I've got complaints about BioShock Infinite, so if you don't want to hear them, you'd better stop reading now.

BioShock, for all its successes, cheated in a couple of important ways: Rapture was already decrepit when you got there; and the general gameplay was fairly eclectic. The first meant that there was no reason for live dialog (except in very special circumstances), and that there was no need to show the environment's transition from splendor to squalor. The second meant that the fairly basic gun set didn't matter all that much; ammo varieties, plasmids, hacking, and environmental hazards kept things plenty interesting.

BioShock Infinite tackles both of those cheats head-on, and I'm not convinced that these were wise decisions.

In the first case, Infinite begins by showing you Columbia at its finest: gorgeous vistas coated in liquid sunlight, lush gardens and well-dressed citizens, children playing in the streets and at sidewalk carnival games. Naturally, this peace doesn't last long, and you have to start shooting up dudes before too much time passes. But past this, other ne'er-do-wells rapidly appear, and not just out of the underground -- in firefights, and in common public areas. If an area isn't already in conflict by the time I get there, I can count on it to erupt soon. I think the message that the game is trying to convey, is that the city leadership is lying to its elite citizenry about public order. But the message I keep getting instead, is that the game is lying to me about the feasibility of this city, and that level design isn't any fun unless the architecture is already ravaged by conflict.

Infinite also goes to an intense amount of effort building a relationship between you and the captive girl Elizabeth. Which is all well and good in theory, but in execution, this dynamic just hasn't been given enough care and polish. I'm not that far into the game, and there have already been two instances where spontaneous dialog spoiled a scripted reveal (that is, a character ends up explaining something twice, and gets a reaction the second time). Also, for having such a weighty script, Elizabeth sure says "Oh." a lot. Maybe once a minute when I'm not in a firefight. In any other game, these would be non-problems, but I expect a better attention to detail from something that is so deliberately story-focused.

I have some other misgivings about the story's believability, but I'm willing to give those the benefit of the doubt for now.

As for BioShock's second cheat, its varied mechanics compensating for a simplistic arsenal? Well, this time around, someone's decided that Booker needs to be more like Marcus Fenix and Master Chief. You can only carry two weapons at a time, so you'll have to drop a gun to pick a new one up. Maybe you'd expect those weapons to be pretty kick-ass, to make this a meaningful choice, but they're just your standard set of shooter armaments: pistol, machine gun, shotgun, rifle, sniper rifle, and so on. So your gun choice is more likely to be based on ammo than on personal preference.

Vigors (this game's plasmids) aren't very numerous, and mostly follow a common template of "click to shoot, hold to lay trap." There are no hacking games at all -- you can pick locks, but, disappointingly, by collecting picks and then telling Elizabeth to use them. Weapon upgrades don't change ammo types or properties, they just fulfill standard roles like more damage and bigger clips.

I haven't done very much with Elizabeth's "tears" (as in rips, not weeping) yet, so they may go on to surprise me. But I haven't been super-impressed so far. I'm hoping that some scenarios really get into exploiting the fact that, although you can only have one tear open at a time, you can switch them whenever you want. The most promising aspect of the gunplay, is the skyhook rails; but I haven't had much chance to use these in combat situations, yet.

BioShock Infinite isn't a bad game, at all. When judged against other modern first- and third-person shooters, it comes out looking pretty good. But that isn't really what I wanted, or expected, from a BioShock follow-up; and I don't think it's naive of me to believe that I wasn't alone in this expectation. What I expected was an engrossing story of political sci-fi and human ambition, told through eccentric characters and an even more eccentric world. And those elements are here. But the uncanny valleys of Columbia's stability and Elizabeth's personality, and the shooting game's transparent attempts to make itself more like other shooters, keep distracting me from it.

I've still got plenty of game ahead of me, and it's possible for that sentiment to change. I really hope it does.

Progress: Met the Vox

I've still barely scratched the surface of the new Tomb Raider; I installed my copy of Heart of the Swarm yesterday; my Club Nintendo post-play surveys for New Super Mario Bros. 2 and Paper Mario: Sticker Star expire in two days; not to mention the rest of my ridiculous backlog (why did I buy so many games in December!?). So of course, instead of playing any of those, I've been playing a 20 year-old elevator simulation game.

The recent brouhaha over SimCity 5 - which, is hilarious, by the way - reminded me of the joys of property construction, and specifically of childhood hours wasted in front of SimTower. If you're not in the know, SimTower is in many ways a vertical iteration of the classic SimCity formula: your job is to build a tower that's attractive to little sim-people, be it with offices, condos, hotel rooms, fast food joints, swanky restaurants, movie theaters, et al. Unlike a traditional SimCity (and oddly like the new one), you don't necessarily have to provide for all the needs of any individual sim-person; it's totally fine, and expected, for sims to e.g. live elsewhere and only come to your tower for work, or live in your tower and then go work somewhere else. But unlike SimCity 5, you don't have to give a flying fuck about that "somewhere else." You just have to sustain your internal economy and try to push up your population to gain ratings: 2 stars, then 3, then 4, and 5, and ultimately a "TOWER" rating for being the most awesome tower ever.

