I wasn’t planning on “reviewing” Fall Guys, but after finally hitting level 40, almost a month before the season ended, I felt that there were certain things about the game that I needed to say. So let’s not consider this a review as much as a progress report with the hope that improvements and changes are made for season 2 that help shape the game into a better, more accessible, and ultimately more sustainable long term game.
Let me start off by saying that I really like Fall Guys. I knew it would be successful from the very first E3 announcement back in like 2019. A lot of people don’t actually know much about the history behind the game. Or more importantly, the history behind the television show that inspired the game. Fall Guys was directly inspired by an old Japanese game show called Takeshi’s Castle. It aired from 1986 to 1990. Many people watched this, but even more people today probably watched a show called Most Extreme Elimination Challenge (MXC), which ran from 2003 to 2007. This was a joke show that took footage from the original Takeshi’s Castle and dubbed over it with creative reedits and additional fake footage in order to fabricate a hilarious made up gameshow. It was a brilliant experiment that in many ways inspired most of the wacky real physical challenge game shows we see today. Shows like American Gladiator, Ninja Warrior, Wipeout, and so on were all directly inspired by Takeshi’s Castle and/or MXC.
I loved watching MXC, and shows that came after it like Ninja Warrior. Me, and many other children like me, used to dream of competing in these shows. Many people still do which is why shows like this still exist today. Takeshi’s Castle was the direct inspiration for Fall Guys. This has been stated multiple times by members of the development studio, Mediatonic. They even stated that gifs from the show were used in the pitch deck to Devolver Digital and PlayStation when trying to get the game published. I saw the Takeshi’s Castle influences in the very first announcement trailer and it was my own love of the show, or more accurately its dubbed variant, that made me want to play the game. Obviously I was not alone in this. The idea for Fall Guys seems fairly obvious now. People love platforming, competition, and gameshows. Making those concepts into a singular game should have been a no brainer. But now we have Fall Guys and that’s great. I have some issues with the game though.
One of my favorite games in Fall Guys is Door Dash. But that’s not really an accurate statement. A more accurate statement is that I’m really happy Door Dash is in the game because it’s a direct reference to the opening game of every episode of MXC. Every episode started with the real life version of Door Dash. That’s why it’s in Fall Guys. And even though I find many aspects of the game annoying from a gameplay standpoint, it’s without a doubt a perfect recreation of the experience of watching the real life version all those years ago. I’m extremely fond of its presence in the game for reasons of nostalgia and I absolutely don’t want it removed. The problem is the experience of Door Dash was then applied to just about every other game in Fall Guys and that is probably my main issue with the game.
Takeshi’s Castle was not a battle royale style competitive gameshow. Only the Door Dash game worked like that. All the other games were single contestant physical challenges. Each contestant waited their turn and lived or died based on their own performance. Basically like any other legitimate gameshow of this type. And that was why I wanted to be on the show. I wanted to know if I was physically capable enough to complete the obstacle courses. That’s also why I wanted to play Fall Guys. I wanted to know if I was capable of completing the obstacle courses. My main problem with Fall Guys is the multiplayer aspect.
The worst thing about Fall Guys is other players. More specifically the other players who aren’t trying to actively reach the finish line in an honest manner. The term commonly used for these players is griefers. I assume it’s because of all the grief they cause honest players. The intent of the game is to reach the finish line and claim the crown. That’s the point of every show. Get the crown. And the point of every round is to get to the finish line or objective completion in order to make your way towards the crown. But the purpose of the rounds is to weed out the weakest/least skilled players by measuring their ability. Griefers exploit this situation by working to remove players inorganically. It’s one thing to fall off an edge, say in Slime Climb, because too many people were jumping at the same time and you got boxed out. That is an unfortunate repercussion of not being able to build the game to host 60 different obstacle courses simultaneously in the way that the game should actually work to be authentic. The Tetris 99 model, minus the attacking, would be the proper way for Fall Guys to work. Every player would only have to tackle their own obstacle course and you would play until the group is whittled down to one final survivor. But that’s asking way too much of an indie studio with current server and bandwidth limitations to boot. That’s the only reason we’re playing this awkward battle royale version of the gameshow. And yes it is a gameshow. Mediatonic has stated outright that you are playing a gameshow when you play Fall Guys. Thus the logical conclusion is that the rules and etiquette of a gameshow should be applied.
