Taco Bell's going right along with their shredded chicken -- it looks like they're going to do what they've done with their XXL "series" of limited time items. XXL burrito, XXL taco, XXL quesadilla, XXL nachos, etc... now we've had the shredded chicken smothered burrito (a now seemingly permanent item that I get fairly often), this shredded chicken DLT, and likely some shredded chicken quesadilla and nachos in the pipeline. As a matter of fact, Taco Bell's currently testing what are essentially spicy chicken taquitos. Anyway, onto this review.
First of all, there are two varieties -- the Chicken Cool Ranch DLT Supreme and the Spicy Chicken Cool Ranch DLT Supreme. The difference between the two is that the former has Taco Bell's been-around-forever avocado ranch sauce, and the latter has Taco Bell's a-bit-more-recent-but-still-nothing-new chipotle sauce. I'll refer to them as CCR and SCCR. One has 170 calories, and two has 200.
Both of these tacos are actually a decent size -- I got more chicken on these tacos then I get beef when I rarely order a Dorito Taco. Therein lies the problem: these should-be crunchy tacos become pretty soggy because of the chicken. The CCR is my less favorite of the two. The avocado ranch sauce doesn't add much of anything to the flavor, and the already-there sour cream makes it equally as pointless, since they're both supposed to be there for "balancing."
The SCCR is the one I'd have again. I've liked Taco Bell's chipotle sauce since they've had it, and it works really well with this taco. Also, the sour cream doesn't come off as an afterthought, because it actually cools down the heat a little bit. In fact, I'm pretty sure the CCR was thought of after the SCCR just to give a second "new" option. Both had enough flavor that I didn't think it was necessary to add any hot sauce to them -- the SCCR one especially. Not to mention that they were both already salty enough: the salty Doritos shell, the sodium soaked chicken, and the kidney killing chipotle sauce will have you downing water after eating them, despite their good flavor overall.
I liked both varieties, but I like the taste of the spicy one more, and the sour cream doesn't feel unnecessary like it does on the other.
3.5/5 -- Chicken Cool Ranch DLT (The one with avocado ranch sauce.)
3.75/5 -- Spicy Chicken Cool Ranch DLT (The one with the chipotle sauce.)
Friday, May 09, 2014
Monday, May 05, 2014
Game Review (MLB '14: The Show - PS4)
MLB The Show is a series I first -- and last -- played in '06. At the time, I left the game feeling unimpressed for reasons I don't quite recall, but I did get a free hat out of it, and the Tigers wound up making it to the World Series that year. Having an Xbox 360 since the Summer of '06, I haven't played The Show since its inaugural go. Since the Xbox One isn't even getting a real baseball game this season, I'm glad to have chosen to get a PS4.
One of the most important things for many people getting a game on a next-gen console that's already on a last-gen console are the graphics, and there's no denying that. The Show '14 is a game that, to me, doesn't look as great as, say, NBA 2K14 (for the sake of comparing first year next-gen sports games). The biggest flaws in this game, outside of the soon-to-be discussed commentary, pertain to the graphics... and there's quite a list. First of all, the majority of player faces look nothing like their real life counterparts. The MLB 2K series didn't have particularly great faces (I recall several well-known players having randomized ones), but the ones that were done tended to look pretty good. In this game, when a hitter stands in the box, don't be surprised when you need to direct your eyes to the bottom of the screen just to get a glimpse of who the hell's hitting. On the plus side, the batting stances -- for the most part -- are incredibly well done, and help in identifying players. A nit-pick I have is that players who have tattoos (Prince Fielder, Yadier Molina, Miguel Cabrera, etc.) don't have tattoos, and that's something that I sincerely hope changes in '15. Again, I know it's wrong to compare, but NBA 2K14 has tattoos, why can't The Show? Other things I noticed include the fans. While it's great to see far more original faces in the crowd so it looks more realistic, the fans don't look at the action on the field. Instead, they always seem to be looking towards center field. This has always been a thing in baseball games, but I was hoping for a change. Lastly in terms of graphics, there's also a fair amount of clipping that I noticed in this game. For instance, the bat boy sits on a chair that goes through his body, and when you see a pitching go adjust their pants, their hands go through. Fans also fill up the stands and are just as rowdy in Houston in the middle of August as they are in the middle of a pennant race. This is a common thing in most sport games, but it's something I'd really like to see addressed next year, as it's just incredibly unrealistic outside of Opening Day in many parks. Again, many people may consider these nitpicks, but they're things that are impossible to not notice.
The sound in the show is about on-par with what was seen in the past, when comparing to previous games' YouTube videos. That is to say, the soundtrack is still good, but not great, and the commentary is, as it always has been, absolutely uneventful, bland, boring, trash, and any other negative adjective you can think of. Personally, I don't understand it, at least on Matt Vasgersian's side of things -- the guy calls a game well on TV, but in this game, he sounds like he's deliberately trying to be unexciting, and it will more than likely make many players of The Show '14 want to mute the commentary for yet another year. The stadium sounds are all fine and good, but the sound as a whole is underwhelming, due in large part to the worth-muting commentary.
The game as a whole is a lot of fun, despite the shortcomings graphically and with the commentary. It has a nice simulation feel that the 2K series lacked (which felt part simulation, part arcade), and a fair amount of game modes to keep you entertained. One of the biggest additions to The Show '14 is the ability to use quick counts, which can shorten game times considerably. I don't plan on ever using it, but it could certainly be something worth checking out if you don't have about an hour to dedicate to a single game. The most significant downfall to this game as a whole has to be any online game mode, as there is unbelievable lag that renders the game virtually unplayable. For me, this isn't a huge loss, as I play 98% or more of my games against the CPU, but it makes it impossible to have an enjoyable match with somebody online.
In its entirety, the game plays very well, but the commentary and fairly unimpressive graphics have left me only a bit more than content with this offering. Most of this review would seem like nitpicking with nothing but negativity, but after hearing Ramone Russell talk about how the whole team making this game are "perfectionists", I've seen plenty of flaws (subtle and not so subtle) in this game, most notably the notoriously monotone and uninteresting commentary. I'm looking forward to what MLB: The Show '15 will bring -- hopefully we get a new cast for the commentary, because this commentary is flat out stale, and the commentators are a good part of what makes a baseball game entertaining. Just look at the MLB 2K series; the only reason why the series was playable (outside of the intuitive pitching mechanics) was the great commentary. The Show '14 is a must-buy and no-brainer for any PS4 owning baseball fan, but I can't overlook the graphical flaws and, to be blunt, awful commentary.
4/5
+: Pleasant presentation overall; saves transfer year to year in most game modes; solid controls; all-around the best baseball game I've ever played.
-: Dreadful commentary; Diamond Dynasty saves don't transfer; basically unplayable online, which should cause players who normally play online to be hesitant of purchasing this game; some bugs, including a lot of clipping(that sticks out a lot in a baseball game), annoying animations from the players, and fans who have faces of men, but female bodies... what the.
One of the most important things for many people getting a game on a next-gen console that's already on a last-gen console are the graphics, and there's no denying that. The Show '14 is a game that, to me, doesn't look as great as, say, NBA 2K14 (for the sake of comparing first year next-gen sports games). The biggest flaws in this game, outside of the soon-to-be discussed commentary, pertain to the graphics... and there's quite a list. First of all, the majority of player faces look nothing like their real life counterparts. The MLB 2K series didn't have particularly great faces (I recall several well-known players having randomized ones), but the ones that were done tended to look pretty good. In this game, when a hitter stands in the box, don't be surprised when you need to direct your eyes to the bottom of the screen just to get a glimpse of who the hell's hitting. On the plus side, the batting stances -- for the most part -- are incredibly well done, and help in identifying players. A nit-pick I have is that players who have tattoos (Prince Fielder, Yadier Molina, Miguel Cabrera, etc.) don't have tattoos, and that's something that I sincerely hope changes in '15. Again, I know it's wrong to compare, but NBA 2K14 has tattoos, why can't The Show? Other things I noticed include the fans. While it's great to see far more original faces in the crowd so it looks more realistic, the fans don't look at the action on the field. Instead, they always seem to be looking towards center field. This has always been a thing in baseball games, but I was hoping for a change. Lastly in terms of graphics, there's also a fair amount of clipping that I noticed in this game. For instance, the bat boy sits on a chair that goes through his body, and when you see a pitching go adjust their pants, their hands go through. Fans also fill up the stands and are just as rowdy in Houston in the middle of August as they are in the middle of a pennant race. This is a common thing in most sport games, but it's something I'd really like to see addressed next year, as it's just incredibly unrealistic outside of Opening Day in many parks. Again, many people may consider these nitpicks, but they're things that are impossible to not notice.
The sound in the show is about on-par with what was seen in the past, when comparing to previous games' YouTube videos. That is to say, the soundtrack is still good, but not great, and the commentary is, as it always has been, absolutely uneventful, bland, boring, trash, and any other negative adjective you can think of. Personally, I don't understand it, at least on Matt Vasgersian's side of things -- the guy calls a game well on TV, but in this game, he sounds like he's deliberately trying to be unexciting, and it will more than likely make many players of The Show '14 want to mute the commentary for yet another year. The stadium sounds are all fine and good, but the sound as a whole is underwhelming, due in large part to the worth-muting commentary.
