Armageddon tells the story of Darius Mason and his fight against a “long-dormant evil” that is unleashed above and below the surface of Mars. Unlike Guerrilla, Armageddon is a linear affair, but the series’ staple destruction mechanics are purportedly still very much a part of the game.

This “linear affair” that they speak of makes me a little more excited. Part of the problem of finishing the campaign for me, in Guerilla, is that I kept getting side tracked by side missions. I suppose that’s the point, but I kept putting off the actual story and eventually… sort of got bored. Rest assured, I plan

There is a preorder bonus, but only through the THQ store, as of now. If you preorder through them, you’ll receive a glow in the dark t-shirt along with the game. Kinda neat. If you like wearing clothes. Which I don’t. Ever.

Red Faction: Armageddon will be released on the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and PC on May 31st, 2011 in the USA, and June 3rd, 2011 in Europe.

First, it was supposed to release in April. Then it got a really vague “Fall 2011″ release. Now, we finally have an official release date for Gears of War 3, scheduled for September 20th. Still, quite a while away, but it’s nice to have a solid date rather than an estimate.

No word on the release for the beta that was included with Bulletstorm… hopefully that’s soon, though it will give quite a gigantic buffer before the actual game is released. Color me excited. Sexually.

I’m still waiting to hear about a special/collector’s/limited edition before I preorder, however. It’s been rumored that they’ll [EPIC] will be going all-out for this limited, if there is even one, somewhat in the vain of the recent Call of Duty special editions. Different “levels” of the editions? Collectible items? Figures? We’ll see. I’m hoping so.

And so are you.

You know HTML, right? Simply put, it’s a browser clock that uses hexidecimal color codes to correspond with the time on your system. It takes the current time and converts it to a hex code, which displays behind the time in the center, ever-changing. It’s fairly hypnotic. If you own a Mac, you can download a screensaver of it as well.

• The Colour Clock

Nothing will ever beat #FF9933, though. Find the corresponding time for that, and you win a prize!

I only just recently completed my first playthrough of the first inFAMOUS, but I’ve been waiting to hear the release date for the second. After seeing some of the videos, the graphics look vastly improved, as does the gameplay… which is tight. And also sweet. So swight (see what I did?), in fact, that I actually marked this date on my calendar.

On top of the June 7th release date, Sucker Punch! has also revealed the special edition, “Hero Bundle,” and it’s contents. Aside from the game itself, the bundle will include:

• Cole’s sling pack
• An 8.5 inch Cole statue
• a DC mini comic

On top of those three physical items, it will also come with a download voucher that includes the following:

• In-game Kessler skin
• 24K gold amp weapon
• Electrocution Grenade power
• The game’s soundtrack
• Lightning Hook power

Specific retailers will offer preorders of the standard edition that will include one of those items. Amazon gets you the gold amp weapon, Best Buy is the Kessler skin, GameStop will allow you to use the Lightning Hook power, and Wal-Mart will carry the voucher for the Electrocution Grenade. All of the mentioned outlets will offer the soundtrack as a bonus as well.

The Hero Bundle will set you back a cool $100. Is it worth it? It depends on how much you like the game. Myself, as well as others, have been somewhat interested in Cole’s sling pack since the release of the first game. As I discussed with Aaron, about the durability and overall quality of the sling pack, however, you must realize that the game itself is $60. Then you have to add on the statue and comic. How much does that leave for the sling pack? We’ll have to wait and see.

Again, inFAMOUS 2 will be released on June 7th, 2011, exclusively to the PlayStation 3 console.

This year’s Oscars are extremely difficult to read. There are far less shoe-ins and far more wild cards. Ever year the experts make their guesses,  then wait and listen to buzz, then make their revised guesses. I won’t be doing any revised guesses on the count of no hollywood cocktail parties being on my slate for the next few weeks. So here’s some free flowing speculation.

Natalie Portman summons her inner swan.

Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role
Annette Bening (The Kids are All Right)
Nicole Kidman (Rabbit Hole)
Jennifer Lawrence (Winter’s Bone)
Natalie Portman (Black Swan)
Michelle Williams (Blue Valentine)

• Who should win?