It would not be acceptable conduct if you were watching Ninja Warrior and someone pushed another contestant off a ledge. Because that’s not a measurement of who the best contestant is. It’s a measurement of who the most dishonest contestant is. No one wants to see that. Griefers take away from the game because they are objectively playing the game outside of its intended practice. The fact that they are allowed to do so shouldn’t be viewed as license or encouragement to exercise such poor sportsmanship. It’s simply the result of a technological limitation. The crown should always go to the person who is best at completing the challenges in the show in an honest manner.
There are ways to correct the griefing issues, but they would also take away from the game. Griefing is accomplished in two main ways in Fall Guys. The first is by grabbing people unnecessarily and the second is by standing in the way of others trying to make it to the finish line. The second tactic really only happens in a few specific games in specific locations. The yellow cylinders in Slime Climb being the most common example. Griefers just stand on those cylinders preventing people from moving forward towards the goal. This is bad conduct because all players should be constantly moving towards the goal at all times. Any time you are not progressing, or at least trying to progress, towards the goal, you are objectively playing the game incorrectly because it goes against the game’s intended conduct. An easy fix for this would be to institute an AFK type system that eliminates players who don’t move a specific distance for an extended period of time. Say you didn’t move more than whatever the length of one to two cylinders was for a period of five seconds in a race game as an example. Griefers would just be eliminated for not actively pursuing the goal. This is a solution, but it’s not the best solution because it makes assumptions about the movement of noobs. Some players are moving that slowly unintentionally. They’re just bad at that game. They’re never going to win the crown at that point, but they shouldn’t be knocked out prematurely when not intentionally trying to play incorrectly. Something does need to be done to combat this issue though.
Wrongfully grabbing other players is a much bigger issue, but in my opinion it’s actually way easier to solve. Grabbing shouldn’t be in the game at all. We don’t know how season 2 will be yet, but in season one there are a number of games that involve grabbing. Literally none of them need grabbing except one. That one is Egg Scramble. All the other games that involve grabbing in any way include the tail games, the cooties game, and Fall Mountain. Literally none of those games require grabbing to work. In fact, I’d argue all of them would play better if they were contact based rather than grabbing based because the grabbing is inconsistent, glitchy trash in Fall Guys. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve grabbed the crown first and not gotten credit for it in Fall Mountain. And we’ve all had our tail grabbed from a mile away. The grabbing mechanics don’t work. They can also be used for climbing but, in season 1 at least, not a single game actually requires climbing to reach the finish line. The only game that absolutely requires grabbing to work is Egg Scramble. Now they could just turn off grabbing for all games except Egg Scramble. But honestly I don’t think anyone would mind if they just got rid of it altogether. It’s a terrible game. Really all team games in Fall Guys are terrible and I wish there was a single player events only mode, but that’s a different issue. Removing grabbing would reduce griefing by probably 75% or more and the only consequence would be losing a game that maybe an infinitesimal number of players would actually miss. What I truly want is a proper Fall Guys experience where everyone’s only concern was/is reaching the goal. This is how it was in the beta and it was great.
My other main issue with Fall Guys is motivation. Fall Guys is fun. But you can’t really keep a game running on fun alone in 2020. There are just too many games to play. And let’s be completely honest. Unless you just love something specific about Fall Guys that you can’t get anywhere else, there are objectively better games to play and pretty much everyone has a backlog as well. The only reason to keep playing any game, Fall Guys or other, is some sort of motivation which goes past fun. I don’t really know what that is for Fall Guys in its current form. It has trophies but most people will never get them all because one of them is nearly impossible for more than 95% of players. No matter how good you are, the amount of luck you need to win five rounds in a row is just too high. A team game can screw you over and then all your progress is lost. I think it’s a bad trophy to begin with. It should have been combined with the total wins trophy so that either win x number of times total or winning five shows in a row got the trophy. That’s considerably more accessible and fair to demand from players. So assume you get all the trophies you want and then what’s your motivation? You can get every trophy in a single season. I have all the ones I care about except the 20 wins one. But that comes back to the same issue. Winning is difficult and not accessible to every player. Some players just never will be winners. I’ve only won six times and I’m a fairly advanced player. I get to the final round more than 80% of the time. But a bad placement in Fall Mountain or a bad camera angle in Jump Showdown, not to mention server errors and glitches, can screw you over again and again. But even without those issues, some players will just never get good enough to win in a competitive game of this nature. And that’s fine. What’s not fine is locking cosmetic items behind multiple wins.