The game as a whole is a lot of fun, despite the shortcomings graphically and with the commentary. It has a nice simulation feel that the 2K series lacked (which felt part simulation, part arcade), and a fair amount of game modes to keep you entertained. One of the biggest additions to The Show '14 is the ability to use quick counts, which can shorten game times considerably. I don't plan on ever using it, but it could certainly be something worth checking out if you don't have about an hour to dedicate to a single game. The most significant downfall to this game as a whole has to be any online game mode, as there is unbelievable lag that renders the game virtually unplayable. For me, this isn't a huge loss, as I play 98% or more of my games against the CPU, but it makes it impossible to have an enjoyable match with somebody online.
In its entirety, the game plays very well, but the commentary and fairly unimpressive graphics have left me only a bit more than content with this offering. Most of this review would seem like nitpicking with nothing but negativity, but after hearing Ramone Russell talk about how the whole team making this game are "perfectionists", I've seen plenty of flaws (subtle and not so subtle) in this game, most notably the notoriously monotone and uninteresting commentary. I'm looking forward to what MLB: The Show '15 will bring -- hopefully we get a new cast for the commentary, because this commentary is flat out stale, and the commentators are a good part of what makes a baseball game entertaining. Just look at the MLB 2K series; the only reason why the series was playable (outside of the intuitive pitching mechanics) was the great commentary. The Show '14 is a must-buy and no-brainer for any PS4 owning baseball fan, but I can't overlook the graphical flaws and, to be blunt, awful commentary.
4/5
+: Pleasant presentation overall; saves transfer year to year in most game modes; solid controls; all-around the best baseball game I've ever played.
-: Dreadful commentary; Diamond Dynasty saves don't transfer; basically unplayable online, which should cause players who normally play online to be hesitant of purchasing this game; some bugs, including a lot of clipping(that sticks out a lot in a baseball game), annoying animations from the players, and fans who have faces of men, but female bodies... what the.
Saturday, May 03, 2014
Game Review (Mercenary Kings - PS4)
Being the PS4 free game of the month for PlayStation Plus members, this was one of the first titles since the PS4's monthly "freeleases" that piqued my interest. A side scrolling late '80s looking shooter? Sign me up! I wasn't sure what to expect from the game, but I was interested enough to give it a download.
Graphically, Mercenary Kings is very simple, and looks as if it were made almost thirty years ago. It's a clean looking game thanks to the HD quality though. There's a bit of blood and gore goodness, but I'd actually prefer more. There's a decent amount of variation between levels, and while the color palettes change and a few new enemies arrive, the gameplay truly doesn't change all that much, but more on that in a bit. Despite the simple graphics, there are occasional hiccups in online play, but they're few and far between, and hardly an issue.
The sound isn't much, and is about what you'd expect from a game with this look. There is a bit of voicing done in here, but mostly you'll be reading text on-screen. Simple and fine and good, but hardly the reason anybody would buy Mercenary Kings.
Mercenary Kings is a pretty simple game. It's a side scrolling shoot 'em up and collecting game. You'll find yourself picking up every bit of loot you can find to beef up your weapons and trying to come up with the best possible combination for your weapon of choice. While I probably wouldn't be too interested in this game if it were just single player, its redundant gameplay is easy to forgive and forget when you're playing with a friend, two, or three. Mercenary Kings has several ranks and missions to go through, probably thousands upon thousands of weapon combinations, and fairly memorable enemies, regardless of the fact that many later in the game are just reskinned versions of ones you've killed before. It's not a game that requires much more than pressing square and avoiding attacks, but it has a surprising bit of depth, and is an entertaining multiplayer experience.
3.75/5
+ Plenty of content, including a lot of guns, ranks, levels, and abilities.
- Not to be played for long periods of time due to its repetitiveness; not-so-great when playing alone.
Graphically, Mercenary Kings is very simple, and looks as if it were made almost thirty years ago. It's a clean looking game thanks to the HD quality though. There's a bit of blood and gore goodness, but I'd actually prefer more. There's a decent amount of variation between levels, and while the color palettes change and a few new enemies arrive, the gameplay truly doesn't change all that much, but more on that in a bit. Despite the simple graphics, there are occasional hiccups in online play, but they're few and far between, and hardly an issue.
The sound isn't much, and is about what you'd expect from a game with this look. There is a bit of voicing done in here, but mostly you'll be reading text on-screen. Simple and fine and good, but hardly the reason anybody would buy Mercenary Kings.
Mercenary Kings is a pretty simple game. It's a side scrolling shoot 'em up and collecting game. You'll find yourself picking up every bit of loot you can find to beef up your weapons and trying to come up with the best possible combination for your weapon of choice. While I probably wouldn't be too interested in this game if it were just single player, its redundant gameplay is easy to forgive and forget when you're playing with a friend, two, or three. Mercenary Kings has several ranks and missions to go through, probably thousands upon thousands of weapon combinations, and fairly memorable enemies, regardless of the fact that many later in the game are just reskinned versions of ones you've killed before. It's not a game that requires much more than pressing square and avoiding attacks, but it has a surprising bit of depth, and is an entertaining multiplayer experience.
3.75/5
+ Plenty of content, including a lot of guns, ranks, levels, and abilities.
- Not to be played for long periods of time due to its repetitiveness; not-so-great when playing alone.
Tuesday, April 29, 2014
Food Review (Kraft Homestyle Four Cheese Macaroni and Cheese)
I saw one of these bastards on the shelf at Kroger. Since I occasionally get in the mood for awful macaroni and cheese (Easy Mac and the like), I thought this could be worth trying.
First thing I noticed from the back of the box is that this is 380 calories -- alright, not bad -- but it also somehow has half the recommended daily sodium. So long as it tastes good, I could be fine with knowing a salt lick is in my bowl. Well, it doesn't taste good at all. First of all, the portion of noodles is tiny. The picture is a bit deceiving because it's a close up, but I think the total amount of noodles is about half a cup. Seeing such a small amount of noodles in the bowl with three different packets had me confused. Well, apparently, there's a seasoning packet, a "cheese" packet, and bread crumb packet. The "cheese" packet (I use quotations for obvious reasons) is surprisingly big, and I just wondered why there was so much cheese for so few noodles. I wound up using maybe 3/4ths of the "cheese" before throwing the rest out, and then put the crumbs on top.
I'm really not sure I've ever had worse tasting macaroni and cheese in my life. Not to say it has a bad flavor, but it tastes like salty noodles with a bit of American cheese in it. The worst part about the whole thing has to be the bread crumbs. What the shit is that? The texture is unpleasant like sawdust, flavorless, and off-putting.
"Homestyle"? Really? If I went to your house and your mom or grandma served something that tasted like this, I'd slap them. It's bland, the bread crumbs don't add anything positive, the portion size is pretty small... I've said enough.
2.5/5
+ It looks good, right? And it doesn't taste *bad*
- Salt is basically the only flavor; the bread crumbs suck; Homestyle? LOL.
Wednesday, April 16, 2014
Food Review (Fresco Steak Burrito Supreme from Taco Bell)
Yes, another one -- a random review of a random permanent item on the Taco Bell menu. This is the Fresco Steak Burrito Supreme, which runs at a pretty steep $3.39. This is also available in chicken, or you can get a regular Burrito Supreme with beef, steak, or chicken for presumably the same price. I'm not sure though, since I haven't had one in ages.
Alright, so... what differs in the Fresco variety of this burrito is that, as far as I know, it pulls out the cheese and sour cream and replaces it with pico de gallo. Doing this spares about 70-90 calories on the burrito depending on the variety you get. For me, this is a better option, just because I'm generally not a fan of sour cream inside of a burrito. I mean, it gets all warm and disgusting and makes me think of man juice or some shit. As for the cheese, I can do without that as well, because Taco Bell's cheese is pretty flavorless and does nothing but add fat and calories. I don't normally like tomatoes, but pico de gallo I actually really like... it adds a much more interesting depth of flavor over the waxy cheese.
Okay I went off there. The burrito itself is described on the website as:
Alright, so... what differs in the Fresco variety of this burrito is that, as far as I know, it pulls out the cheese and sour cream and replaces it with pico de gallo. Doing this spares about 70-90 calories on the burrito depending on the variety you get. For me, this is a better option, just because I'm generally not a fan of sour cream inside of a burrito. I mean, it gets all warm and disgusting and makes me think of man juice or some shit. As for the cheese, I can do without that as well, because Taco Bell's cheese is pretty flavorless and does nothing but add fat and calories. I don't normally like tomatoes, but pico de gallo I actually really like... it adds a much more interesting depth of flavor over the waxy cheese.
Okay I went off there. The burrito itself is described on the website as:
This Taco Bell Fresco burrito is a warm, soft flour tortilla wrapped around marinated premium thick cut steak, hearty beans, tangy red sauce, crisp shredded lettuce, diced onions, diced ripe tomatoes, and pico de gallo.
...Wait. "Premium" thick cut steak? Look Taco Bell, I enjoy your food (for shit knows the reason), but how exactly are you allowed to say this steak is "premium"? It's porous. It has an odd texture. It doesn't really even LOOK like meat. So either I've been eating the wrong kind of steak my whole life, or Taco Bell is full of shit -- I'm guessing the latter. Anyway, as it turns out, the burrito isn't too awful. It comes in at 232g, which is the equivalent of 2.5 standard crunchy tacos, and with 350 calories. So it's a decent amount of food, but when you consider the price of this thing ($3.39), I'd actually hope for more.