Natalie Portman is the obvious choice. Her performance in Swan is unlike anything she’s ever done, pushing the boundaries of her acting abilities. It certainly wasn’t what I expected to be seeingfrom her down the line when Mr. Magorium’s Wonder Emporium was gracing theaters. So it’s a nice surprise, and one that deserves recognition. I wouldn’t mind Kidman winning, but it’s doubtful (and she has her 2002 win as consolation).

• Who will win?

This is a slightly different story. Despite being nominated 4 times, Annette Bening has never won an oscar. As we saw last year with Jeff Bridges, this can be the determining factor in edging out one person over another. After all, Portman will have more time to churn out oscar winning performances than Bening will. The other player to worry about is Michelle Williams, whose Blue Valentine performance was eaten up by the Academy. I suspect Portman is still likely.

Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role

Javier Bardem (Biutiful)
Jesse Eisenberg (The Social Network)
Colin Firth (The King’s Speech)
James Franco (127 Hours)
Jeff Bridges (True Grit)

• Who should win?

Colin Firth was absolutely robbed last year, despite his amazing performance in A Single Man. This year he hit back even harder, and his go as King George VI is worthy of taking top prize.

• Who will win?

On account of Jeff Bridges’ win last year, he can safely be counted out. Jesse Eisenberg is a filler nomination. I think Firth’s biggest competition will come from James Franco, who not unlike Portman gave the best performance of a somewhat wishy-washy career and blew everyone out of the park. Jessie Eisenberg is sort of an underdog due to The Social Network not being a zany teenage comedy, but the character he played wasn’t that different from his usual bizarro Michael Cera persona. My money is still on Firth.

Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role
Amy Adams (The Fighter)
Helena Bonham Carter (The King’s Speech)
Melissa Leo (The Fighter)
Hailee Steinfeld (True Grit)
Jacki Weaver (Animal Kingdom)

• Who should win?

Jacki Weaver’s portrayal as Janine Cody in Animal Kingdom was one of the most evil and delicious things I’ve ever seen. She was a magnetic force in that picture to the point where I found

Jackie Weaver plays a conniving matriarch in Australian crime drama "Animal Kingdom"

myself subconsciously waiting for her to return to the screen screen.  This is an Australian actress in an Australian picture and you’ll probably never see her again. It’s sad. And she really deserves the honor. But it’s a shame that they didn’t delay the film’s release until 2011, because 2010 is a year owned by Hailee Steinfeld.

Steinfeld was just 14 when she performed in True Grit, her first motion picture ever (under direction of the Coen brothers, no less) and held her own against heavyweights like Matt Damon, Jeff Bridges, and Josh Brolin. And considering that her character Mattie Ross is the principle in both the screenplay and the novel in which it’s based on, she really belongs in the “best actress” category. There was nothing “supporting” about this performance. In fact, it was the other way around. But she dominated.

• Who will win?

Steinfeld. I’m pretty confident here. Melissa Leo is the only other performer who has seriously been buzzed about, but her golden globes should be enough. STOP BEING SO GODDAMN GREEDY, LEO.

Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role
Christian Bale (The Fighter)
John Hawkes (Winter’s Bone)
Jeremy Renner (The Town)
Mark Ruffalo (The Kids are All Right)
Geoffrey Rush (The King’s Speech)

• Who should win?

Christian Bale should (and will) win. His turn as Dickie Eklung scored him his first nomination. He lost over 30 pounds, and visually transformed himself for the role. It’s interesting to see him take these roles in between phone-in efforts like Terminator Salvation. Geoffrey Rush is great, but outshone here. Mark Ruffalo and Jeremy Renner are the filler.

• Who will win?

Bale’s biggest competition comes from John Hawkes’ portrayal of Teardrop in Winter’s Bone, the latter being a very subdued performance. Less people saw Bone, But it’s a great one. Still, Bale really pushed himself, and I think he’ll be rewarded.

Adapted Screenplay
127 Hours (Simon Beaufoy and Danny Boyle)
The Social Network (Aaron Sorkin)
Toy Story 3 (Michael Arndt, story by John Lasseter, Andrew Stanton and Lee Unkrich)
True Grit (Joel Coen and Ethan Coen)
Winter’s Bone (Debra Granik and Anne Rossellini)

• Who should win?