The only real motivating factor currently in the game, other than trophies most people probably don’t care about, is cosmetics. The game has a vast collection of cool cosmetics. The problem is that all the best ones require you to win up to 10 times in a limited period of time. This is a bad system. A game is supposed to reward players for the time they put in. That’s standard fare in 2020. That’s why so many games/franchises have taken on RPG elements. No matter how trash you are at a game, you can slowly but surely build up enough XP to get the things you ultimately want. Whether it’s better armor in Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey, new skills in Ghost of Tsushima, or more damage in God of War (2018), any player can over time build towards that goal no matter how rubbish they are. If you can kill just one enemy, run away, save, and repeat that process, then eventually you can get whatever you want from all those games and most others in 2020. Fall Guys doesn’t have this. Fall Guys doesn’t reward players for their time. It only rewards them for winning or for having real world currency to spend in the DLC Store. There are of course rewards you can buy with kudos, but the bulk of them are fairly boring. It’s the crown rewards that players actually want. And most players, as in a majority of the several million people playing on Steam and PS4,simply won’t ever get enough wins to get all the cosmetics they want.
In my opinion, exclusivity is harmful to a player base of casuals. People who aren’t hardcore don’t like seeing stuff they can’t eventually get as a result of time put in. Performance based rewards are not appealing in a game that relies so heavily on luck. In the long run, I think this will turn a lot of people off Fall Guys if not changed. A simple solution would be to make kudos exchangeable for crowns. Say 500 or 1000 kudos to 1 crown. Allowing this conversion would still require players to put in a large amount of effort or time but would reward them with things they actually want in the long run. No matter how garbage you are at the game, knowing you can eventually unlock the Portal costume would motivate many players to keep playing. Currently no such motivation exists. Once a player accepts that they simply won’t win 10 games, they have no reason to keep playing once fun stops being enough of a draw. The way it should work, in order to preserve a level of exclusivity, is that items are locked behind a single win wall. Meaning that all special cosmetic items should only be available to users that have won at least one show. But once this condition is met, they should be able to convert kudos to crowns and buy whatever they want regardless of how many times, above the required one, they’ve won. Initiating a system like this works to the advantage of all players while still requiring a minimum level of accomplishment. It’s the perfect compromise.
In its current form, Fall Guys appears to be a causal game but was clearly built for the top players. That’s the second worst way to build and manage an online multiplayer game. You don’t build for the top of the player base. You build for the middle. The bottom of the player base requires no attention. They will either stop playing because they can’t get better or keep playing because they just enjoy the game with no need for motivation. The top will keep playing because they’re the top and their vanity will keep them plugged in. People like excelling and rarely choose to leave something they’re already good at as long as it keeps feeling rewarding to win. But the middle of the player base, which also happens to be the biggest, requires actual management to keep their attention. If things are too easy, they get bored and leave. If things are too hard, they get irritated and leave. If rewards aren’t accessible, they get irritated and leave. But a game needs them. The top players are nothing without the middle players, because they need someone to dominate. The opposite is not true though. The middle players don’t need top players. They want to win so they can become those top players. The fewer top players present, the more motivated the middle players are to take that spot. Keeping the middle tier players happy and motivated to keep playing is the only way a game like Fall Guys remains successful in the long term. Currently it doesn’t have that.