It tastes alright. Taco Bell's steak is what it is, and that's meat that makes you question what animal it came from, with a not very steak-like texture. It's not bad though, and as I said, reasonably filling. There's enough texture going on here with the beans, weirdly chewy "steak", and pico de gallo to keep it fairly interesting. I suppose it's a good "healthy" option from Taco Bell (if you want to call it that), but I'd sooner get two times the food for about $1.50 more and get a Cantina Bowl.
3.25/5
+ Decent size. Reasonably good what-you'd-expect Taco Bell kind of flavor. 350 calories.
- Weird ass "steak". $3.39 is a bit high. It's pretty mediocre as a whole.
Monday, April 14, 2014
Show Review (MLB Off the Bat on MTV2)
I don't review shows much at all anymore, but I couldn't pass up this opportunity. MLB Off the Bat is a show on MTV2 that features Major League Baseball players doing non-baseball activities. I was skeptical, but I thought it could be a pretty good show, given the fact that I like baseball. As it turns out, this show is absolute shit. There is nothing good about this show whatsoever. It's scripted beyond belief, it's not funny, it's awkward at times, and most of all, it consists of nothing but an excess of general douchebaggery. The hosts aren't amusing in the slightest, and the show as a whole is pretty painful to watch. I wasn't expecting much at all from a show on MTV2, but this is absolutely brutal. Baseball fan or not, save yourself the time -- there's no way that this shitty ass show lasts more than one short season.
1.5/5
+ MLB!
- Cheesy, lame, pathetic, etc.
1.5/5
+ MLB!
- Cheesy, lame, pathetic, etc.
Wednesday, April 09, 2014
Drink Review (Red Bull: The Red/Blue/Silver Edition)
"Are you fucking serious? Reviewing goddamn Red Bull?"
When you've got nothing to do, you need something to do. I haven't done one of these maligned "Drink Reviews" for probably two years. Here goes nothin'...
I picked these up with a regular Red Bull for a total of $8, since they were on sale for $2/4 at Kroger (for a single 8.4oz can).
The first time I sipped one of these, I was put off by the ridiculously terrible artificial flavor, but it grew on me. It's also a bit tart/sour, which I wasn't expecting. It makes it more interesting to drink and takes away from some of the sweetness (27g of sugar in a can, waddup!?).
If you do get one of these, just don't look at the ingredients. Sucrose and glucose of course, but then plenty of other for-a-science-experiment ingredients thrown in. All-in-all, it has almost the same nutrition label as a regular Red Bull.
None of the three taste all that great, but they're alright. My first thought was that these would probably be good in some sort of mixed drink. I'd sooner take a regular Red Bull over any of these three varieties.
3.5/5
When you've got nothing to do, you need something to do. I haven't done one of these maligned "Drink Reviews" for probably two years. Here goes nothin'...
I picked these up with a regular Red Bull for a total of $8, since they were on sale for $2/4 at Kroger (for a single 8.4oz can).
The first time I sipped one of these, I was put off by the ridiculously terrible artificial flavor, but it grew on me. It's also a bit tart/sour, which I wasn't expecting. It makes it more interesting to drink and takes away from some of the sweetness (27g of sugar in a can, waddup!?).
If you do get one of these, just don't look at the ingredients. Sucrose and glucose of course, but then plenty of other for-a-science-experiment ingredients thrown in. All-in-all, it has almost the same nutrition label as a regular Red Bull.
None of the three taste all that great, but they're alright. My first thought was that these would probably be good in some sort of mixed drink. I'd sooner take a regular Red Bull over any of these three varieties.
3.5/5
Wednesday, April 02, 2014
Food Review (Premium Grilled Chicken Bacon Clubhouse Sandwich from McDonald's)
That's a mouthful. Per the McDonald's website,
"Thick-cut Applewood smoked bacon, caramelized grilled onions, white cheddar*, crisp leaf lettuce and fresh tomato top our grilled chicken breast fillet. Served on an Artisan roll with our Big Mac secret sauce."
And that's how McDonald's describes this thing. There's also the option to get a fried chicken version, or a burger. I opted for the grilled chicken just because it's what I was in the mood for. For the fried chicken, you're looking at 760 calories per sandwich. The hamburger is 720, and the grilled chicken variety is 590. I chose to get this sandwich after reading some relatively positive things about the burger version. My overall impression is that it's alright. The chicken is actually a solid piece of meat (as usual when you get "premium" meat), the bacon doesn't taste microwaved, and the roll is actually really good. The caramelized onions are a nice touch, but I don't care for the bitterness they give with the grilled chicken. I figure it'd work better with an actual hamburger. The white cheddar (notice the asterisk in the description) basically can't be tasted at all, and only add a bit of texture and enhance the look of the sandwich. The piece of lettuce I got was tiny, but I did get two tomatoes.
It's alright. I just have too high of expectations for fast food sandwiches since I've started going out more often. The bacon is improved from what I remember McDonald's bacon being, the chicken was juicy and hot, and the whole thing tasted pretty good, but I wasn't blown away.
+ The bun is soft with some sweetness and isn't all dry like McDonald's usual sesame seed buns. There are two slices of decently sized bacon. Chicken was good, albeit salty (naturally).
- Only slightly above average in the grand scheme of things. Slides all over and is messy in general because of the slippery grilled chicken patty. Piece of lettuce was tiny. Grilled chicken version probably isn't the best choice.
3.5/5
(Almost a 3.75)
Monday, March 31, 2014
Food Review (Chicken Cantina Bowl from Taco Bell)
I've had a good number of these, and I'm surprised I never got around to reviewing what many people believe to be the embarrassment of Taco Bell. For $4.99, this is what you get, per the Taco Bell website:
"Experience our new citrus-herb marinated chicken, flavorful black means, guacamole made from real Hass avocados, pico de gallo prepared fresh daily, roasted corn and pepper salsa and a creamy cilantro dressing, all served on a bed of premium Latin rice. Also available in Steak of Veggie"
And that's what it is. When this item was introduced to Taco Bell way back when, it was soon after I decided to start counting my calories. While I still ate nothing but loads of sodium and saturated fat, I was (and still am) trying to not let myself balloon out. A lot of people probably look at the price for this item and scoff, but the truth is, it's a good value. Not just because of the pretty decent quality of what you're getting, but because of the size of what you're getting. The chicken cantina bowl is, from what I've seen, the heftiest item on the Taco Bell menu, which should also help to explain the five dollar asking price.
I've probably had at least two dozen of these over the past year or two (primarily because of its size and relatively low calorie amount of 540), and I've noticed some consistencies that aren't exactly positives. First of all, all too often it seems like the rice is undercooked. Not terribly, but definitely noticeable. Second, the chicken seems to be dry too many times when I get these things. Why do I keep getting them? They still taste decent. The black beans and corn salsa are always perfectly fine, the guacamole is decent (albeit uninteresting), and the cilantro dressing has a good flavor (although it's a bit salty, but what can you expect?).
If you're looking to fill up and feel a bit less remorse from eating fast food, this is a fair option. Yeah, there aren't too many calories in this cantina bowl, and there's not a lot of fat, but there is a lot of sodium, and it still has chicken that's likely injected with a bunch of mystery ingredients, regardless of what that slut Lorena Garcia says.
3.75/5
+ Good value. Decent amount of flavor. Surprisingly filling.
- Pretty consistently undercooked rice and overcooked chicken.
Food Review (Fresco Crunchy Taco from Taco Bell)
Ah, what the hell am I doing right now. Reviewing something so boring... yes, that's right, the crunchy taco from Taco Bell is getting its own review. To be more precise, this is actually for the fresco crunchy taco. Taco Bell's longest tenured menu item (total mind blower, I bet), the crunchy taco is a simple crunchy corn tortilla with about a tablespoon of "beef", a cup of lettuce, and a teaspoon of pico de gallo. You read that correctly. Taco Bell's crunchy taco has an impeccable, beautiful balance of ingredients!
In all seriousness, it doesn't suck. I prefer the fresco crunchy taco over the regular crunchy taco just because the pico de gallo offers a lot more flavor than Taco Bell's flavorless "cheese", and it's also a couple dozen fewer calories. No big deal. For a dollar, you can't go wrong. It's simple, good, and a measly 150 calories. Taco Bell's delicious combination of a crunchy, often times stale or broken shell, 75% horse meat and 25% cardboard with a bit of wilted, flavorless, only-there-for-color lettuce is strangely compelling. The pico de gallo on top adds a nice flavor and texture to what would otherwise be a very mediocre menu item. I don't normally like tomatoes, but getting this taco fresco style is the only way to do it.
+ A dollar. Pico de gallo in place of flavorless cheese at no extra charge. Good for what it is.
- It's Taco Bell. All the years of ingesting "horseboard" can't possibly be good for my bowels.
4/5
In all seriousness, it doesn't suck. I prefer the fresco crunchy taco over the regular crunchy taco just because the pico de gallo offers a lot more flavor than Taco Bell's flavorless "cheese", and it's also a couple dozen fewer calories. No big deal. For a dollar, you can't go wrong. It's simple, good, and a measly 150 calories. Taco Bell's delicious combination of a crunchy, often times stale or broken shell, 75% horse meat and 25% cardboard with a bit of wilted, flavorless, only-there-for-color lettuce is strangely compelling. The pico de gallo on top adds a nice flavor and texture to what would otherwise be a very mediocre menu item. I don't normally like tomatoes, but getting this taco fresco style is the only way to do it.
+ A dollar. Pico de gallo in place of flavorless cheese at no extra charge. Good for what it is.