The Coen Brothers did an amazing job of adapting Charles Portis’ novel. Debra Granik, too, did a phenomenal job adapting Bone. God knows the Coens have enough wins under their belt. I think

I don't expect "Inception" to get the recognition it deserves.

Granik deserves to be recognized for her efforts here (she was snubbed in the director’s category).

• Who will win?

The Academy loved Aaron Sorkin’s script for The Social Network, which garnered eight nominations and earns my proclamation of the year’s most overrated picture. I think he’ll get it, but I’m not

happy about that.

Original Screenplay
Another Year (Mike Leigh)
The Fighter (Paul Attanasio, Lewis Colich, Eric Johnson, Scott Silverand Paul Tamasy)
Inception (Christopher Nolan)
The Kids are All Right (Stuart Blumberg and Lisa Cholodenko)
The King’s Speech (David Seidler)

• Who should win?

Christopher Nolan’s screenplay for Inception is so masterfully done that I still know people who are grappling with exactly what happened. It’s a rare, cerebral, summer blockbuster- written with a great deal of love and perspiration. It deserves to win (in several categories, actually). Inception’s huge box office intake could make it somewhat of a pariah, but that’s not fair.

• Who will win?

This will be close. Mike Leigh has been nominated about 6 times and never won. They clearly love the guy. The question is whether they think these other contenders were better. Stuart Blumberg’s script for The Kids are All Right has garnered universal praise. I suspect it will be whittled down to David Seilder for Speech, and Blumberg.

Achievement in Directing
Darren Aronofsky (Black Swan)
David O. Russell (The Fighter)
Tom Hooper (The King’s Speech)
David Fincher (The Social Network)
Joel and Ethan Coen (True Grit)

• Who should win?

This is the first nomination for both Aronofsky and Hooper, and both of their pictures have a tremendous amount of buzz. But so does Fincher’s. I really want the Coens to win. Yes, again. It’s that

Jeff Bridges and Haylee Steinfeld size up some bad guys in the Coen Brothers' "True Grit"

good. But in lieu of that, Aronofsky should take it home for his impressive work saving a lackluster script in Black Swan.

• Who will win?

It’s sort of a grab bag here. I suspect Hooper may pull it out last minute.

Best Motion Picture
Black Swan
The Fighter
Inception
The Kids are All Right
The King’s Speech
The Social Network
The Town
Toy Story 3
True Grit
Winter’s Bone

• What should win?

There are a lot of great contenders here, and many have very good chances of winning for different reasons. I would be happy with Inception (won’t happen), Black Swan, The King’s Speech, or True Grit winning. To me, they’re the most deserving.

• What will win?

Probably a drama, ruling out Toy Story and The Kids are All Right. Probably not The Town. Its rare for the best director pick not to coincide with the best picture pick (it does happen, though). If my gut about Tom Hooper is correct, The King’s Speech will have gained enough momentum to win this thing. It’s important to note just how political this thing is. The academy has pushed digital film over the past few years, which may give an edge to “The Social Network.”

It’s about time. The How To Train Your Dragon film was reported to be getting at least two more installments, making it a trilogy. Like many others, I’m weary of a sequel for such an amazing film. It is being reported that the sequels will branch off into new areas for Hiccup and Toothless to explore, instead of being on their island in the North Sea.

Co-director, Dean DeBlois, explains in some detail:

It’s going to be quite epic. We are treating How To Train Your Dragon as the first act in a much larger story. As we head into this one, the world expands. Everything is much bigger with still the heartfelt qualities that made the first one resonate so much with audiences. There are no longer restrictions to this tiny island in the North Sea. They have the entire Northern hemisphere within their grasp. The only way of tracing the story is to draw on elements that were in the first movie and set up elements for a third movie, so it doesn’t feel like a random adventure with the same five or six characters. This truly is a second chapter in a larger story.

Producer Bonnie Arnold is also hinting at new dragons and some new characters. The film(s) are based off a series of books, and at 8 installments, I have no doubts they will run out of material to use for the sequels. Again, I’m still nervous of the outcome of any sequels… but I’m hoping for the best.

I read an article a few years ago with some industry expert saying that single player and multiplayer games would be a thing of the past. For a game to succeed, he said, games would need to offer both competently and in the same package. While that has certainly been the attempt for the past few years, I really wish it was not.