It's a shame that the game's remakes and sequels haven't really modernized the game much - though to be fair, I know little of the Japan-only The Tower DS released in 2008 - because the freedom and simplicity of SimTower makes it very accessible, and consistently engaging for the duration of your tower. But there are aspects of the game that have been left in the 20th century, like the inability to batch-process property modifications (you'll instead have to inspect every single property one by one), certain properties which mystifyingly can't be demolished (so make sure you place them correctly the first time), hard limits on the numbers of certain properties (and elevators, which is crippling to large towers), and vague in-game indicators of why a property has a bad evaluation (e.g. "Conditions are terrible" without any elaboration as to why).

Nevertheless, 20 years later, SimTower is a fun and charmingly-polished diversion. It's aged surprisingly well, aside from the technical puzzle of running it in the first place. (It's possible to get going in a copy of Windows 3.1 running in DOSBox, but ultimately the best solution I found was in Wine on Linux, in Windows 3.1 version-mode and with virtual desktop emulation.)

Better than: SimCity SNES
Not as good as: I dunno, a better city simulator, I guess?
There are some fan-made attempts to remake this: but they're either abandoned, still in slow development, or just not very good.

Progress: 5-Star Rating

Don't screw this up, Deep Silver. You know what I'm talking about. (In fairness, THQ, but that's hardly comforting.)

The eShop demo didn't waste any time showing me some things I definitely dislike about Mirror of Fate: first among them, that Trevor Belmont's whip attacks move the character forward, making even the most minor battle a constant struggle against being sucked up next to your foe(s). It may sound like a triviality, but having to continually roll away from an enemy just to be whip-moved right back to him is a real bother.

The demo also shows off quite a few irritating QTEs, the failure of which will of course result in a baddie devouring a chunk of your health. It's 2013, guys. I thought we were over this? (Actually, between the whip attacks and the QTEs, Mirror of Fate bears a disappointing resemblance to God of War. And oddly enough, this isn't the first time I've had to compare Castlevania to Kratos.)

The action and platforming seem competent enough in general, but the demo doesn't show anything in the way of story development or character advancement. Oh, scratch that -- "no statistics to delve into, no equipment or items to find and switch up ..." - so this stuff doesn't exist in the full game, either. That's a real bummer.

Based on the demo, Mirror of Fate feels pretty lacking in depth, and the reviews online aren't exactly convincing me otherwise. This seems like it's just an action game with a map on the bottom screen.

Progress: Gave Up -- Finished the demo

What's most immediately arresting about Tomb Raider is that the sinking-ship scene - you know, the one from the reveal trailer way back in 2011 - isn't just early in the game, it's the beginning. In a blunt retort to 30 years of adventure-story tradition, Lara's journey doesn't begin with an innocent introductory chapter and later descend into darkness -- she is in dire straits from the very first moment. It's only through carefully-crafted narrative devices (like scattered journals, a camcorder video from the ship, and her demeanor when re-uniting with her shipmates) that we learn more about Lara's youthful innocence, even as, stranded in unfriendly wilderness, the game's high-tension action sequences test her physical and emotional limits.

Which isn't to say that this is a down-to-earth tale of human adversity. It is, at the end of the day, still a video game; Lara rapidly becomes a master killer, mowing through waves of hostiles with bow and gun. But, at least so far as I've played, her bloodthirst is less pronounced than Nathan Drake's. This game feels like an iterative step in the industry's ongoing process of humanizing these unstoppable killing machines we call heroes.

Now, as for the gameplay, Tomb Raider presents a really fascinating combination of linear adventuring and open-world exploration. Lara's island isn't as open as a Far Cry or as intricately labyrinthine as a Metroid - at least, not yet - but it's a pleasant middle-ground between, say, Skyrim and Uncharted. For all the moments where Lara needs to solve a puzzle or sneak/kill her way through a camp, there are (relatively) safe areas to explore, with hidden items to find, wildlife to hunt, and salvage to collect.

Oh, and you'll use salvage (as a currency) to upgrade weapons and tools. Which, together with experience levels and skill points for upgrading abilities, not only highly incentivizes exploration but also affords a surprising amount of character customization.

The plot of the island is still a little opaque to me, and I'm still waiting for some important combat mechanics to show up, like melee. But so far I'm pretty impressed by Tomb Raider's unique narrative style and mechanical variety.

Progress: Tracking some wolves

Your "progress" in Burnout Paradise is represented by the level of your license -- winning events, in addition to unlocking new vehicles, gets you closer to a new, higher-class license. It's a little contrived, since the only thing a new license actually accomplishes is to reset events, allowing you to ... win them again for the next license. But as you progress, faster vehicles become available, and your opponents become faster and more aggressive as well.

