luni, 1 noiembrie 2010

StarCraft II Wings of Liberty Review

In StarCraft II, it's still the Terrans, Zerg, and Protoss clashing against each other, and you're still mining minerals with SCVs, Drones, and Probes and pulling Vespene Gas from the ground to fuel production. It's a classic style of real-time strategy play, one old-school RTS gamers should be very familiar with. Compared to the changes Blizzard made between the traditional gameplay of Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and the hero-based leveling elements of Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos, StarCraft II feels like a relatively safe play; a game designed to slide in and discreetly supplant its predecessor instead of ruffle the feathers of longtime StarCraft devotees and risk rejection. While it's not a revolutionary game, it is one of the most fully featured, expertly designed, and impressively refined real-time strategy experiences on the market.






Even though at its most basic level a lot of the game is familiar, much has been adjusted. In no area is this more apparent than in the single-player campaign. Blizzard's decision to split the overall story of StarCraft II into three parts sparked some controversy when it was first announced; basically that means you only get to play as the Terran faction (with a few exceptions) for the solo portion, and must wait until later for the Zerg and Protoss campaigns to be released to see the entirety of the story. 




Unlike the original game, this time around you won't be staring at the sparsely animated heads of major characters as they bicker and plot on video monitors between missions. Instead, Blizzard gives you a detailed world to play around in to give its fictional universe a greater sense of place and atmosphere. The action follows along with Jim Raynor, who begins the game as a gruff alcoholic in the process of rebelling against Arcturus Mengsk, the corrupt emperor of the Terran Dominion. If you've forgotten the StarCraft storyline or never got around to learning it, then it should be fairly easy to dig into this one, though you're going to miss a lot of references.

Regardless of your level of exposure to the fiction, it's difficult to ignore the eye-rolling cliches and talk of prophecies being fulfilled, and the overabundance of 1980s action movie-style macho posturing and cheesiness. It's all snugly wrapped around the missions though, which makes it easier to look beyond the standard sci-fi trappings and appreciate the detail that's gone into the creation of the character models, the smoothness of the animations, and the amount of character interaction packed into the experience. Since missions are bookended by cut-scenes, great voice acting, and rewards, it makes each feel important in its own way, and adds to your motivation to meet every challenge. It's something a lot of developers besides Blizzard have difficulty doing in this genre, with their missions often feeling like a string of meaningless, boring tasks.


Additional narrative is also provided through interactive environments between missions. You're able to explore various settings, from a dusty building at the campaign's outset to Raynor's starship, the Hyperion, and beyond as the action continues. Eventually the entirety of the game's options and locations are unlocked, letting you flip around to different areas of the ship to talk to major characters or purchase upgrades. On top of that, new units are unlocked depending on which mission you choose to take on next, which can be further modified in the upgrade center, adding significant bonuses to each like more effective healing for medics or boosted protection for Marines. Because the campaign isn't tied down by the strict rules of multiplayer balance, this also means you'll see a number of favorites return from the original. Firebats, Vultures, Goliaths and more can be unlocked and upgraded in the story mode, which is both a great nod to fans and adds more variety for new players. It's a system that's constantly giving you new things to play around with and ways to modify what's already available, making progressions more exciting. 






As if that wasn't enough, even more options for army customization exist throughout the campaign, including a research system and mercenary units. These mercs can be hired by Raynor for a fee, and when deployed in battle serve as elite versions of existing units that are called in instantly. It can be great in a bind, and adds to the stable of available fighters when setting up a battle plan. Optional objectives in missions call for the collection of Protoss or Zerg research items, which can then be turned in between stages for even more upgrades. Along both Zerg and Protoss paths these upgrades exist in pairs - where selecting one locks out the other - meaning you'll have to make permanent decisions about things like whether you want to buff the armor of a Bunker or slap a gun turret on top. All these modification systems combined make for a highly customizable campaign experience that's consistently fun because it introduces a steady stream of new content and options, making sure there's always something to look forward to trying out for the first time.

Customization is a big part of the campaign's appeal, but really the best part is the mission design. It's quite a feat for Blizzard to stuff in this many missions and give each a unique feel, but that's exactly what's been done. Each can be broken down into basic and familiar escort, commando, defense, and assault types of tasks, but within each of these a special element is always thrown in. Sometimes it's a giant wave of fire slowly sweeping across a map spurring you to frequently relocate your base in pursuit of objectives. Sometimes it's a see-saw back and forth battle between armies as you vie to capture nodes located around map. Sometimes you'll just be in control of a single unit and need to stealth into enemy territory, relying on AI controlled allies to help wipe out detectors so you can snipe, slice and nuke your enemies into submission. I'd recommend any seasoned RTS player bump the difficulty to Hard since Normal is pretty easy, but regardless of skill level the game is always fun because the mission objectives are so diverse. 


marți, 26 octombrie 2010

NORTON ANTIVIRUS 2011

Pros
Quick installation. Automated help. High rating independent lab ratings. Best malware-removal score yet. Checks files from Web, e-mail, IM, more. Effective intrusion prevention system. Interactive threat map. Proactive performance warnings.

Cons
Beaten in malware blocking and specific malware removal tests. Info displays are informative, but unduly complex for some users.