- It's Taco Bell. All the years of ingesting "horseboard" can't possibly be good for my bowels.
4/5
Food Review (Chicken Tendercrisp from Burger King)
Alright, I haven't reviewed a food item in awhile, and I basically never review an item that's a mainstay on a fast food menu... but I feel compelled to make an exception for this (although I may do more in the future, sadly).
The Chicken Tendercrisp from Burger King used to be one of my absolute favorite chicken sandwiches from a fast food restaurant. A nice size, tasty breading on it, and juicy chicken. In fact, the Firecracker Tendercrisp, which has been a limited time item a couple times at Burger King, was one of my top two chicken sandwiches, after Wendy's long gone Four Alarm Chicken Sandwich.
What I had today was absolute shit. That's right, I said it, shit. I was shocked, appalled, and confused. I have to say right off that I haven't had a Tendercrisp for maybe about a year, so maybe everybody knows about the change, but this is entirely different from what Burger King used to offer. The first thing I noticed was the pathetically thin patty of chicken. After taking a bite, I noticed the Tendercrisp morphed from a solid piece of chicken breast to the same kind of thing Checkers offers -- a half "sponge" chicken texture, and half chicken breast... some sort of weird ass hybrid. There's a mild chicken flavor, but there's a massive amount of saltines, and the breading doesn't even taste like I remember. What the hell? How did this go from such a solid chicken sandwich to an absolute joke?
Do not buy this "premium" chicken sandwich. It's utter trash. I know only about a dozen people will ever see this review, but if you're curious about this sandwich: DO NOT PURCHASE IT.
1.5/5
+ Honestly, none that I can think of. I mean, I guess it's edible. I didn't die after I ate it -- yet. Hey, there are two tomatoes too... I suppose that's a plus, right? Most places only give you one, correct?
- All else. The patty is half the thickness or less than half the thickness of the Tendercrisp of old, the breading looks similar but doesn't have the flavor I remember, the chicken is half spongy/half chicken breast, and dry. The website claims this thing is 700 calories, but I find that impossible to believe given its size, or rather, lack of size.
The Chicken Tendercrisp from Burger King used to be one of my absolute favorite chicken sandwiches from a fast food restaurant. A nice size, tasty breading on it, and juicy chicken. In fact, the Firecracker Tendercrisp, which has been a limited time item a couple times at Burger King, was one of my top two chicken sandwiches, after Wendy's long gone Four Alarm Chicken Sandwich.
What I had today was absolute shit. That's right, I said it, shit. I was shocked, appalled, and confused. I have to say right off that I haven't had a Tendercrisp for maybe about a year, so maybe everybody knows about the change, but this is entirely different from what Burger King used to offer. The first thing I noticed was the pathetically thin patty of chicken. After taking a bite, I noticed the Tendercrisp morphed from a solid piece of chicken breast to the same kind of thing Checkers offers -- a half "sponge" chicken texture, and half chicken breast... some sort of weird ass hybrid. There's a mild chicken flavor, but there's a massive amount of saltines, and the breading doesn't even taste like I remember. What the hell? How did this go from such a solid chicken sandwich to an absolute joke?
Do not buy this "premium" chicken sandwich. It's utter trash. I know only about a dozen people will ever see this review, but if you're curious about this sandwich: DO NOT PURCHASE IT.
1.5/5
+ Honestly, none that I can think of. I mean, I guess it's edible. I didn't die after I ate it -- yet. Hey, there are two tomatoes too... I suppose that's a plus, right? Most places only give you one, correct?
- All else. The patty is half the thickness or less than half the thickness of the Tendercrisp of old, the breading looks similar but doesn't have the flavor I remember, the chicken is half spongy/half chicken breast, and dry. The website claims this thing is 700 calories, but I find that impossible to believe given its size, or rather, lack of size.
Game Review (Second Assault expansion for Battlefield 4)
Battlefield 4's second expansion is one that I figure people will take two sides on -- "I love it!" and "I hate it." It seems popular for FPSs to offer at least one map pack a year with maps from a previous game. Second Assault features four maps that were in 2011's Battlefield 3, but they feature DICE's new Frostbite 3 engine as well as a new look and feel. Also in this expansion, Capture the Flag is introduced to Battlefield 4, there are 11 assignments, 5 trophies/achievements, 5 weapons, and 2 vehicles. Since the majority of people will be buying expansions based on the maps included, that'll be what I focus on here.
---
Caspian Border: One of my personal favorites from Battlefield 3, Caspian Border is back and it's better than ever with some differences that I really like, though I do see why some people have a beef with it. Caspian Border 2014 seems more "border-esque", as there is now a giant concrete wall running through the map. It's awesome and all, but the Russian (I think? Well, one of the sides) faction has three flags on their side of the wall, putting the other team at an instant disadvantage in Conquest. Regardless of this confusing decision, this map is phenomenal. The huge wall in the middle of the map makes moving around the map interesting, there are scout posts on top of the wall, there's a new tunnel/sewer area, and plenty of new little things that likely makes this my favorite map from the pack, and one of my favorites in Battlefield 4. I realize that sounds sad, but come on... Battlefield 4's disc maps were reaaaally weak for the most part. I have to score this map a 4.5 -- I'd go higher, but the instant disadvantage on Conquest is a bummer. 4.5/5
Gulf of Oman: When this map was announced as a part of Second Assault, I remember seeing a lot of people asking "Why?" Personally, I really enjoyed this map in Battlefield 3 and thought it was incredibly underrated. What am I down about with Gulf of Oman 2014 though? The damn sand storm. It's the Levolution for this map, and while it's a fairly neat idea, it just doesn't work, for ME, for the simple fact that the sandstorm goes on, and on, and on. I think it would be better off to either have the sandstorm come once for less time, and come and go in short durations. Besides the sandstorm, Gulf of Oman 2014 looks essentially the same other than a graphical upgrade. This remains a fun map, but I like it a tick less than Battlefield 3's version just because of the length of the sandstorm. 3.75/5
Operation Firestorm: This is another map that I liked in Battlefield 3 that seemed to be disliked by quite a few players. In Operation Firestorm 2014, the map has a darker look to it, and I believe two new capture points on Conquest that are actually well placed and apparently thought out a good bit before just being added to the map. The Levolution for this map is, for all I know, fire. I don't know what has to be done because I haven't done it, but there are oil spills and fire for the map's Levolution, which makes traveling on foot a bit interesting. The thing about Operation Firestorm on Battlefield 3, at least on the 360, was that the map just looked bland. Operation Firestorm 2014 bumps up the graphics, and makes the game more fun (at least on Conquest) with new capture points. Another super fun map. I don't think many at all will agree with my scoring of this, but I couldn't give a shit! 4.5/5
Operation Metro: Ah... Battlefield 3's version of Call of Duty: Black Ops' Nuketown. The very definition of a love it or hate it map. Well, for me, it depends on the game mode. Conquest? This map is one of the worst experiences ever in an FPS. Rush? Intense, fun, and far less linear as Conquest. Not just that, you get to play on the first section of the map in Rush, which is one of my favorite parts about Operation Metro. The Levolution for Metro is that you can shoot supports that cause the ceiling to collapse on enemies. Nothing huge, but a fun little addition that makes the map a bit more interesting. I haven't gotten a chance to play this map much, unfortunately, just because it never seems to come up in Rush. I make it a point to play it if I see a server where Rush is being played on it though. 3.5/5
---
And there you have it. Second Assault is worth shelling out the $15 for, if you don't have Premium. Caspian Border and Operation Firestorm are probably both different enough to please players who aren't into playing old maps, but Gulf of Oman and Operation Metro haven't changed all that much outside of a slightly different color palette and an improvement in graphics. Overall, this is a better expansion pack than China Rising, just because these maps felt more inspired in Battlefield 3, and more inspired here in Battlefield 4.
4.25/5
Thursday, March 27, 2014
Game Review (China Rising expansion for Battlefield 4)
I planned on wasting my time typing up reviews for Battlefield 4's map packs, but never got around to it. Well, now I'm committing to it, so get ready for a slew of text and posts about Battlefield 4. Hm. If only I put so much effort into worthwhile things...
---
China Rising was the first map pack release for Battlefield 4, and was even included for free for those who bought Battlefield 4 at or around launch. While that's a really cool throw-in, it's sort of a slap in the face to those who already planned on getting Premium. Hey, it's nothing new though, the same thing happened with the Back to Karkand map pack on Battlefield 3. As usual, four maps are included in China Rising: Altai Range, Dragon Pass, Guilin Peaks, and Silk Road. That's not all though -- Air Superiority makes a comeback (does anybody actually care?), five trophies/achievements are added, and some weapons, gadgets, and vehicles are also introduced. For $15, the value seems to be there, as you aren't just throwing down three Lincolns for some maps. Of course, the maps are the meat of the expansion, so how are they?
