the only really downer for the game is its difficulty, you're killed a little too fast considering how tricky it can be to run away with the touch-screen analog sticks. 

In all, even though I usually hate handhelds and Call of Duty, this was genuinely enjoyable. The price tag of £6 is a bit much for any iPod game but I would say it's worth shelling out if you're on a lot of bus journeys and need something to keep you occupied for a fair amount of time. 8/10.

Assassin's Creed II

We all know Assassin's Creed I was a good game and not a bad start to the series, but definitely with a lot of flaws, some of which could really hinder the whole experience. A great, previously unexplored idea and fantastic setting, but who wants to do the same missions about 9 times over, with little or no character development in the frankly awful cutscenes, and you can't swim? Well, despite Ubisoft doing not a great job with some of the Splinter Cell games, and making a diabolical follow-up to Prince of Persia: The Two Thrones, it seems they've gained a skill all too few developers have: scouring the internet, seeing what people didn't like, and changing it. This is a sequel with a difference, and sets a very good example.

The setting of Creed II is both the same and completely different. It picks up exactly where the last one left off, in the room of (presumably) Subject 16 who you find out more about in the course of the game, and follow Desmond a lot more, discovering a good deal about the war of the Assassins and Templars continuing into the 21st century. However, when in the Animus, you're now accessing the memories of a different ancestor, Ezio Auditore, in 1400s Italy. You're only given two cities this time, but not only are they absolutely huge (Florence and Italy), you are also given access to a couple of smaller towns, and your very own town with the great Villa De Auditore where you can touch base if you're short of weapons or money. The cities are complemented with a much-improved crowd dynamic; you can blend with anyone and there tend to be a lot more civilians who instead of just walking robotically round huge scripted loops, actually stand in groups and talk, or shop, or (as irritatingly as the Harrassers in the first game) run up to you and play music. It is clear that this is the type of environment Ubisoft wanted in the first game but fell short of. The cities in general are, for the most part, a lot easier on the eyes too. When standing atop a building, you're not looking at a flat sea of yellow, brown and white. Beauitful European architecture is all around you and it's not hard to recognise some of the breathtaking landmarks, in particular the gigantic Duomo in Florence.

The storyline really takes off during the course of the game, while it takes a little too long for Ezio to take his true Assassiny form (even though he already has the ability to free run like a pro), a lot of questions are answered and even more asked, allowing at least two more sequels. More about 'the truth' is uncovered and you begin to understand the Assassin motto 'Nothing is true, everything is permitted' to a greater extent. It is considerably more complex than the first and I would say you are missing out on 60% of the game if you are not following it or have not played Assassin's Creed I. Thankfully the story is now shown in actually watchable cutscenes with decent camera angles and some fantastic facial expressions; the graphics aren't mindblowing but the faces are some of the best I've seen in a game. 

A very strong point of the predecessor was the combat system. It allowed skill and without irritating button-bashing you could fight elegantly with nifty counter attacks shown with gruesome detail, with a variety of weapons. Even this strong point has been improved upon, there are about 30 different weapons in all, ranging from swords and daggers, to spears and axes, to throwing knives and even a small gun. Fighting different classes of enemies spices it up and you have to use different tactics accordingly, and new moves such as fighting unarmed and disarming enemies means you can recover and get your own back if attacked off guard. I can't say it any more; Assassin's Creed II has one of the best combat systems out there and you'll find every fight being unique. 

For all these improvements, there are little criticisms to make. The main I find is while the actual cities look better and are more fun to traverse, the setting of the first game had a feel of religious tension, of 'Holy War' that brought it to life, and showed the contrast of the different cities. The most you'll get here is gang wars and it simply isn't the same, not to mention in this environment assassins are expected to be around, whereas during the crusade it's a much more original idea. The voice acting could also have been a lot better, it's far too obvious that it's done by Americans due to painful Italian sterotypes, eg 'Mamma Mia!' and the use of moronic American vocabulary, such as 'gotten' and 'someplace'. It's a minor criticism, but it's sometimes quite distracting.

Assassin's Creed II probably won't get into the books as one of the best games ever, but it is very, very good. Being one of the best single-player games I've had this generation, I rate it 9/10. Not perfect, but without a doubt worth a buy, so long as you're acquainted with the storyline of the previous game.