And here is a link to my writer’s page at Paste Magazine, where I edit the games section and contribute regular comic and TV reviews. This page does not list or link to any of the content in Paste’s subscription-only mPlayer, so a number of features and editorials I’ve written won’t appear on that site.

Some I write reviews for Joystiq. Here is a list of everything I’ve written for that site.

To celebrate the 25th anniversary of “The Legend of Zelda,” Nintendo is releasing a “Zelda” game for every current Nintendo system this year. All but one of those games are remakes, but that’s not a problem, as for most of its 25 years the “Zelda” franchise has been one of the absolute best.

The first “Zelda” of 2011 is the 3DS remake of 1998’s “Ocarina of Time.” “Ocarina” took the epic adventures of earlier “Zelda” games and transported them to a 3-D world that felt surprisingly live and interactive at the time. It remains many fans’ favorite game in the series, and is a legitimate contender for greatest game ever made. Of course it’s now 13 years old and has already been reissued for the GameCube and through the Wii’s Virtual Console. Is there any life left in the old girl?

Yeah, there is. A whole lot, actually. “Ocarina 3D” is the same great game made just a little bit greater.

“Ocarina 3D” fashions a more user-friendly experi-ence. The touch-screen removes the hassle of constantly pausing to cycle through your weapons and items. The 3-D graphics makes Hyrule feel more alive than it already does. And like the AR games that come with the 3DS, you can aim Link’s weapons by moving the entire system until you’ve locked on to your target.

It’s also a much easier game to look at. The blocky, fuzzy images of the Nintendo 64 original have been replaced with gorgeous new graphics that are greatly improved even with the 3-D effect turned off

“Alice: Madness Returns” is in no way affiliated with “Zelda” or Nintendo, but there are a few minor similarities. It’s a sequel to a game from 2000, and like “Ocarina 3D” it feels like a throwback. The combat resembles that of “Ocarina,” with Alice (of Wonderland fame) autolocking onto enemies and using a combination of strikes, ranged weapons and defensive ducks and shields to take down enemies. The Gothic, Hot Topic aesthetic is slightly off-putting, and the linear and repetitive levels mostly remove any chance for exploration. It’s not full of wonder, but “Alice” is a competent 3-D platformer.

LINK

“Operation Flashpoint: Red River” thinks it’s so sly. There’s a Red River in Asia, but it’s nowhere near the game’s turf. This river’s red because it’s full of the blood of stereotypical Arabs, along with some soldiers from the Chinese army, that you and your buddies kill in a widening cyclone of geopolitical implausibility.

The developers who make first-person shooters long have raced to concoct the most generic war between America and interchangeable racial stereotypes, lifting stories directly from bad 1980s action movies and mindlessly celebrating violence as the proudest possible display of patriotism. Ten minutes into “Operation Flashpoint: Red River,” there’s a cut-scene that makes the last 30 years of American history look like the most vulgar episode of “G.I. Joe.” This might be the most cynical shooter ever made.

Turn the volume all the way down when you play “Red River.” Nothing anybody says in this game is meaningful or important, and all of it falls somewhere between laughable and offensive. In reminding us that war is hell while reveling in foul-mouthed macho bluster, “Red River” tries to have its cake while hitting it with a tactical airstrike, too.

The game’s narrative might be astoundingly idiotic, but the game itself is a sharp tactical shooter that requires a bit of brainpower. It’s a slower, more realistic shooter than the arcade-style murder sprees found in “Call of Duty”-style games. You can’t just spray bullets in every direction. You have to aim accurately at your enemies, whose dark clothing is often hard to spot against the game’s dusty backdrops.

In “Red River,” you control one member of a four-man Marine fire team. That means playing with up to three friends or three computer- controlled partners. Every member has to pick one of four classes, with differences in weapons and abilities. One member is the team leader, who can give commands via a scroll-wheel. Choosing the best command for each situation is vital, as is communication if you’re playing co-op with friends, which is the game’s only multiplayer mode.

“Red River” is probably no more realistic than “Call of Duty,” but its slower pace and emphasis on strategy feels more believable. Too bad you have to endure ridiculous cut-scenes, which try too hard to be mature, to hit the meat of the game.