Fall Guys has literally millions of players. I don’t know the exact number, but let’s say it has 15 million players. It sold 7 million copies on Steam and it was free for PS+ owners on PS4, topping the charts as the most downloaded free game. So I don’t think 15 million is an inflated number. If anything it’s too low. If I had to make an estimate, I’d say maybe 5% of players have won 5 times. I based this on the fact that the PSN trophy called “Top Tier” requires 7 wins and only has a 4% completion rate. So if only 5% of players have won 5 times, that’s a measly 750,000 of 15 million players. And 5 wins is only half a special cosmetic set. You need 10 wins to get both pieces. Not even 4% of players have gotten more than 7 wins. It’s likely that maybe only 3% of players have won enough times to buy a full special cosmetic set. Let’s also not forget that there have been multiple high demand special cosmetic sets. Yet only 1.1% of players have achieved the “Golden Guy” trophy, meaning they won a total of at least 20 times. So few players have actually been able to get the cosmetic items they want in a game that has no motivations to keep playing other than cosmetics. That is not a sustainable model in the long term. People will soon tire of the idea of seeing a few players, many of which are also griefers, wearing the cosmetics they want with absolutely no chance of ever unlocking them for themselves. People will only put up with that for so long. A time based work around for this issue would do wonders for millions of players desperate to get costumes referencing other games they like, such as the My Friend Pedro skin.
There are a number of other things I’d personally like to see added to the game, but I wouldn’t argue that they are necessary to make the game more appealing and sustainable for a majority of players. For instance, I’d like a single player mode with challenges. Like imagine a version of the game that actually runs like the TV show. You play the courses solo and get rewarded in crowns for completing certain tasks like “finish Slime Climb in under 60 seconds”. That kind of thing would be way more appealing to me than the battle royale experience the game currently offers. I’d probably stop playing the multiplayer mode completely unless my friends were online. I’d also love a speed mode where there is only 1 round and all 60 players go for the crown in a single game. I imagine something like a 360 degree Fall Mountain map where all 60 players start equidistant from the crown and rush towards the center. Or you could just do Fall Mountain and other regular final games in lobbies of only 5 to 10 people. I think this mode would be very popular for people and would be an additional method of making crowns and by extension special cosmetics more accessible to a majority of players. You could even set a limit on it like you can only win 5 – 10 crowns a day in that mode. It would definitely help with that “Infallible” trophy as well.
As I said early on in this post, I like Fall Guys. I’ve played it for way too many hours. At the time of writing this, I’m one of only 1.3% of players to reach level 40 in the first season. I want to see the game continue and thrive for many seasons. But in its current form I can’t see this happening. Severe changes need to be made in order to keep the average players motivated. Most of them will probably return for season 2, but if things go much the same then I predict the player base will decline significantly for season 3. I can say personally that once I hit level 40 I was done. My win percentage was simply too low to motivate me want to keep playing these same games with no time contingent rewards that actually mattered to me. I have more than 20K kudos and nothing I actually want to spend them on. But if I could convert them to crowns then that would change instantly. I’ll definitely return for season 2, but if the games aren’t super fun and I can’t see myself winning shows consistently, then there’s really no reason to keep playing. I definitely don’t see myself hitting level 40 again.
Mediatonic has done something great here. They should be proud of the success and I’m sure it has been very profitable. But now is the time to decide what type of game this will be. Is Fall Guys going to be a long term project that lasts for years and becomes a cultural staple like Fortnite, to my disappointment, has become. Or will it just be something that happened in 2020 that we all remember fondly but move past to the next trend just as quickly as the last thing we all tried and got bored with. I hope for the former, but that won’t happen organically or accidentally. The game needs to be managed and altered properly in order for that to happen. Only time will tell.
I went into the Marvel’s Avengers open beta genuinely excited. I tried the alpha back in 2019 at Gamescom and I really enjoyed it. There are things about the alpha that were specific, intentional, and effective at drawing my attention and long term interest. Specifically, it only featured the opening sequence ending with Captain America’s death. Essentially the first third/half of the beta’s tutorial. This portion of the game is an effective demo experience, which is why they used it in the alpha and so much in the trailers. But honestly it’s not indicative of the long term experience of playing the game. Or at least it wasn’t indicative of the long term experience of playing the beta.
