Shellshock: Nam '67
Developer: Guerrilla
Publisher: Eidos
Plaform: PS2, Xbox, PC
Marks: 6

In Shellshock: Nam '67, Eidos have tried to tackle the topic of the Vietnam War in video game format. This is no small task, and the list of failed films, books and music can attest to this. In this essay, I will explain why.

The game attempts to portray an accurate depiction of life in the shit, complete with napalm raids, ambushes, booby traps, etc. However, it falls well short of the mark and reinforces the idea that the Americans are usually in the right when it comes to war. In short, it's a grossly simplified version of events and not something that would be acceptable in history class as an educational tool It's quite ridiculous to think that the complexities of one of the most bizarre wars in history could be summarized in one video game. But that seems to be the way the wind is blowing these days; exaggerating the truth about wars is standard. Everyone's at it.

Still, in terms of game play this one's actually fairly entertaining. As opposed to simply being target practice, the enemies are slippery and realistic. They hide behind trees, they fight back and they yell commie slogans, just like in real life. The graphics are a step up from some older war games, though maybe not quite up to the standard of something like Medal Of Honour. While not a massive leap forward in gaming, Shellshock is certainly above average in many ways.

I guess the dilemma here is whether or not the good game play makes up for the historical difficulties in trying to portray the Vietnam War. All games are fiction and only meant to entertain; so it's insane to slate a manufacturer for making the game a bit more US-friendly at the expense of a few minor (or major) details. It probably wouldn't have got past the censors if they'd showed all the rape and torture portrayed in Brian De Palma's Casualties Of War, the brutal Vietnam film starring Sean Penn and Michael J. Fox in his best role outside Back To The Future.

Eidos obviously wanted to make something edgy and controversial and they've succeeded. They've just had to stretch the truth a little to make it work. Maybe things would be a lot better if we simply skimmed over some of the bad parts of history.

LIL' CHIP WITHERS (AGE 15)

Tiger Woods 2005
Developer: Electronic Arts
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Plaform: PS2, Xbox, Gamecube, PC
Marks: 420

You may remember that around a year ago I wrote about how good it was to get stoned and play Tiger Woods on Playstation 2. Throughout the review I glamourised the use of weed, suggesting that it was fun and harmless. It's not. Weed makes you stupid and forgetful. It has sapped my will to do anything, let alone find a girlfriend, become better at my job, or maintain relationships with my friends. In fact, in the last year I would say that my standing as a human being has dropped approximately 15 percent. Of this, 14 percent is a direct result of being a lazy stoner. Fuck weed.

However, if you must (and I stress MUST) smoke weed then yes, Tiger Woods remains one of the best stoner pastimes ever, up there with not dong anything and not having a girlfriend. This year they've added 8 more courses, new players (including the old-time greats), better stances, and more comprehensive game face controls. Yes, Tiger Woods 2005 has some cool new shit for those with very little motivation.

But I'd first suggest that you get out there and try some new things. Educating yourself about the upper classes of drugs will most certainly be a worthwhile experience. Alcohol, cocaine, ecstasy and a host of other drugs will make you a much more fun and social person and generally have no downsides or side effects, ever.

Saying that, like lots of middle class white people, I recently developed a small crack cocaine habit and the main thing it's taught me is the value of manners. Taking a big chug of rock makes me feel instantly satisfied and clear-headed at the same time, so it makes me quite a nice person to get high with. I've sat for hours with other people with worse crack habits than mine and their manners leave a lot to be desired. While I love the overwhelming sense of well-being feeling that rock gives you, the bigger addicts prefer the ability it gives you to talk incessantly about yourself—like personal conspiracy theories on Shrek, or how freeform dance classes freed your mind from the trauma of teenage dyslexia and made you realise you were a person with a soul and whateveritis. Very fucking boring stuff.

SYRUP DAVIES