Red Faction: Guerrilla

Red Faction: Guerrilla's only failing is in its insistence on trying to have it both ways, appealing to some of our basest destructive instincts and then asking us to think about them.

Red Faction: Guerrilla

Publisher: THQ
Players: 1-16
Price: $59.99
Platforms: XBox 360 (reviewed), Playstation 3, PC
ESRB Rating: Mature
Developer: Volition
Release date: 2009-06-05

There's something of a groundswell of support bubbling up for Red Faction: Guerrilla, a not undeserved acknowledgement that there's a lot of good to be found in a game that sort of snuck up on us. Here we have a behind-the-back shooter that shares a lot in common with Gears of War in terms of combat, Grand Theft Auto in terms of structure, and Wrecking Crew in terms of gimmick. Somehow, too, it manages to combine these elements without sacrificing one of those mechanics for the other -- the combat is well-implemented and intense, the mission structure is balanced and allows a player to play to a number of given strengths, and busting up buildings, should get old but somehow, it doesn't. Just when you thought you'd made the biggest boom possible, you get a few more remote charges and find a way to make a bigger one. And you laugh, because making the big booms is fun.

If it was all about the big booms, Red Faction: Guerrilla might be game of the year material, even. The problem is, it's not. Red Faction: Guerrilla's only failing is in its insistence on trying to have it both ways, appealing to some of our basest destructive instincts and then asking us to think about them. The end result is a game that allows an impressive amount of freedom in the approach that one can take to the game but then has the gall to make you feel guilty about it.

Granted, it's true that the game leaves little ambiguity as to who the good guys are and who the bad guys are, given that the very first "action" you see the EDF (that's the Earth Defense Force, a somewhat curious label for the organization turning Mars into a police state) perform involves the killing of your avatar's brother. You, as Alec Mason, are then thrown unwittingly into the civil war between the Red Faction -- that is, the "terrorists," and in this case, the "good guys" -- and the EDF.

As the game goes on and the story (threadbare as it may be) progresses, there never exists a question as to whether the EDF is the evil side of the equation. The EDF is the gaming manifestation of the worst fears of those who believe that the government exists solely to usurp the rights of the people it governs. When you talk about the precedent that the Patriot Act sets, when you wonder whether you want to live in a country whose people don't seem to mind that its government spies on its citizens, it's the EDF that you see in your mind. This is a worldwide military governing body that rules its people with the proverbial iron fist, presumably the sort of government that discourages such luxuries as "freedom of expression" and "right to privacy." What exactly they stand for isn't always clear; for Alec Mason, the EDF is simply the bunch of bastards who killed his brother, and as motivation, that tends to be enough.

What isn't always clear is how "good" the "good guys" are. The Red Faction blows up buildings, kills EDF foot soldiers without repercussion and even goes so far as to torture the enemy for information. The conflict that this sets up in the player is plainly intentional: following the lead of the most recent spate of Call of Duty games, Red Faction: Guerrilla is committing itself to portraying a conflict such as the one taking place on Mars as an ugly, gruesome, and often morally questionable affair. The story of Red Faction's single player mode is simply begging for people to talk about it, and in doing such begging, it forces the player to partake in actions that actually reduce the player's identification with the protagonist, removing the player from the game. We are to believe that Mercer has been dragged into a conflict that he wanted no part in, and yet he hardly bats an eye at the destruction of property, the killing of military forces, and even the agonized screams of a potential informant. The detachment that this forces in the player actually reduces the investment in the story, given that it seems an awful lot less questionable to simply drive around and look for crystals to mine than it does to continue fighting the "good" fight with these sorts of tactics.

Red Faction: Guerrilla's single player mode is actually a great game made worse by its story. Redemption does come, however, in the game's multiplayer experience and in a little, easy-to-ignore mode called, yes, "Wrecking Crew." Multiplayer feels pretty much the same as any other behind-the-back or first-person multiplayer mode does these days, but the allowance for the destruction of buildings and cover really does add a whole new dimension to the experience. Did somebody park in a tower and start picking off other players at will? Bring down the tower with explosives, and the problem is solved. No longer can you indefinitely hide in cover as a competitor comes after you because there's a good chance that the cover won't exist in 30 seconds. Capture the Flag is a whole new challenge when the most direct route to an enemy camp involves an entirely breakable bridge. If more people recognized the Red Faction name, these are the types of gameplay tweaks that could give the established names like Halo, Call of Duty, and Killzone a run for their money on the network usage stat pages.

The "Wrecking Crew" mode for its part is an offline multiplayer mode that allows players to take turns and see how much damage they can do to the architecture on a single map. If you can't see the appeal in that, this probably isn't the game for you anyway.

The strength of these multiplayer modes only underscores the dissonance between the story that the game tries to present and its actual gameplay experience. When blowing up buildings and shooting at nameless-but-obviously-evil bad guys is the primary draw, it's a mistake for a story to try and force players to question the ethics of what they're doing -- playing the game is just not as fun. While video games don't necessarily have to be "fun" to be great, the fact that so much of Red Faction: Guerrilla is loads of fun turns the implications of the story into kind of a drag. It's much more fun to watch a tower fall when you don't have to wonder if there are innocents inside or even wonder what "innocent" even means.


So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.