Sadly, I did not leave the beta enthusiastic about this game. I saw many people online during the pre-order beta, which I didn’t participate in, complaining that the game wasn’t good. I assumed they were just being whiny because it wasn’t as good as Marvel’s Spider-Man, which shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone because the scope of Marvel’s Avengers is much larger and harder to manage than a single player, solo character, open world story focused game set in one map. It would be genuinely surprising if Avengers was as good as Spider-Man. Anyone who expected it to be needs to learn more about how games and game development actually works. So I ignored these nay-sayers. I would play the beta myself and form my own opinion. Now that I’ve done that, I sadly have to agree with them.
Let me be crystal clear at the start of this review. Marvel’s Avengers (beta) is not a bad game. It’s a boring one. It had many issues, but with the exception of many server errors, it had few objective problems. Rather it’s just not a well-paced and exciting game. From a design standpoint, I certainly had some complaints about menus, UI, and character development/RPG elements, but nothing I could definitively say made it a bad game. But what I can say is that the beta did not leave me excited to play the full game the way it should have.
Let’s get the foundational development stuff out of the way quickly, because that’s not where this game has issues. The graphics are fine. I’m tired of reading stupid complaints from misinformed people about the fact that the characters don’t look like the ones in the movies. I’ve written and tweeted about that a lot already. Basically, these characters are all 40+ years old with several iterations that have existed long before the MCU. Your lack of knowledge of this history is not the fault or responsibility of Crystal Dynamics. They are not making MCU movies and thus have no obligation to make the characters look like Robert Downey Jr., Mark Ruffalo, Scarlett Johansson, and so on. To clarify, the graphics aren’t necessarily impressive. Spider-Man is a much more impressive looking game. But Avengers doesn’t look bad. It looks fine. And, when the server was working, it played smoothly. I didn’t have issues with lag or any sort of performance based problems during gameplay.
The audio was fine as well. I honestly can’t say a single bad thing about it. The voice acting worked effectively. Hearing Hulk say “Hulk Smash” for certain attacks is a nice effect. You also have different Avengers saying stuff as you play in order to build the atmosphere. The sound effects also worked well. Thor’s hammer specifically stood out to me because it has that heavy impact sound that you would want. In terms of fundamentals, Marvel’s Avengers delivers. It’s the finer details that ultimately leave this game lacking.
Writing is really tough to judge based on the beta. This is for two main reasons. The first is that the game is not structured in a clear linear fashion. Or at least the beta didn’t appear to be. It’s a mission based game, which is fine. But usually mission based games have a clear track for story based missions. I couldn’t figure out if that’s how Avengers will work based on the beta. Though it may very well have been that they didn’t include any additional story missions once you completed the tutorial. I actually enjoyed the story sequences a lot. There were boss fights, character development via conversations, and a traditional single player game structure. I’m all but certain there will be more missions like this in the full game, but the overall structure of how the plot is presented was unclear. The other problem, and I pray this was because the beta was intentionally built to skip over things, was that there were serious continuity errors. The small number of story sequences at the beginning of the beta jumped around so much that I thought I was just not paying attention closely enough. I assume this will not be the case in the full game. I was interested in the plot, but I can’t speak to the quality of the writing at this time.
The game is built on replayability so that’s kind of a no brainer. They want you to replay the same missions and new missions continuously using different characters and collecting different gear. The question isn’t whether or not the game has replayability but whether or not it’s worth replaying. I happen to hate replaying things. Especially when the replay experience is much the same. I have to say that a lot of the replay value in this game is cheap replay value. You replay for the sake of loot and XP. Not meaningful development of the experience or to gain new insight into the plot. Loot is character specific, meaning that each time you play a level you will only get loot for the character you’re using at the time. In a way this is good because you can prioritize your characters and make sure you’re getting gear for the ones you want. But it also means that you will eventually hit a gear wall with any character and start getting stuff you already have rather than gear for other characters in your roster.
The game also doesn’t have shared XP. This is my biggest peeve about games with large rosters. When you play as Iron Man, you’re only developing Iron Man. So if you get to level 10 with Iron Man and decide to switch to Hulk, you now have to go back to level one stats and trash gear. Then you gotta replay the same missions and upgrade Hulk. That might be OK with one or two characters. But Avengers has already confirmed like 20. I don’t want to replay the missions from scratch 20+ times. The characters are different but not that different. Pooled XP would make this game way more manageable.