Altai Range: I would say I have played this map more than any other in the pack, as it seemingly kept coming up on Conquest when I was playing it. Altai Range, to me, is the very definition of an average map. Something about it is just very "vanilla." I do like the middle capture location on Conquest, but there are more reasons to dislike this map than like it, I figure. First, air vehicles are a bitch to use due to the relentless anti-air vehicles that can down your chopper or jet in mere seconds. Normally that would just be a *bit* of an annoyance, but on a map that's as open as Altai Range is, it's really hard to outmaneuver the anti-air vehicles, no matter how good of a pilot you are. If you like vehicles, stick to the ground on Altai Range. Besides that, the map just has a rather ordinary sort of layout with a boring color palette. A very, very average map with some aspects that make it disappointing, to be quite honest. 3.5/5
Dragon Pass: This is a map that seems to take place in a swampy sort of location in China. The color of this map is very, ehrm... brown. There are a number of ways to get around, with mountains all around the map, which make it pretty interesting. At the same time, there are some really long sight lines that make sniping easy for people just waiting for some soldiers to walk down a road and across a bridge (hey, to be frank, if you do this, you deserve to get your damn head shot off). The jets on this map aren't nearly as helpful as helicopters are due to the mountains all around, but skilled pilots could do some damage. Dragon Pass has a fair amount of water on it with Ski-Doo dealies to zip around on to get you to where you want to go. Dragon Pass has a pretty interesting look to it and has a couple really fun areas for gunfights, but this seems to be one of the most consistently laggy maps on Battlefield 4, no matter what server I play it on. In spite of that, Dragon Pass still remains a pretty decent map that'll give you some memorable moments. 3.5/5
Guilin Peaks: Gorgeous is the first word that comes to mind when describing this map's design. This one takes place in a Chinese jungle, and it just looks great. There's a cave area that takes up a good portion of the middle of the map with some good elevation. Outside there's a lot of vegetation, a good number of rocks and hills, and a few buildings spread around. While there are choppers on this map, this is likely a map where you will be spending a lot of time on the ground, whether it be on foot or an ATV. The cave area can get hectic when battling over the capture point in Conquest as grenades start flying everywhere and you can't see much of anything -- it's a blast. Rush is also a pretty fun option on Guilin Peaks, despite the fact it may slightly benefit the Defenders. I'd say this is my favorite map from the pack, and one of the better maps in Battlefield 4, period. 4.25/5
Silk Road: I would be surprised if I was the only person that thought of Bandar Desert when I first saw this map. There's a good third of the map that's just a pile of sand leading to the central capture point that has barricades up and a couple hangers. There are also some elevated cliff areas for snipers to look across the battlefield, and for tanks to position themselves to light up infantry below, or shoot at choppers in the sky. Silk Road also has bombers, which are basically perfect for a map like this. Silk Road is a really open map, but there is enough elevation throughout the map that it could make things a bit tricky for a bomber. I don't think many people like this map as much as I do, but something about it is just really fun to me. It doesn't have the awesome aesthetic of Guilin Peaks, but it is the best map for dog fights and long range tank battles, in my opinion. 4.25/5
---
While Altai Range and Dragon Pass are both rather average maps, Guilin Peaks and Silk Road are worth the price of admission. Guilin Peaks has some awesome infantry gameplay, and Silk Road is great in a tank or in the sky with it being more difficult to insta-kill jet pilots. Add things like a handful of guns, new assignments, and a couple new vehicles (including a bomber), and you have a pretty solid expansion pack. China Rising may not exactly blow your mind, but it will certainly entertain you.
4/5
---
China Rising was the first map pack release for Battlefield 4, and was even included for free for those who bought Battlefield 4 at or around launch. While that's a really cool throw-in, it's sort of a slap in the face to those who already planned on getting Premium. Hey, it's nothing new though, the same thing happened with the Back to Karkand map pack on Battlefield 3. As usual, four maps are included in China Rising: Altai Range, Dragon Pass, Guilin Peaks, and Silk Road. That's not all though -- Air Superiority makes a comeback (does anybody actually care?), five trophies/achievements are added, and some weapons, gadgets, and vehicles are also introduced. For $15, the value seems to be there, as you aren't just throwing down three Lincolns for some maps. Of course, the maps are the meat of the expansion, so how are they?
Altai Range: I would say I have played this map more than any other in the pack, as it seemingly kept coming up on Conquest when I was playing it. Altai Range, to me, is the very definition of an average map. Something about it is just very "vanilla." I do like the middle capture location on Conquest, but there are more reasons to dislike this map than like it, I figure. First, air vehicles are a bitch to use due to the relentless anti-air vehicles that can down your chopper or jet in mere seconds. Normally that would just be a *bit* of an annoyance, but on a map that's as open as Altai Range is, it's really hard to outmaneuver the anti-air vehicles, no matter how good of a pilot you are. If you like vehicles, stick to the ground on Altai Range. Besides that, the map just has a rather ordinary sort of layout with a boring color palette. A very, very average map with some aspects that make it disappointing, to be quite honest. 3.5/5
Dragon Pass: This is a map that seems to take place in a swampy sort of location in China. The color of this map is very, ehrm... brown. There are a number of ways to get around, with mountains all around the map, which make it pretty interesting. At the same time, there are some really long sight lines that make sniping easy for people just waiting for some soldiers to walk down a road and across a bridge (hey, to be frank, if you do this, you deserve to get your damn head shot off). The jets on this map aren't nearly as helpful as helicopters are due to the mountains all around, but skilled pilots could do some damage. Dragon Pass has a fair amount of water on it with Ski-Doo dealies to zip around on to get you to where you want to go. Dragon Pass has a pretty interesting look to it and has a couple really fun areas for gunfights, but this seems to be one of the most consistently laggy maps on Battlefield 4, no matter what server I play it on. In spite of that, Dragon Pass still remains a pretty decent map that'll give you some memorable moments. 3.5/5
Guilin Peaks: Gorgeous is the first word that comes to mind when describing this map's design. This one takes place in a Chinese jungle, and it just looks great. There's a cave area that takes up a good portion of the middle of the map with some good elevation. Outside there's a lot of vegetation, a good number of rocks and hills, and a few buildings spread around. While there are choppers on this map, this is likely a map where you will be spending a lot of time on the ground, whether it be on foot or an ATV. The cave area can get hectic when battling over the capture point in Conquest as grenades start flying everywhere and you can't see much of anything -- it's a blast. Rush is also a pretty fun option on Guilin Peaks, despite the fact it may slightly benefit the Defenders. I'd say this is my favorite map from the pack, and one of the better maps in Battlefield 4, period. 4.25/5
Silk Road: I would be surprised if I was the only person that thought of Bandar Desert when I first saw this map. There's a good third of the map that's just a pile of sand leading to the central capture point that has barricades up and a couple hangers. There are also some elevated cliff areas for snipers to look across the battlefield, and for tanks to position themselves to light up infantry below, or shoot at choppers in the sky. Silk Road also has bombers, which are basically perfect for a map like this. Silk Road is a really open map, but there is enough elevation throughout the map that it could make things a bit tricky for a bomber. I don't think many people like this map as much as I do, but something about it is just really fun to me. It doesn't have the awesome aesthetic of Guilin Peaks, but it is the best map for dog fights and long range tank battles, in my opinion. 4.25/5
---
While Altai Range and Dragon Pass are both rather average maps, Guilin Peaks and Silk Road are worth the price of admission. Guilin Peaks has some awesome infantry gameplay, and Silk Road is great in a tank or in the sky with it being more difficult to insta-kill jet pilots. Add things like a handful of guns, new assignments, and a couple new vehicles (including a bomber), and you have a pretty solid expansion pack. China Rising may not exactly blow your mind, but it will certainly entertain you.
4/5
Thursday, January 23, 2014
Food Review (Chili Cheese Fries and Chipotle Ranch Chicken Loaded Grillers from Taco Bell)
Well, that was one hell of a long title. The original three Grillers (Beefy Nacho, Spicy Chicken, Loaded Potato) came out quite awhile ago. With the senseless removal of the Volcano Menu, the Spicy Chicken Griller has been scrapped, and these two have been added -- both $1 for a limited time.
The Chili Cheese Fries Griller is pretty simple: chili, nacho cheese, and potatoes. It's been awhile since Taco Bell has had chili nationwide, so there's something for people to get excited about. I thought this was a pretty good Griller, and at a very good size -- I think somebody overstuffed mine, not that I mind. This Griller is a lot like the Chili Cheese Burrito, just that this adds potatoes, which adds an extra bit of texture and flavor. While I'm not crazy about Taco Bell's chili, it's still good for what it is. Between this potato-centric Griller and the Loaded Potato one, this one is quite a lot better. 4/5
The Chipotle Ranch Chicken Griller I was hoping I'd like a lot, since it was replacing the Spicy Chicken one, which had lava sauce. It's certainly good, but it's not new at all. I'm fairly certain it's the same sauce that's on their Smothered Burrito. That's not a bad thing, but it's nothing I haven't had from Taco Bell before. I actually like the addition of the sour cream in this Griller as well. 4/5
These are definitely my two favorite Grillers now. The Beefy Nacho one is boring, as it's just meat and cheese with soggy red strips, and the Loaded Potato one is okay, but really salty with unappealing pieces of "bacon". Both are well worth a purchase. At the $1 price, it's a no-brainer.
4.25/5
The Chili Cheese Fries Griller is pretty simple: chili, nacho cheese, and potatoes. It's been awhile since Taco Bell has had chili nationwide, so there's something for people to get excited about. I thought this was a pretty good Griller, and at a very good size -- I think somebody overstuffed mine, not that I mind. This Griller is a lot like the Chili Cheese Burrito, just that this adds potatoes, which adds an extra bit of texture and flavor. While I'm not crazy about Taco Bell's chili, it's still good for what it is. Between this potato-centric Griller and the Loaded Potato one, this one is quite a lot better. 4/5
The Chipotle Ranch Chicken Griller I was hoping I'd like a lot, since it was replacing the Spicy Chicken one, which had lava sauce. It's certainly good, but it's not new at all. I'm fairly certain it's the same sauce that's on their Smothered Burrito. That's not a bad thing, but it's nothing I haven't had from Taco Bell before. I actually like the addition of the sour cream in this Griller as well. 4/5
These are definitely my two favorite Grillers now. The Beefy Nacho one is boring, as it's just meat and cheese with soggy red strips, and the Loaded Potato one is okay, but really salty with unappealing pieces of "bacon". Both are well worth a purchase. At the $1 price, it's a no-brainer.