If it was just that simple, it would be a fine excuse to continue exploring the map and vent your road rage. But at high speeds the game becomes ludicrously difficult: turns are virtually impossible to take (sometimes, even to see) and the slightest steering error will send your compacted wreckage careening through the air. A dedicated racing gamer probably won't mind, but for me, it's practically unplayable.

With that frustrating ceiling on the license game, and the lack of friendly map indicators making it impossible to reasonably search for yet-unfound secrets, my enjoyment of Paradise has gradually petered out. But it has made me curious about Criteron's Need for Speed entries.

Better than: Excite Truck
Not as good as: Sleeping Dogs
Probably not very appropriate comparisons: so I don't play racing games, whatever.

Progress: Gave Up -- Class A license

I really enjoyed Assassin's Creed III, so yeah, this is pretty much a no-brainer.

I tried Burnout Paradise some years ago, and dropped it almost immediately. I can't remember why -- maybe it was the arcade-style handling, or the lack of pedestrians to mow down, or that goddamned Guns N' Roses song. Anyway, I gave it another shot and I'm actually having a lot of fun with it (especially with the in-game radio turned off).

As an open-world driving game, Burnout Paradise has less in common with Grand Theft Auto than it does with Saints Row -- not in terms of madcap zaniness, but in terms of having a ton of little activities scattered around the map. You upgrade your license by doing races, destruction derbies, and other key driving things, but there are also hidden shortcuts to find, boarded-up secrets to uncover, and uh, billboards to jump through. For the completionist explorer, this is a treasure trove.

Unfortunately, that's about all there is to the game. There's no story, and the "campaign" is just doing events to upgrade your license. (Okay, I guess there are multiplayer features, but -- don't care.) You could do worse than just having a big bucket of little things to do, but you could do better, too.

My other complaint is that it's too difficult to search for undiscovered secrets. Paradise City is pretty big, and there's no indication on the map of where you've found a jump, or a billboard -- so to track down ones you haven't found yet, even using a guide, you'll have to methodically search through the entire map.

Anyway. You can drive real fast, ramp over a drawbridge, and run opponents into guardrails. There's some real fun to be had here.

Progress: Class A license

New SMB U is a lot like the Wii version. It looks better, it has different powerups, and there's the additional Gamepad helper functions (which, honestly, I never even tried). But the premise of the game is the same -- do some Mario stuff with your friends.

It's more of the same, but that same is still pretty good. And while the game's earlier levels are rife with the kinds of casual, family-friendly obstacles that Mario stalwarts groan at, later levels offer genuine, hardcore challenge. The same goes for the boss fights: while they start out as rote jump-on-head, dodge-spinning-shell routines, later encounters become exceptionally tricky with volatile platforms and roaming projectiles.

Unfortunately, I can't comment on the special world, because - as before - unlocking those stages requires collecting all the goddamn star coins, and I ...don't feel like doing that.

Better than: New Super Mario Bros. Wii
Not as good as: Super Mario Galaxy
Still a good formula: but Nintendo's gonna have trouble stretching it much farther.

Progress: Beat Bowser (skipped world 4), mostly with two players

The brilliance of the trailer for Thomas Was Alone is that, in addition to showing off the game's stylish graphics and smooth narration, it establishes that there's a real game in here: a competent platformer, with falling floors, spikes, water hazards, switches, and so on. But the brilliance of the game itself, is that it goes much, much deeper than this.

Thomas Was Alone can be best compared, mechanically, to games like the Lost Vikings -- generally, you'll be in control of a team of block-shaped characters, each with unique traits. Some may jump higher or farther, some may be able to fit in narrow spaces, and some may have altogether unique abilities like floating or bouncing. You'll need to switch between these characters and make them cooperate with one another to get them all to the level exit. Although the introductory stages are a bit slow, new mechanics and challenges continue to be introduced right up to the very end, and most levels show a sparkly polish that's right up there with triple-A productions.

At about three hours, Thomas Was Alone isn't exactly a long game, but it feels like a complete and fulfilling journey. It's simple to grab ahold of, but ramps up expertly to truly satisfying levels of challenge. The visual presentation is consistently excellent, the music is energetic and engaging, and the narrative element makes the whole experience feel like a work of art.

The icing on the cake is the story itself, which I won't spoil here. Like the game's mechanics, the story develops from almost nothing into something really satisfying by the final levels. I was really surprised by how attached I became to a bunch of colored rectangles.

My only complaint is that, very rarely, collision doesn't work quite right and can muck up the platforming in unexpected ways. Fortunately the levels are designed in such a way that you'll almost never have to repeat more than a few seconds of effort.

Better than: Limbo
Not as good as: Braid -- but it's pretty close!
I hate to admit it: but this is proof that expert-level polish can come out of Unity.

Progress: Complete