If you've ever played Angband, Nethack or any of the other oldschool "roguelike" games, then you'll find the permadeath of Shiren the Wanderer to be a blast from the past. If, on the other hand, you've grown accustomed over the years to the ability to save, die, and reload, you'll find the permadeath of Shiren the Wanderer to more than a little bit brutal. There are no take-backs, only do-overs. And by do-overs, I mean, you start from the beginning and do it all over again.

For those used to reloading the last save after dying, having to start over again can take some getting used to. It requires a different approach to the game. A different mind set. A certain level of bloody-minded determination. It's worth it, though.

I initially ragged on Lair complaining of its awful control scheme. When given the choice to watch Mansquito, an awful Sci-Fi channel movie and playing Lair, I initially opted for the more entertaining option of a movie about a giant bug-man.

Interestingly, after much complaining from, well, everyone, Lair's developers have finally seen fit to allow us the choice of not using the motion sensitivity option on the PS3. As it turns out, the control scheme isn't the problem. The problem is that the game just sucks. Read on for my updated take on this game...

Viking: The Battle for Asgard is an action adventure/hack n' slash which follows in the footsteps laid down by Conan which followed in the footsteps laid down by God of War. It has the tragic hero. It has legions of bad guys which your tragic hero stomps on. It has lots of brutal, brutal violence. It even has quick-time-events. The only thing it's really missing are environmental puzzles. And you know what? I'm ok with that. For me, the puzzles in God of War were always just another thing getting in the way of bashing on monsters. The really new thing that Viking brings to the table is colossal battles between a Viking army that you raise (which includes dragons) and the legions of Hel.

The sheer enormity of the battles in Viking evidence some serious technical skills on the part of Creative Assembly, which is only relevant, of course, if the game is any fun. And it is. I have been glued to my 360 pretty much non-stop for the last for four days.

Dark Sector is one of those games that makes me glad that I'm not being paid to write these reviews. If someone was paying me for to review Dark Sector, I'd have to play the whole game. And that, dear reader, would suck. That would have me reconsidering my choice of career. Dark Sector is a 3rd person shooter that really wants to be something else. Sometimes. Except for when it doesn't. It tries really hard (and fails) to be a brutal close combat game. Sometimes, it will try to be a action adventure with environmental puzzles. And this too, it will fail at. Based on the first 30 minutes or so, you might think that it was intent on delivering a high concept story with well developed characters. And on that point, you'd be wrong.

The only really good thing I can say about Dark Sector is that it annoys early and often, thereby allowing me to get on the with the business of playing games that don't suck.

The premise of Turning Point: Fall of Liberty is simple: Winston Churchill dies early, and without his powerful leadership, Europe falls to the Nazis during the big WWII. Emboldened by their success overseas, they launch a massive attack against our Eastern seaboard capturing several important cities and the White House. You get to play the part of "Carson" the construction worker turned hero who becomes a critical member of the resistance movement against the Nazis.

As many reviewers have pointed out, Turning Point is a fairly flawed game. Despite those flaws, I had some fun with it.

There was once a time when the common FPS protagonist could carry every weapon he encountered and a full load of ammo for each. Likely as a result of the success of games such as Halo, which have a more realistic limit on weapon carrying, this has become somewhat less common. Nowadays, you're typically limited to a couple of guns, some ammo, and maybe some grenades. Condemned 2: Bloodshot takes this its (il)logical conclusion: not only are you limited to carrying a single, solitary weapon, but if that weapons happens to be a firearm, you're only allowed to carry the ammo in the clip.

As a gameplay mechanic that forces the player to scavenge his immediate area for improvised weapons, it's kind of interesting. But it also flies in the face of common sense: even the most drunken and idiotic of ex-cops (which your protagonist certainly is) probably has a couple of pockets in which he can stick some extra bulltets, or failing that, his gun once the bullets run out. Seriously, if I've got room for a flashlight, a radio, and a digital camera/UV light/audio spetrograph, then I've got enough room for a couple of extra .38 shells.

And that's just the most obvious and pervasive flaw you'll encounter.

Super Smash Bros. Brawl is finely crafted video game. With the exception of some longish loading times, it's technically proficient: the graphics and sounds are well done and, for one, you can play online multiplayer. It provides the player with lots of options in character selection and in character and level customization. And, as it's really two games in one, it's a solid value. But I still hate it. Just like I hate beets.

It doesn't matter if the beets in question were watered with tears of gods and lovingly tilled by the hands of beautiful virgin maidens, I still think that they're disgusting. And so it goes with Super Smash Bros. Brawl.

The story of God of War: Chains of Olympus takes place some 10 years before the first God of War (originally released for the PS2). Strange thing: this fact is not immediately apparent and is, in fact, not made definitively apparent anywhere in the game. The game begins without context. The box explains nothing. The so called "manual" contains nothing but a few pages describing basic play mechanics. I finally found the answer to my questions about God of War chronology at wikipedia. It seems a strange, if ultimately irrelevant, oversight given how story driven the game series has been. Oh well, as it turns out, I really don't care so much about back story when gameplay is this freakin' awesome.

Clocking out after 6 hours of gameplay (on easy), Chains of Olympus is a fantastic, but short, game.

After stumbling upon Freight Tycoon, Inc. at GamersGate, I became immediately intrigued and embarked on a search for more info. Is there a demo? What are the specific elements of gameplay? Is this like Transport Tycoon of old, except just with trucks? Good lord, why won't anyone tell me anything?!? This game has received zero attention from everyone, including its publisher. Counting this very review, there appears to be exactly one review of this game online.

And that's too bad because it's actually a decent game.

I really wanted to like Sins of a Solar Empire. I think Stardock is a great company with exactly the right stance on copy protection (it's harmful to everyone). And I think Ironclad Games is doing a fantastic job of listening to their customers. The very same day that I posted a review complaining about the lack of speed control options in Sins, a helpful reader pointed out the fact that a recent patch corrects that oversight.

So, with handy dandy speed controls in hand, I gave Sins of a Solar Empire another go. Objectively, I can say that Sins of a Solar Empire is a very well designed real time strategy game. Subjectively, it bores me to tears. But this is obviously a matter of taste.