What have we gotten out of this deal? Tacked on gameplay. Time diverted from what should be the development’s focus to some uninspired outing that few will enjoy. Some AAA titles do it adequately, but I always feel that it is in spite of how stupid the idea is, not because they were following some divine gameplan. Uncharted 2 is cited as an amazing game. To what are critics referring to? The single player campaign. While it has a multiplayer aspect, and while it is adequately done, it is not where the game truly shines. When you step away from the AAA budgets, this divide gets even worse. Singularity comes to mind. A primarily single player FPS, the game was a fairly lack-luster outing, but managed to be quite enjoyable, even if every aspect felt generic and borrowed. Take it online and things get worse. While the multiplayer is a competent  clone of the versus mode from L4D, I can’t help but feel that the time spent on it would have been better allocated to the single player which could have used some more polish to be a truly amazing game, rather than the average outing it turned out to be.

Flip the sides, and the same is true of multiplayer games like Killzone 2, Modern Warfare 2, etc. Or games like Resistance 2, which seemed to have no focus at all. While entirely single player games are numerous, there are few games which come out and only tackle multiplayer. The ones I can think of, have been better for it, such as the old gems Tribes and Tribes 2, or the more recent Warhawk.

I brought this up to a friend of mine, who instantly told me that he has always enjoyed the Call of Duty franchises single player, and is glad it is there. Personally, I would prefer it to be absent, and have that time spent on more maps for the multiplayer, more depth to it, less bugs, etc. But I am more concerned with the games with smaller budgets that could really benefit from a more focused development cycle. Shout out your opinion.

After watching the trailer for this game, I realized something.

My life is empty.

However, Primal Carnage comes in to fill any and all voids of emptiness within said life of mine. It will manage to do this by pitting humans and dinosaurs against each other. However, this ain’t some pansy-ass Jurassic Park bullshit we’re talkin’ ’bout here.

If you will permit, I would like to share a brief summary of the game, from the game’s website:

Combining the fast paced action of an all out multi-player FPS, and the need to accomplish specific objectives by each team member to complete a section of each level, Primal Carnage® will raise the bar for co-op gameplay.

With immersive, high fidelity sound, stunning visual and enviroments, late night pizza will be the call from your team members as you attack the next level. Can you be the top ranking Merc or Jurassic crew in the world?

According to the website, it looks as though there will be two different games modes readily available for play. One is Power Grid: “Power Grid requires the Mercenary team to activate power nodes across the map until they have powered the radio station on the island. The Dinosaurs’ objective is to stop the mercenaries from accomplishing this at all costs.” The other is Survival: “Players team up to test their skills in an epic battle against AI dinosaurs while defending a moving object (train, boat) and completing objectives together to reach the end, where they will encounter a boss battle and be required to use teamwork to succeed.” There is a footnote near the bottom of the page that reads “More game modes, maps, information coming soon and is subject to change during development.”

This is a very small company, with a small staff as of now. I’m sure it will be a little while before this game is fully released, but from what I’m seeing so far, I’m feeling that the wait will be worth it. Beta signups are labeled as COMING SOON and “taking place shortly.” I will be frequently checking in on that, to hopefully become part of the beta.

I’ll be supporting Lukewarm Media as much as possible throughout the development of the game, and I’m hoping that many others will do the same. This looks like some quality work with a fresh, interesting concept for gameplay.

Plus, who doesn’t love dinosaurs? Look out below for some footage of the game.

Primal Carnage – T-Rex Development Footage

T-Rex Attacks

Raptor Attacks

Primal Carnage – Unreal Development Kit (T-Rex vs. Spino)

Concept Art Slideshow

Some more videos and art, as well as forums and any other information you are hungry to ingest can be found at the game’s website (http://www.primalcarnage.com/website/), as well as the design and production team’s site (http://www.lukewarmmedia.com/website/).

When WIlliam Friedkin’s “The Exorcist” was unleashed on the world in 1973, a kind of mass-hysteria ensued. A public desperate to believe in something flocked to theaters and then promptly fainted or ran out. Ushers were given smelling salts to nurse unconscious audience members. People wept openly in terror, gripped by religious mania. This was the magic of cinema at its finest, festering itself in the minds of people long after they left the theater. It spawned countless knockoffs in multiple countries. Today it remains the exorcism movie by which all others (and indeed, horror pictures of any other sub-genre) are judged. When one sets out to broach the subject, they better make sure to do it right.