The game definitely has replay value, and a lot of it at that. There are at least 40 levels of rewards for every character. The rewards include costumes, emotes, name plates, and items. But to have to hit level 40 20 or more individual times replaying the same 10 missions would be annoying. The game implies that playing through missions with different characters is a different experience with access to different areas and secrets, but from what was shown in the beta it’s not nearly that complicated or intricate. I was able to get to most places with the characters I was using. Only occasionally did a wall appear that couldn’t be broken by my current character. And those moments were really annoying because the AI doesn’t help and you can’t take control of AI party members.
Now let’s actually talk about the gameplay. The fact is that while the gameplay mechanics are fairly good, the game as a whole is repetitive and boring. It’s for the most part a button mash fest with open area maps and loot chest collecting. There is some nuance to the gameplay in the form or special moves and certain enemies with special abilities or conditions that have to be dealt with in non-straight forward ways. But for the most part you’re just mashing square and triangle. Which usually I don’t have a problem with. But in this case it’s so generic. You’re just fighting faceless soldiers or robots. And most of the time you’re just fighting them to fight them. The missions are mostly devoid of purpose other than get loot. Only a few had any real story or reason behind them. The rest were just there to be there. This made the entire experience boring unless I was playing with friends. Co-op was fun, but more because of my friends than the gameplay being entertaining. It’s a game you don’t have to think too much about so you can talk to your friends. You can zone out and totally ignore what’s happening in many of the missions. That makes for great multiplayer, but terrible single player.
You can use AI companions in place of real people in your four man team. They work in some ways but in others they just remind you that the game was meant to be played with other people. For instance, there are lots of soft puzzles that involve hitting multiple switches, sometimes within a time limit. The puzzles are not hard. In fact, calling them puzzles is an exaggeration. They’re just tasks that force you to look around the nearby environment. AI won’t help with these. They can all be done as a solo player, but you will have to waste your time looking for all the switches and “racing” to hit them all before the time runs out. But if you had a team this would be much easier and more engaging as you compete with your friends to find a switch first. That’s how most of the game is structured. Lots of moments where it’s clear that it would be more entertaining and engaging if you had real players rather than AI companions. You see this in the combat too.
There are ways to work together as a team in combat. I’m not talking about official team attacks/combos. I’m talking about strategy. For example, there was a moment where I was using Kamila Khan and had Hulk as an AI companion during a fight against a shielded enemy. Shielded enemies are annoying because you can’t attack them from the front without special abilities. You have to get behind them. There are multiple ways to do this. Few of them are convenient. In this instance I had an AI Hulk companion fighting right behind this enemy. He was engaged with other enemies but easily could have attacked this shielded enemy I was engaged with. A single attack to its back would have thrown it off balance and allowed me to make short work of it. But I couldn’t communicate with AI Hulk and AI characters don’t actually care about you as the player. They fight in an effective but ultimately random manner. They aren’t there to support you. They’re simply there to help deal with the large groups of enemies. They can’t be used for any higher levels of strategy. But if that AI Hulk had been a real person I could have told him to punch that shielded enemy in the back to create an opening for me. That pretty much sums up the single player experience, unless you’re playing without AI companions. A constant reminder of how much better things could be if you were playing with friends.
The combat is different for different characters, but it’s not equally satisfying for all characters. For some characters, the combat feels great. Surprisingly, my favorite character to use in the beta was Kamila Khan. I would not have guessed that going in. Her combat feels good. The stretching and growing powers work in an almost Luffy (One Piece) fashion. You are limited in what you can do of course. But the combat feels satisfying. Bounding through the maps to quickly close distances feels good with her as well. Her legs constantly stretching and contracting to cover more ground. A big part of the combat feeling satisfying comes down to perceived impact. Thor’s combat feels good as well. When you hit something with that hammer, you feel the impact. The controller vibrates in such a way and the audio generates a sound effect in such a way that you feel happy with that hammer hit. This is not the case for all characters. Somehow they screwed up the Hulk. When you hit something with Hulk’s giant fist, it rings hollow. I couldn’t put my finger on it, but I think it’s the vibration, or lack thereof. For some reason they didn’t give Hulk’s punches the haptic feedback they deserve. It’s like they’re trying to say that the Hulk feels nothing with each punch. He’s so strong that hitting things doesn’t even register for him. That may be good from a character development standpoint but from a gameplay standpoint it’s terrible. When you’re playing as the Hulk you want to FEEL the power. You can see the power happening on screen but you can’t feel it and that’s really disappointing.
