Two new reviews up at Gameshark that I’m shamelessly shilling here- one is a review of the new Metal Gear Solid variant of Risk and the other is an A- write-up on Street Fighter X Tekken. I’m playing more SFxT than Mass Effect 3, which is surprising to me.
Both of these games bring up an interesting quandary. I have severe, sharp criticisms of both at a fundamental product level. Yet I liked both (well, liked one and loved the other) regardless of the fact that one is a fan-facing cash-in and the other is a fan-facing cash-in with a ridiculous on-disc “DLC” marketing scheme. As a critic of games- and thereby game products- it can be tough to distinguish between the fun or appeal that a game offers and how it exists in the marketplace. But are we “critics” or “consumer reporters”?
With MGS Risk, it’s a fun variant with tons of fan service. But it’s hardly a MGS board game or all that could potentially entail. And it’s hardly as thematic as the Star Wars Original Trilogy Risk.
With SFxT, it’s a top-shelf fighting game that’s outrageous and thrilling with two stables of classic fighters. But between 12 DLC characters (which will likely be $5 a piece), costume packs, enhancement gems, and other future purchases it risks feeling like a storefront as much as a complete product.
But I had a good time with both. So there it is.