4.25/5
Friday, January 03, 2014
DVD Review (The Simpsons: The Complete Sixteenth Season)
For the past fifteen seasons I've reviewed (that nobody has read), I've reviewed individual episodes. This time, I'm thinking... nope. I just finished watching the 16th season, and have gathered the following thoughts:
It's alright. It's not nearly as bad as I was expecting, and it's not half as bad as so many people lead me to believe it would be. The main problem I have with some of the episodes in this season are the same as ones that I have in seasons a bit prior: jokes that go on and on and on and aren't even funny (I call them Family Guy jokes), Homer still doesn't work at the nuclear plant (he even jokes about it in one of the episodes), the plots are less than stellar in a number of episodes, and "Homer and Ned's Hail Mary Pass" has absolutely brutal guest voice acting.
As for the bonus features, the commentaries are there as usual, there's storyboard art, deleted scenes, commercials, and all of that predictable good stuff. Also, on disc three, there's a bonus episode from season 23. On disc four, there's even audio of a table reading of "Thank God, it's Doomsday". Below are my three favorite and three least favorite episodes from the season (in no particular order unless noted):
Best:
Heartbroke Kid
Don't Fear the Roofer
Thank God, it's Doomsday
Worst:
Homer and Ned's Hail Mary Pass
Pranksta Rap
She Used to Be My Girl
My best list isn't as accurate as my worst -- I find that the good episodes in season sixteen are fairly consistent, but I guess I picked out ones that I felt were most memorable. As for the worst, wow. There are probably five episodes in this season that I would have paid not to have in this DVD set. She Used to Be My Girl isn't so much painfully bad (as most of HaNHMP is) as it is forgettable, and Pranksta Rap is a combination of the two.
Any Simpsons fan will want to pick up this season. There are some good jokes throughout a pretty sizable number of the episodes, and that makes it worthy of a purchase. Be warned though, this season (like many after about season ten) features an awful lot of "What the hell were they thinking?" moments and entire episodes.
3.5/5
It's alright. It's not nearly as bad as I was expecting, and it's not half as bad as so many people lead me to believe it would be. The main problem I have with some of the episodes in this season are the same as ones that I have in seasons a bit prior: jokes that go on and on and on and aren't even funny (I call them Family Guy jokes), Homer still doesn't work at the nuclear plant (he even jokes about it in one of the episodes), the plots are less than stellar in a number of episodes, and "Homer and Ned's Hail Mary Pass" has absolutely brutal guest voice acting.
As for the bonus features, the commentaries are there as usual, there's storyboard art, deleted scenes, commercials, and all of that predictable good stuff. Also, on disc three, there's a bonus episode from season 23. On disc four, there's even audio of a table reading of "Thank God, it's Doomsday". Below are my three favorite and three least favorite episodes from the season (in no particular order unless noted):
Best:
Heartbroke Kid
Don't Fear the Roofer
Thank God, it's Doomsday
Worst:
Homer and Ned's Hail Mary Pass
Pranksta Rap
She Used to Be My Girl
My best list isn't as accurate as my worst -- I find that the good episodes in season sixteen are fairly consistent, but I guess I picked out ones that I felt were most memorable. As for the worst, wow. There are probably five episodes in this season that I would have paid not to have in this DVD set. She Used to Be My Girl isn't so much painfully bad (as most of HaNHMP is) as it is forgettable, and Pranksta Rap is a combination of the two.
Any Simpsons fan will want to pick up this season. There are some good jokes throughout a pretty sizable number of the episodes, and that makes it worthy of a purchase. Be warned though, this season (like many after about season ten) features an awful lot of "What the hell were they thinking?" moments and entire episodes.
3.5/5
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Food Review (Grilled Stuft Nacho from Taco Bell)
It's seemingly been eons since Taco Bell has released a new item, and I was pretty excited when I saw that something fresh was coming out -- until I read the details of the Grilled Stuft Nacho (GSN). Sigh...
"The Grilled Stuft Nacho is nacho flavors all wrapped up and grilled to perfection in the shape of a giant nacho chip, with seasoned beef, warm nacho cheese sauce, our new zesty nacho sauce, crunchy red strips, and cool reduced-fat sour cream."
Alright, Taco Bell. So it's the Beefy Nacho Griller? Oh, no it isn't, there's a "new zesty nacho sauce." The GSN looks like a Crunchwrap Supreme wrapped up in a gimmick -- I mean triangle. Alright, fine, a triangle... that's cool, I guess? If you've had Taco Bell in the past few years since they've needlessly thrown their artificially colored bright red strips, you've probably already had this "new" item. As said, the only thing that's "new" is the zesty nacho sauce, but I'm under the impression that it's nothing but their nacho cheese sauce mixed with the volcano sauce... both of which they've had on their menu for years. The difference being that this "new" sauce isn't spicy at all, while the volcano sauce has a bit of a kick to it.
How does it taste? Well... fine. As expected, the crunchy red strips become soggy red strips unless you eat the thing either in the restaurant, or while driving. I suppose the shape is something that'd appeal to kids, but it seems incredibly stupid to come out with and advertise as "new." Byfar the most appealing thing about the GSN is definitely the price. At $1.29, you really can't go wrong. The size of this thing is decent, but it only weighs in (according to the Taco Bell site) at about 140g, which is about the weight of a Cheesy Gordita Crunch. Coming in at 570 calories, I'm confused as to how the Smothered Burrito (which is about 2.5x the weight) is only about a hundred more calories.
I'm rambling. Anyway, the GSN is a perfectly fine promotional item from Taco Bell, but you won't fall in love with this thing like, say... the BEEFY CRUNCH BURRITO.
3/5
+ The price.
- While it isn't at all bad, the "new" sauce doesn't seem new at all; Gimmicky; Nothing exciting.
"The Grilled Stuft Nacho is nacho flavors all wrapped up and grilled to perfection in the shape of a giant nacho chip, with seasoned beef, warm nacho cheese sauce, our new zesty nacho sauce, crunchy red strips, and cool reduced-fat sour cream."
Alright, Taco Bell. So it's the Beefy Nacho Griller? Oh, no it isn't, there's a "new zesty nacho sauce." The GSN looks like a Crunchwrap Supreme wrapped up in a gimmick -- I mean triangle. Alright, fine, a triangle... that's cool, I guess? If you've had Taco Bell in the past few years since they've needlessly thrown their artificially colored bright red strips, you've probably already had this "new" item. As said, the only thing that's "new" is the zesty nacho sauce, but I'm under the impression that it's nothing but their nacho cheese sauce mixed with the volcano sauce... both of which they've had on their menu for years. The difference being that this "new" sauce isn't spicy at all, while the volcano sauce has a bit of a kick to it.
How does it taste? Well... fine. As expected, the crunchy red strips become soggy red strips unless you eat the thing either in the restaurant, or while driving. I suppose the shape is something that'd appeal to kids, but it seems incredibly stupid to come out with and advertise as "new." Byfar the most appealing thing about the GSN is definitely the price. At $1.29, you really can't go wrong. The size of this thing is decent, but it only weighs in (according to the Taco Bell site) at about 140g, which is about the weight of a Cheesy Gordita Crunch. Coming in at 570 calories, I'm confused as to how the Smothered Burrito (which is about 2.5x the weight) is only about a hundred more calories.
I'm rambling. Anyway, the GSN is a perfectly fine promotional item from Taco Bell, but you won't fall in love with this thing like, say... the BEEFY CRUNCH BURRITO.
3/5
+ The price.
- While it isn't at all bad, the "new" sauce doesn't seem new at all; Gimmicky; Nothing exciting.
Sunday, December 08, 2013
Joel McHale on VGX -- Painful.
"...I know the difference between 'Miss Pacman' and 'Mizz Pacman'..."
Moments into the show, it was evident that the whole thing was going to be a mess. Joel McHale's try-hard, unfunny sex jokes were cringe worthy. I'm pretty sure that if you make sex jokes and people have a straight face, you're the worst "comedian" ever, and need to find a new occupation. How is this guy famous? Why did Spike think it'd be okay for him to be on? I could rant for paragraphs and paragraphs, but it'd be a waste of time.
For the love of Christ, give me back G4TV/G4TechTV/whatever sort of actual *GAMING NETWORK*... Spike TV is awful as hell, and this whole VGX garbage shows that they have a faux interest in games.
Suck testicles, Spike.
Moments into the show, it was evident that the whole thing was going to be a mess. Joel McHale's try-hard, unfunny sex jokes were cringe worthy. I'm pretty sure that if you make sex jokes and people have a straight face, you're the worst "comedian" ever, and need to find a new occupation. How is this guy famous? Why did Spike think it'd be okay for him to be on? I could rant for paragraphs and paragraphs, but it'd be a waste of time.
For the love of Christ, give me back G4TV/G4TechTV/whatever sort of actual *GAMING NETWORK*... Spike TV is awful as hell, and this whole VGX garbage shows that they have a faux interest in games.
