First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.
Treat the ground like Play-Doh.
- Terrain deformation mechanics are engaging, sharp graphics, enjoyable multiplayer
- Dim bullet-sponge enemies, unimaginative missions and puzzles, disappointing finale
Yes, the gameplay is hinged upon a single unique concept but the terrain deformation "gimmick" is executed nicely, turning what is otherwise a vanilla shooter into something fairly interesting and decent.
Price$ 99.95 (AUD)
Buy now (Selling at 5 stores)
Most action gamers are used to environments that remain static, no matter how much havoc you cause but Fracture brings something new to the table: its "terrain deformation" concept let's you change the very ground you, and most importantly, your opponents are standing on. It might sound like a gimmick but it actually pays off in a tangible way; it's just too bad that the rest of the game isn't as forward-thinking.
Civil War II
Messing around with the in-game terrain in Fracture is accomplished using the Entrencher, an intuitive tool that's dirt simple to use: point it at a patch of mud and launch beams that raise or lower the ground. The effect is unnerving because I've taken the solidity of game levels for granted all these years; watching solid ground that used to be immutable suddenly shift and change like so much Play-Doh is, at first, a little odd. To its credit, however, Fracture never treats terrain deformation like a mere gimmick — it actively affects nearly every aspect of gameplay, turning otherwise plain vanilla firefights into moderately intense engagements.
When I first started playing Fracture, I got my ass shot up regularly until I stopped trying to dodge bullets and hide behind existing cover, and started creating my own when I required it. Need a place to catch your breath and let your shields recharge? Put a wall of earth between you and incoming fire. Running low on ammo in a tight space? Crush your foes against the ceiling, then scoop up their weapons. And why wait for enemy heads to pop out from behind cover when you can catapult them above it with the violent birth of a well-placed hill? The freedom to develop your own collection of tactical tricks serves the game well for at least several hours.
What causes Fracture to stumble over the long haul is its unwillingness to till fresh soil elsewhere. While many areas feature physics puzzles, usually centred on nudging key objects into or out of place, most are simply variations on familiar conventions. The more I played the game, the more I found my enthusiasm slowly dwindling. The surprisingly polished graphics and ability to reshape terrain aside, there wasn't much there to enliven the rather uninspired missions which were populated by equally dull opponents. Other minor problems, like enemies who can take three shots to the head and still keep on ticking, contribute to the problem.
Thankfully, the game's online modes give Fracture a second life. It features fairly standard variations on deathmatch, capture the flag, and control point camping, but the fact that all players can alter the terrain at will allows for some creative possibilities. Defensive play in particular is practically reinvented: Instead of simply waiting for opponents to invade, you can construct elaborate hills and valleys around key assets, make sections of the world impassable, or catapult yourself across the map in moments.
Head In The Sand
And really, it's the online mode where the game's true potential lies. I can't wait to see what devious tactics online opponents come up with using the Entrencher. The single-player campaign is serviceable but its lacklustre missions and staid enemy encounters-even the final boss fight is sort of disappointing-ultimately conspire to leave you feeling flat. But despite its faults, the terrain deformation and unique online twist is distinctive enough that it's worth playing, even if won't exactly alter the foundations of gaming forever
Latest News Articles
- Google invites Glass wearers to brave LA's beaches
- Telerik frees HTML5 collection of components
- Space X rocket en route to ISS with space laser cargo
- AMD steers clear of low-cost tablet market
- Experts: Avoid big mistakes with Oracle's Exadata
Most Popular Articles
- 1 Top 5 reasons to hate the Samsung Galaxy S5
- 2 What's the difference between an Intel Core i3, i5 and i7?
- 3 Windows 7 Home Premium vs. Windows 7 Professional
- 4 Five flaws in Samsung Galaxy S5's TouchWiz
- 5 Laser vs. inkjet printers: which is better?
GGG Evaluation Team
For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.
The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.
The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.
My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.