Bottom Line
Norton AntiVirus 2011 is top-notch antivirus with impressive bonuses. It didn't ace most of my tests, but it did very well. You won't go wrong with Norton for protection.




Whether you love it or hate it, you know the Norton name. Symantec has been in the business so long it must be tough to come up with a new version each year, right? Well, you wouldn't know it looking at Norton AntiVirus 2011 ($39.99 direct). The product's appearance continues to evolve, and it includes some interesting new features. It scored very well in my tests, though not always at the very top.
Installs in Minutes
Installation is extremely quick and simple. A few minutes after you click "Agree and Install" you're ready to activate and register the product. Yes, it needs a definition update for peak protection, but it normally performs that update during idle time. Naturally I forced a full update before running my tests.

More than half of my malware-infested test systems requested a reboot soon after installation to finish removing active threats. When Norton wouldn't start correctly on one system, the One Click Support screen appeared automatically with a recommendation to fix the problem; it worked.





Specifications

Type
Business, Personal, Professional
OS Compatibility
Windows Vista, Windows XP, Windows 7
Tech Support
Phone, online chat, email
More
A full scan of my standard clean system took almost 50 minutes, twice as long as the average. However, by first running an application ratings scan to identify known good programs I cut the scan time down to barely over two minutes—that's fast! Normally this scan for known good programs would happen automatically during idle time.
New in the 2011 edition, the Norton Insight Network window displays up-to-the-minute statistics on how many files have been identified as good or bad using input from the Norton community. Along the same lines, the new reputation scan examines all files on your disk and reports on three significant stats: trust level, age, and prevalence. Older and more widespread files are naturally considered safer than very new or very uncommon files.
High Scores from the Labs
For years, Norton has consistently received the VB100% award from Virus Bulletin. Both ICSA Labs and West Coast Labs certify Norton technology for virus detection and removal; West Coast adds several additional checkmark certifications. AV-Comparatives rated Norton ADVANCED+ (the top rating) for on-demand malware removal and ADVANCED for proactive detection of new malware. That parallels my own tests, in which Norton outscored the rest for removal but not for blocking.
Both AV-Comparatives and AV-Test ran special real-world tests last year. In the dynamic test by AV-Comparatives only Norton and Kaspersky Internet Security 2010 ($79.95, ) received an ADVANCED+ rating. AV-Test challenged a dozen security products to protect test systems from real-world current threats over a period of two months. Norton detected the most threats, but PC Tools Internet Security 2010 ($49.95, ) edged it into second place for most thorough protection.
Just this August, AV-Test evaluated a collection of security products and rated them on ease of use, success at repairing malware infestations, and overall protection. Kaspersky, Norton andPanda Internet Security 2010 ($49.95, ) shared the top score, with 5 or 5.5 points in each category.
Thorough Malware Cleanup
Norton's full antivirus scan went smoothly on all thirteen of my malware-infested test systems. In most cases, Norton took care of all the threats it found and simply reported on its success at the end—I like that. For low-risk threats or threats whose removal might force closing active programs, Norton asked for permission first. Most of the systems needed a reboot after scan to complete the cleanup process.
At the bottom of the results screen there's a little note: "If you think there are still risks, click here." Doing so takes you to the download page for Norton Power Eraser. This tool performs a more aggressive scan than Norton AntiVirus alone. That means it can remove more threats, but there's also a chance it will flag a valid file as malicious. Symantec points out that any false positives will be uncommon files, since Norton Insight whitelists known good files that are widely used. For testing, though, I just used Norton AntiVirus without piling on Norton Power Eraser.
Norton detected 89 percent of the assorted threats, matching Panda Antivirus Pro 2011 ($50.95, ) and Spyware Doctor with AntiVirus 2010 ($39.95, ). However, Norton was significantly more effective than the other two at removing what it found. It cleaned up almost every trace for nearly half of the threats it found and achieved a malware removal score of 7.9, the highest yet with my current malware collection.
Norton detected 78 percent of the scareware (rogue antivirus) threats. Four other products detected more, but Norton's removal was very effective. With 7.8 points, it came very close to the top scareware removers Ad-Aware Pro Internet Security 8.3 ($29.95, ) andMalwarebytes' Anti-Malware 1.46 (Free, ), both of which got 8.1 points.
In a separate test using commercial keyloggers in place of malware Norton again scored well but not at the top. It detected 86 percent of the threats while Webroot AntiVirus with Spy Sweeper 2011 ($39.95, ) and Spyware Doctor caught 93 percent. Webroot definitely won this test with 7.8 points compared to Norton's 6.9.
Both the malware and keylogger collections include samples that use devious rootkit techniques to hide from detection. Spyware Doctor, Webroot, and three other products detected every single one of the rootkit samples; Spyware Doctor scored 9.0 points and Webroot 8.0. With 89 percent and 7.7 points, Norton is definitely in the winner's circle but not quite at the top. For details on how I test malware removal and derive these scores, see How We Test Anti-Malware.


Norton does a great job cleaning up malware; in particular, it's very thorough at removing what it finds. While other products scored higher in specific categories, Norton took the overall prize.