Suck testicles, Spike.
Wednesday, December 04, 2013
Game Review (Battlefield 4 Disc Maps)
I've been playing Battlefield 4's maps for almost three weeks now, and have a pretty good feel for them so far. I usually review maps closer to initial launch, but I waited for the PS4 version of Battlefield 4 to come out, and didn't think to review the maps until now. Off we go.
---
Dawnbreaker: Sucks that I'm doing these maps alphabetically, because otherwise, I'd probably save Dawnbreaker for last... truth is, I think it may be my favorite map on-disc, which is probably unusual, because I feel like a lot of people loathe it. I can understand why if you love to fly jets (why the hell are they on this map anyway?), but weaving through the skyscrapers in a helicopter and roaming the streets in an LAV is some fun stuff. Not to mention I love the variety on the map as far as map elevations. I wasn't expecting to care for this map based on what I initially heard of it, but it's grown to become one of my unquestioned favorites. I give this map a 9, simply because it seems fantastic compared to the vast majority of the maps on-disc. 4.5/5
Flood Zone: One of the maps I was really intrigued by, because I thought the whole Levolution idea of the map being flooded and having to travel around on boats would be awesome -- and in theory, it should be awesome. The problem I have with this map is pretty simple... there just aren't enough boats around. If you're stuck in the water, you're done for. There are some ledges to crawl up onto, but then you have to jump in the water again to get on another ledge, and so on. When you're actually at the parking garage or on one of the many roofs (or in a boat!), Flood Zone is actually a pretty fun map. I don't love the layout, but it's a pretty decent map. Hey, there are certainly far worse ones on the disc... I'll get to those soon. 3.5/5
Golmud Railway: *Shudder*. That's about it. This map is literally a battlefield. A battle... on a field. It's about as fun as it sounds. Most of this map is flat (with a few small hills), and it's the very definition of an uninspired map. There are few landmarks to make the map stand out, and it's just a bore to play, generally. The few little "towns" on Golmud Railway keep the map from being a complete dud, but it's still pretty bad anyway. Just a very generic, bland, un-fun map. Not much else to say about this one. 2.75/5
Hainan Resort: Fun stuff -- especially on Conquest Large (Surprise, surprise!). Hainan Resort has an incredible layout that balances a good amount of infantry fighting, naval warfare, and a little death from above. The flag points in Conquest Large are in memorable locations, and it's just a well-made map as a whole. Additionally, unlike Flood Zone, you don't get stuck in the water (in most areas) and feel like you're inevitably going to die. Another pretty fun map on a disc of general mediocrity. 4/5
Lancang Dam: Just a prime example of a Battlefield 4 map... EH. It's playable and alright and fine and okay, but it's not a map that comes up and makes you say, "Ooo, I like this one." The idea of an island out in the water away from the dam makes the map more interesting, and there can be some pretty intense naval battles, but it's generally a pretty bland experience, albeit not bad. There are some fun fights to be had on the ground as well. 3.75/5
Operation Locker: The one map that has no vehicles on any game mode by default, I didn't think I'd like Operation Locker... well spank my diddly, this is one hell of a fun map. Try playing this on Conquest (or Obliteration), and just watch the utter shit storm that ensues at choke points. Really, in all of my hours of Battlefield gameplay, I've never seen such intense gunfights among so many people in one area. It can definitely get insanely hectic, but that's what I like about this map -- there's little to no breathing room. Not a map to play constantly (not for me, I'd probably get a headache...), but awesome to have as an option to go to time-to-time. 4/5
Paracel Storm: I saw hours of gameplay of Paracel Storm, and I thought it looked phenomenal... almost like a new version of Wake Island. The big thing with Paracel Storm is probably its Levolution, which, naturally, creates a huge storm, and causes a battleship to crash into one of the islands. The waves will frustrate snipers and those on the water as the storm rolls in, because it can make controlling a ship or a boat very difficult, and hard to snipe from island to island. This is just a very fun map for people who love rolling around on a boat/ship or in the air. There are some nice little areas to have some intense gunfights, but the vehicles and Levolution (that's actually worthwhile, unlike some maps) really make this map. 4/5
Rogue Transmission: Kind of the same story as Golmud Railway for me, but a little bit better, as it's more memorable, and it seems like somebody older than eight years old designed it. The big thing about Rogue Transmission that makes it stand out is the satellite (?) on the map... that's really what makes it better than Golmud. Other than that, it's a very "meh" map with a few areas with buildings and nothing super spectacular. I will say that this is a good map for tanks/LAVs to roll around on. Not so much for air vehicles though, as it's really hard to get away. 3/5
Siege of Shanghai: Anybody who's anybody has seen Siege of Shanghai in some fashion. Like Paracel Storm, it's one of the few maps with a Levolution that actually changes the map fairly significantly. I've played a lot of this map between the beta and full version of the game, and I still enjoy it -- I think that's the sign of a well made map. I love the map more when the skyscraper is still in tact, but it's entertaining both ways. Siege of Shanghai may also be the best map for tank v. helicopter battles, and it's fun just to watch them. 4.25/5
Zavod 311: This reminds me of the one DLC map in Battlefield 3... I can't think of the name. Anyway, this is an underrated map, I think. However, Zavod 311 is a prime example of why Levolution is mostly just a gimmick. Sure, a little pathway gets blocked off, but it doesn't change the map all that drastically. Zavod is also one of the few maps where it may be possible to be in the air with a helicopter for more than fifteen seconds, as it's fairly easy to get away from spots... BUT, be wary of trees, since, you know, they're everywhere. A fun medium-ish sized map that actually sort of plays small/intimately. I like it. 3.75/5
---
Altogether, Battlefield 4's maps are just alright. There are a few stand outs, I suppose, but not really any maps (other than Dawnbreaker) that I'd consider a future classic. It's sad to say, but I hope that the maps DICE heldback from being on-disc for DLC are more fun than the lot of these, because otherwise I'll be a sad, sad, boy. All-in-all, Battlefield 3's disc maps were a decent bit better than those offered here in Battlefield 4.
3.75/5
---
Dawnbreaker: Sucks that I'm doing these maps alphabetically, because otherwise, I'd probably save Dawnbreaker for last... truth is, I think it may be my favorite map on-disc, which is probably unusual, because I feel like a lot of people loathe it. I can understand why if you love to fly jets (why the hell are they on this map anyway?), but weaving through the skyscrapers in a helicopter and roaming the streets in an LAV is some fun stuff. Not to mention I love the variety on the map as far as map elevations. I wasn't expecting to care for this map based on what I initially heard of it, but it's grown to become one of my unquestioned favorites. I give this map a 9, simply because it seems fantastic compared to the vast majority of the maps on-disc. 4.5/5
Flood Zone: One of the maps I was really intrigued by, because I thought the whole Levolution idea of the map being flooded and having to travel around on boats would be awesome -- and in theory, it should be awesome. The problem I have with this map is pretty simple... there just aren't enough boats around. If you're stuck in the water, you're done for. There are some ledges to crawl up onto, but then you have to jump in the water again to get on another ledge, and so on. When you're actually at the parking garage or on one of the many roofs (or in a boat!), Flood Zone is actually a pretty fun map. I don't love the layout, but it's a pretty decent map. Hey, there are certainly far worse ones on the disc... I'll get to those soon. 3.5/5
Golmud Railway: *Shudder*. That's about it. This map is literally a battlefield. A battle... on a field. It's about as fun as it sounds. Most of this map is flat (with a few small hills), and it's the very definition of an uninspired map. There are few landmarks to make the map stand out, and it's just a bore to play, generally. The few little "towns" on Golmud Railway keep the map from being a complete dud, but it's still pretty bad anyway. Just a very generic, bland, un-fun map. Not much else to say about this one. 2.75/5
Hainan Resort: Fun stuff -- especially on Conquest Large (Surprise, surprise!). Hainan Resort has an incredible layout that balances a good amount of infantry fighting, naval warfare, and a little death from above. The flag points in Conquest Large are in memorable locations, and it's just a well-made map as a whole. Additionally, unlike Flood Zone, you don't get stuck in the water (in most areas) and feel like you're inevitably going to die. Another pretty fun map on a disc of general mediocrity. 4/5
Lancang Dam: Just a prime example of a Battlefield 4 map... EH. It's playable and alright and fine and okay, but it's not a map that comes up and makes you say, "Ooo, I like this one." The idea of an island out in the water away from the dam makes the map more interesting, and there can be some pretty intense naval battles, but it's generally a pretty bland experience, albeit not bad. There are some fun fights to be had on the ground as well. 3.75/5
Operation Locker: The one map that has no vehicles on any game mode by default, I didn't think I'd like Operation Locker... well spank my diddly, this is one hell of a fun map. Try playing this on Conquest (or Obliteration), and just watch the utter shit storm that ensues at choke points. Really, in all of my hours of Battlefield gameplay, I've never seen such intense gunfights among so many people in one area. It can definitely get insanely hectic, but that's what I like about this map -- there's little to no breathing room. Not a map to play constantly (not for me, I'd probably get a headache...), but awesome to have as an option to go to time-to-time. 4/5
Paracel Storm: I saw hours of gameplay of Paracel Storm, and I thought it looked phenomenal... almost like a new version of Wake Island. The big thing with Paracel Storm is probably its Levolution, which, naturally, creates a huge storm, and causes a battleship to crash into one of the islands. The waves will frustrate snipers and those on the water as the storm rolls in, because it can make controlling a ship or a boat very difficult, and hard to snipe from island to island. This is just a very fun map for people who love rolling around on a boat/ship or in the air. There are some nice little areas to have some intense gunfights, but the vehicles and Levolution (that's actually worthwhile, unlike some maps) really make this map. 4/5
Rogue Transmission: Kind of the same story as Golmud Railway for me, but a little bit better, as it's more memorable, and it seems like somebody older than eight years old designed it. The big thing about Rogue Transmission that makes it stand out is the satellite (?) on the map... that's really what makes it better than Golmud. Other than that, it's a very "meh" map with a few areas with buildings and nothing super spectacular. I will say that this is a good map for tanks/LAVs to roll around on. Not so much for air vehicles though, as it's really hard to get away. 3/5
Siege of Shanghai: Anybody who's anybody has seen Siege of Shanghai in some fashion. Like Paracel Storm, it's one of the few maps with a Levolution that actually changes the map fairly significantly. I've played a lot of this map between the beta and full version of the game, and I still enjoy it -- I think that's the sign of a well made map. I love the map more when the skyscraper is still in tact, but it's entertaining both ways. Siege of Shanghai may also be the best map for tank v. helicopter battles, and it's fun just to watch them. 4.25/5
Zavod 311: This reminds me of the one DLC map in Battlefield 3... I can't think of the name. Anyway, this is an underrated map, I think. However, Zavod 311 is a prime example of why Levolution is mostly just a gimmick. Sure, a little pathway gets blocked off, but it doesn't change the map all that drastically. Zavod is also one of the few maps where it may be possible to be in the air with a helicopter for more than fifteen seconds, as it's fairly easy to get away from spots... BUT, be wary of trees, since, you know, they're everywhere. A fun medium-ish sized map that actually sort of plays small/intimately. I like it. 3.75/5
---
Altogether, Battlefield 4's maps are just alright. There are a few stand outs, I suppose, but not really any maps (other than Dawnbreaker) that I'd consider a future classic. It's sad to say, but I hope that the maps DICE heldback from being on-disc for DLC are more fun than the lot of these, because otherwise I'll be a sad, sad, boy. All-in-all, Battlefield 3's disc maps were a decent bit better than those offered here in Battlefield 4.