The game also lacks a number of UI, quality of life features. For instance, there’s no mini-map. The maps aren’t huge but they are open and have plenty of useless places you can explore. By useless I mean they don’t contain useful content such as enemies or chests. They’re there for atmosphere. This is a good thing. But not having a map to quickly and easily be able to determine where you actually need to go is troublesome. You can temporarily scan for points of interest, which causes them all to appear on screen. But they don’t stay on screen so you have to keep rescanning. Chests are hidden throughout the maps. JARVIS will notify you when chests are nearby. But that doesn’t tell you how nearby. And there’s no guide to finding them. So you wander around aimlessly hoping to find a chest. Just show me where the chests are with waypoints, Crystal Dynamics. I’m not playing this game to search for loot. Lean on the combat. That’s the only part of the game that people care about outside of the story.
Missions can feel aimless at times but that’s not technically ever the case. There is a main objective and a number of additional points of interest. But the value in doing them always feels a bit hollow. You’re basically just roaming around farming XP and hoping to get superior gear drops. Enemies can also be found randomly throughout the maps without official points of interest. So you just kind of explore hoping to find something until you get bored and go to the nearest point of interest. Then after you get bored with points of interest you just go finish the mission’s main objective. In a way the game can feel like a chore. But even worse, it often just feels boring. I even nodded off while playing solo a few times.
I found the combat to be challenging but fair in most cases. I died a few times, but I never felt like the game was particularly unbalanced. I can at least say that the AI will revive you. The game also has an effective respawn system for when you fail. You are put right back where you were when you died but you have to restart the current objective. This works exactly the way it should.
For all the issues with the gameplay, there’s still charm in playing an Avengers game. It’s nice to be able to choose one of your favorite heroes, team up with your other favorite heroes, and fight bad guys with signature moves. One of the features I really liked is the companion request feature. When going into a mission, you choose your character and select the heroes you want as companions. As there were only four options in the beta, you always played as Black Widow, Iron-Man, Hulk, or Kamila Khan and chose the other three as your companions. But the mechanic implied that you could customize your team however you wanted, even in multiplayer. So for example, once there’s say 10 characters available, you’ll be able to choose what companions you want specifically. If I want Ant-Man, Hulk, and Captain America to be my companions then I can request that and the match making will only allow people playing as those characters to join my team. And if no one is available using those characters for the mission I want to play, then it will give me AI companions. I liked having that level of control over my squad. But in general the matchmaking and setup system needs a lot of work.
Starting a mission is unruly and unnecessarily complicated, as is general character management. For some stupid reason, you can only deal with character customization while playing as the character. This means that if you are currently Black Widow and you want to customize your Hulk, you can’t. You have to wait for the next time you’re playing as Hulk. As in you’ve already selected Hulk for a mission. This is even true when in the hub area outside of missions. You can’t just customize characters available in your roster whenever you want. Starting a mission is convoluted and troublesome. Picking your character seems easy but the game needs a clearer UI showing the selection has been confirmed. Starting a mission is convoluted. You press start and then it doesn’t always initiate the start sequence. Then sometimes it does and during the countdown it just randomly ends and you have to restart it. The countdown for single player with AI is 4 seconds. The countdown for multiplayer is 60 seconds. Why such a huge gap? Going into a mission should be way more streamlined and simple, multiplayer or not. There’s also no real direction in choosing missions. There’s just a map full of them with no seemingly defined reason to differentiate them other than rewards. I was just randomly picking them.
You can set the difficulty between four difficulty levels per mission, which I liked. But the scaling of missions was fairly annoying. By focusing on Kamila Khan, I got her power level up to 16. But then when I wanted to play as Hulk, who at the time only had a power level or 8, all the missions were scaled to 16. I found this super annoying and unbalanced. There needs to be committed power level requirements for each mission, depending on the difficulty level selected.