LINK

LINK

The last time I ran with the “Red Faction,” I single-handedly destroyed every building on Mars with a giant hammer. There was a story to 2009’s “Red Faction: Guerrilla,” but the real point of the game was to knock over everything standing on the Martian surface. Man colonized Mars just so I could tear it all down.

There’s still destruction to enjoy in the new “Red Faction: Armageddon,” but sadly the magic is gone. Instead of liberating the people from an oppressive military on the dusty face of Mars while busting stuff with a hammer, in “Armageddon” I’m killing space bugs in Martian sewers. It’s like going to Space Camp to learn about plumbing.

“Guerrilla” was a leisurely open-world ramble through a Mars in the middle of a future Industrial Revolution. “Armageddon” drops most of what made “Guerrilla” stand out and winds up a standard third-person action game that’s claustrophobic. The game’s cramped tunnels and caves restrain the action in a tight envelope of rocky anonymity, echoing the solitude of “Dead Space,” but with spelunking in place of a spaceship. The missions are uniformly linear, with the hero Darius Mason traveling from point A to point B and shooting every bug along the way.

Vestigial traces of “Guerrilla” make up the best parts of “Armageddon.” The joy of quickly reducing a building into rubble remains potent, especially with the new magnet gun, which uses magnets to make two objects collide with catastrophic results. The magnet gun also is my preferred mode of bug-killing. Attaching magnets to two bugs and watching them squash each other is as fun the 100th time as it is the first.

The story doesn’t call for much demolition work, but those moments when I have to level an infected building while fighting off an onslaught of insects make me forget about how tedious “Armageddon” otherwise can be. Although the magnet gun and maul are the best tools for destruction, the various other guns and lasers are all enjoyably adept at tearing through insect and concrete alike.

“Guerrilla” was no Dostoevsky, but it wasn’t as weighed down with cliches and bad dialogue as “Armageddon.” Beyond the story, “Armageddon” offers up an ersatz co-op Horde mode and a timed, high-score rush mode. Neither are groundbreaking, but both are competent additions.

LINK

How long did it take people to realize that car races are more fun when stuff blows up? Did our great-grandparents go to races a hundred years ago hoping to see an Underslung burst into flames?

I ask because that’s basically all “Motorstorm: Apocalypse” is — a series of increasingly grandiose explosions. Sure, racing is what you’ll be doing, with a myriad of vehicles at your disposal, from muscle cars to monster trucks to four-wheelers. The focus is on all the crazy destruction happening around you, though. You’re not speeding your motorcycle or supercar down a track, but through the ruins of a massive city that is literally crumbling around you as you race. It’d be Michael Bay’s dream video game if it had more ethnic stereotypes.

Oh wait, it does have those, in the miserable collection of barely animated cut scenes passed off as a story. Thankfully you can skip past every single one of these moments. You might want to watch them for the unintentional comedy, though. These scenes are hilariously shameless in their attempt to appeal to the nebulous “extreme” lifestyle that exists primarily in commercials. With their minimal animation and embarrassing X-Games attitude, these vignettes are what “Clutch Cargo” would look like if Poochie from “The Simpsons” was the main character.

That’s the worst thing about “Apocalypse”, but not the only problem. The exploding environment recalls last year’s racer “Split/Second”, but with a crucial difference. In “Split/Second” racers could blow up buildings or collapse bridges at the push of a button after building up a meter during the race. Bringing a city down upon your opponents was as vital a piece of strategy as tossing a turtle shell in “Mario Kart”. You never have any control over the destruction in “Apocalypse”. It’s merely something you react to, and often without enough time to avoid hazards. You will crash repeatedly on a track until you memorize it, and often for reasons that aren’t immediately apparent. The destruction in “Split/Second” is tactical; in “Apocalypse” it’s just frustrating.

I waited until the PlayStation Network was back up to review “Apocalypse” because online multiplayer is a big part of any competitive head-to-head game these days. Unfortunately I couldn’t actually get in a game even though PSN is up again. Multiple attempts never left the lobby as sixteen players couldn’t be found. Maybe explosions aren’t as big a draw for race fans as I thought.

LINK