3.75/5
Friday, November 29, 2013
Game Review (Mario Party: Island Tour - 3DS)
As an early Christmas present, my sister got Mario Party: Island Tour. I had told her about the low scores, but she didn't listen -- and I can't blame her. Mario Party games never get very high scores, but still tend to be entertaining, even if based largely on luck. Mario Party: Island Tour is much of the same -- maybe a bit less.
The biggest difference with Island Tour as opposed to other Mario Party games is that most of the boards do away with stars and coins and just involve one player getting to the "finish line." This is weird and somewhat disappointing, but worse yet, you only play a mini-game every three turns, rather than after everybody has one turn. Thankfully, there is a mini-game mode for people who want to do that. While some of the mini-games are cute and good for a laugh, the big issue with it all is that at least half of them seem to be chance games, where there's no skill involved. The same can be said for a lot of the game boards, which favor luck over skill. Mario Party games and even Mario Kart games tend to do this at times to let people in last place catch up, but it's a bit much in this game. If you don't mind finishing last simply because you picked the wrong place to stand in a mini-game or happened to land on a "?" on a board, then you'll be fine. Basically, don't take Mario Party: Island Tour too seriously. As annoying as the lack of stars and coins on most boards is (as well as the emphasis on chance over skill/real thought), the $40 price tag is perhaps the biggest turn off here. This game features 7 boards to play, as well as (I believe) about 80 mini games. That seems like a decent amount, but the games don't last long while you play them. $30 would be much more reasonable, so I'd recommend buying this game on sale.
As I said, if you can tolerate getting screwed no matter how well you're playing, and like playing brief games of Mario Party, this game's not too bad. The biggest thing this game has going for it is its Mario-themed charm. A decent amount of the mini-games are entertaining, but this is probably the weakest Mario Party yet that I have played. It's a game that's not great. Really, I'd consider it "barely decent." I wouldn't run out to buy Mario Party: Island Tour, but I believe it's better than most critics seem to think it is... it makes me wonder if they even played a Mario Party before.
3.25/5
+: It's a Mario game; Some mini-games are pretty fun; Good in short bursts.
-: Not enough content for the price; Too many "been there, done that" and chance-fated mini-games; Doesn't feel too Mario Party-esque with the omission of coins/stars on most boards.
The biggest difference with Island Tour as opposed to other Mario Party games is that most of the boards do away with stars and coins and just involve one player getting to the "finish line." This is weird and somewhat disappointing, but worse yet, you only play a mini-game every three turns, rather than after everybody has one turn. Thankfully, there is a mini-game mode for people who want to do that. While some of the mini-games are cute and good for a laugh, the big issue with it all is that at least half of them seem to be chance games, where there's no skill involved. The same can be said for a lot of the game boards, which favor luck over skill. Mario Party games and even Mario Kart games tend to do this at times to let people in last place catch up, but it's a bit much in this game. If you don't mind finishing last simply because you picked the wrong place to stand in a mini-game or happened to land on a "?" on a board, then you'll be fine. Basically, don't take Mario Party: Island Tour too seriously. As annoying as the lack of stars and coins on most boards is (as well as the emphasis on chance over skill/real thought), the $40 price tag is perhaps the biggest turn off here. This game features 7 boards to play, as well as (I believe) about 80 mini games. That seems like a decent amount, but the games don't last long while you play them. $30 would be much more reasonable, so I'd recommend buying this game on sale.
As I said, if you can tolerate getting screwed no matter how well you're playing, and like playing brief games of Mario Party, this game's not too bad. The biggest thing this game has going for it is its Mario-themed charm. A decent amount of the mini-games are entertaining, but this is probably the weakest Mario Party yet that I have played. It's a game that's not great. Really, I'd consider it "barely decent." I wouldn't run out to buy Mario Party: Island Tour, but I believe it's better than most critics seem to think it is... it makes me wonder if they even played a Mario Party before.
3.25/5
+: It's a Mario game; Some mini-games are pretty fun; Good in short bursts.
-: Not enough content for the price; Too many "been there, done that" and chance-fated mini-games; Doesn't feel too Mario Party-esque with the omission of coins/stars on most boards.
Wednesday, November 27, 2013
Game Review (Flower - PS4)
Flower originally came out in 2009 on the PS3 (I think?). It is also available to play on Vita, and now on PS4. For $6.99, you can play the game on all of those consoles. Additionally, if you already had the game, you get it for free on PS4. I don't expect this to be the only PS3 game that'll be upgradable on PS4 for free (if you previously paid for it).
Graphics: Flower is an incredibly simplistic looking game -- the whole game will take up maybe 2GB on your hard drive. The best looking thing -- er, things -- in Flower are the blades of grass. The way they ripple in the wind is great. Secondly, the vibrance of all the colors along with the soothing feel of the pedals through the wind is incredibly relaxing. Anything else in the game doesn't look particularly good, but that's not a big loss. Flower isn't so much about the graphical detail as much as it is about the flow and color, which are both great. 4/5
Sound: I'd find it hard to believe that there's a more calming game out there. The music in this game is simplistic, but mesmerizing. If you used to take yoga or have thought about it, Flower should work just fine. The sound of the wind with the subtle music and notes that play every time you bloom a flower could lull you to sleep -- in a good way! 5/5
Control: Six-Axis is what you use to control the game. The only time you use a button is when you bloom your initial flower, start a level, or use the wind. The control from the start was pretty much perfectly fluid -- very responsive, and don't require massive movements. Using Six-Axis makes the game feel even more "floaty" and relaxing. 5/5
Fun: While the game is only about an hour long (yes, you read that right), it's a prime example of quality over quantity. I can tell you that the majority of the time while playing this game, I found myself so relaxed that my mouth was left open. If you're looking for a unique, fun experience to take up a portion of your day, Flower will more than likely entertain you more than an evening at the cinema would... and for a little less money.
4.5/5
Graphics: Flower is an incredibly simplistic looking game -- the whole game will take up maybe 2GB on your hard drive. The best looking thing -- er, things -- in Flower are the blades of grass. The way they ripple in the wind is great. Secondly, the vibrance of all the colors along with the soothing feel of the pedals through the wind is incredibly relaxing. Anything else in the game doesn't look particularly good, but that's not a big loss. Flower isn't so much about the graphical detail as much as it is about the flow and color, which are both great. 4/5
Sound: I'd find it hard to believe that there's a more calming game out there. The music in this game is simplistic, but mesmerizing. If you used to take yoga or have thought about it, Flower should work just fine. The sound of the wind with the subtle music and notes that play every time you bloom a flower could lull you to sleep -- in a good way! 5/5
Control: Six-Axis is what you use to control the game. The only time you use a button is when you bloom your initial flower, start a level, or use the wind. The control from the start was pretty much perfectly fluid -- very responsive, and don't require massive movements. Using Six-Axis makes the game feel even more "floaty" and relaxing. 5/5
Fun: While the game is only about an hour long (yes, you read that right), it's a prime example of quality over quantity. I can tell you that the majority of the time while playing this game, I found myself so relaxed that my mouth was left open. If you're looking for a unique, fun experience to take up a portion of your day, Flower will more than likely entertain you more than an evening at the cinema would... and for a little less money.
4.5/5
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)