Last year producer Eli Roth gave us “The Last Exorcism,” the obligatory blending of the “found footage” and exorcism sub-genres. It was a film with a good premise and botched execution. Its lackluster presentation reminded everyone just how good “The Exorcist” really was. But 2011 brings a brand new offering in the form of “The Rite”. The picture is directed by Mikael Hafstrom, wo previously adapted Stephen King’s “1408″.

Colin O’Donoghue plays Michael Kovak, a young man who enters the priesthood to avoid taking over the family business of embalming. He doesn’t know what he believes, but knows he wants to get away. Once in Seminary school, Father Matthew (Toby Jones) convinces him to try a two-month stint in Rome learning the art of exorcism. Once there, he starts a tutelage under the wings of Father Lucas Trevant (Anthony Hopkins), an old Jesuit priest who had performed more exorcisms than anyone.

Trevant lives alone outside of Rome with a number of cats, and is given to fits of doubt himself. “Some days I don’t know whether I believe in God or Santa Claus or Tinkerbell,” Trevant tells Kovak. But he says that something deep inside him drives him to keep going. And so he does, ridding a number of patients of their spiritual ills over a drawn out period. At first Michael is skeptical. Slowly he begins to question that questioning. Along the way he meets Angelina (Alice Braga), a journalist doing a story on exorcism and looking for “the truth” of the matter. I should hope that her writing isn’t as thin as her character.

If “The Exorcist” rested on the shoulders of a few key players, “The Rite” rests only on one. Luckily, Sir Anthony Hopkins has a very strong set of shoulders.Though notably older, the actor hasn’t slowed down a bit. He gives Trevant the subtle touch he brings to each of is characters. It’s often difficult to read what lies behind those eyes. There’s always something stirring right underneath the surface, and we’re never quite sure whether it’s wisdom or madness. In the cas of Kovak, things are more clear. Or maybe they aren’t clear. But they’re definitely not as interesting.

Everyone here seems to be looking for the truth. Angeline ends up being the weakest and most unnecessary player, having no real stake in this game besides her article. For Kovak, the battle will determine his path in life. For Trevant, it will determine the eternal fate of his soul.

There’s certainly nothing new about the concept of a man of god going through a crisis of faith. But what “The Rite” lacks in story it makes up for in atmosphere, filling the screen with the gorgeously dark undertone of Vatican architecture. The dressing is meticulously laid, and I often found myself wanting to see more of what’s around the corner. There are also one or two genuinely scary moments (mixed in amongst the standard “jump scare” fare). And those who balk at my suggestion of there being one or two scary moments mustn’t forget that most horror films have none at all.

There’s a section of the film dedicated to Kovak’s mortician father and the death of his mother. It contains symbolism that is eventually recalled in other sequences, the intentions of which are never quite clear. These moments are nice to watch. They’re poignant and I’d like to know what they mean…but I don’t. Or perhaps they don’t mean anything. This is particularly resonant considering this is a picture about religion.

“The Rite” is not “The Exorcist,” but during the course of it I didn’t find myself longing for little Regan or Father Merrin or pea soup (although a “Your mother sucks cocks in hell!” wouldn’t have hurt anything). This film is stands on its own, and overcomes the boundaries set by its PG-13 rating. It’s more of a drama than a horror picture. And unlike “The Last Exorcism,” the film appreciates the weight of the rich theological traditions its material broaches.

Like a biblical parable, the majority of the picture is straight forward. It’s up to you to interpret what it means to you. The ambiguity can be a blessing or a curse, depending on what you make of it. Nevertheless, there’s enough grace here to make it an enjoyable film, divine or not.

*The IMDB message board for this film has fast evolved into a flame war between atheists who say the film is bad because the concept of possession is silly and theists who say the atheists are fools who don’t grasp the complexities of the divine rites. This is sad and unnecessary. One doesn’t have to believe in gigantic alien robots to enjoy “The Iron Giant.” Exorcism is no different.