Ultimately I’m still on the fence about buying Marvel’s Avengers. I want to like the game. I want to enjoy a game starring the Avengers with a large roster of playable characters, multiplayer, and a constant stream of new content. But they have not built a game that I would call enjoyable. Or at least the beta did not confirm that they built such a game. What it comes down to for me is friends. If my friends buy the game then I guess I’ll jump in. But if they don’t then I can’t justify spending the money.
Last week, we finally got to see the long awaited PS5 reveal. So let’s do a deep dive of the entire presentation, or at least the parts of it that gave us information we didn’t already know. I considered just going through the whole thing chronologically but I think it would be better to discuss the presentation as a whole, then the console, and end with a rundown of the games shown. But if you want to skip right to the games then you can scroll down to the “The Games” section.
I really liked this presentation. Or more specifically, I really like how they structured the presentation. They started off by doing a flashback sequence to the PS1 era and then traveled through PlayStation history all the way to today. Now this was cool because it was very nostalgic for people like me who have been playing games on PlayStation consoles since the debut system back in 1994. But at first I really didn’t like it because it subliminally set an expectation of focusing on yesterday. They primed the viewer to expect a bunch of ports and remasters to be shown followed by a discussion on backwards compatibility. And that’s exactly what they didn’t do, which is awesome. They set the bar really low for me by starting with a history lesson. They even went as far as announcing that GTA Online would be on PS5. Because we really need to keep playing that almost a decade later . . . So I was ready to be disappointed. I thought it was gonna be like the Switch just announcing a bunch of games I’ve already beaten on PS4. But after the GTA Online announcement they didn’t mention a single game available on PS4. That made me so happy. For some reason everyone has focused on backwards compatibility and playing old games. I don’t know why, but for some reason people want all this additional power in their next console so they replay stuff they’ve already beaten. And that’s not just PlayStation users. XBOX users have continuously whined about backwards compatibility as well and Nintendo is often celebrated for porting Wii U titles to the Switch and charging full price for them. So I was so glad that SONY essentially made the statement that the PS5 is about gaming tomorrow. Not gaming yesterday. Thus naming the presentation “The Future of Gaming”.
Another aspect of the presentation I really liked was the order of the games shown. They didn’t really have any sort of pattern to them. You had AAA titles, lots of indies, every genre, and no specific order. You’re looking at a third person AAA action game and then suddenly they were showing an indie game about being a cat. You’re watching a slow paced indie trailer about space exploration and then it’s followed by a AAA cooperative brawler. They didn’t allow you to get comfortable or have any preconceived expectations about what was gonna be shown next. I liked this because you could never get complacent while watching. It was a long presentation but because it had so much variety and no real structure to it you were never allowed to zone out or you might miss something important. So it kept me engaged the whole time. I’m really happy they chose to show a lot of indie stuff and a lot of it was really nice indie stuff. There were a few titles that I felt were not up to the standard of what a console reveal presentation game should be, but that just means that SONY wants people to realize just how much variety will be available on the PS5. So many SONY haters like to say “PlayStation just has third person movie games”, which is an inaccurate description of the PS4 library, but the point is that SONY went out of their way to say that not only will the PS5 have variety, but it will have variety supported directly by SONY.
It’s also important to note that they showed a lot of games. I don’t know what the most games I’ve ever seen shown in a single presentation is, but this presentation showed 24 new games, one remake, and one port. And of those 24 new games, I think 20 of them were new announcements with no previous discussion other than assumed sequels like a new Horizon was on the horizon (pun intended). People kept asking “What about the games?” and they delivered the games in this presentation. I don’t care about specs. Like for me there is no comparison between PS5 and XBOX Series X because XBOX Series X has yet to show me a single platform exclusive title that I actually want to play. I don’t care if it has more teraflops. And I certainly wouldn’t buy a console to play multiplatform titles when I have a custom built PC. So for me the better console is the console with games I want to play. And before even showing me price, which I’m not happy about SONY, they’ve already shown me at least 10 games that I’m absolutely gonna play. I make it a personal rule not to buy a console until it has at least 10 games available I’m interested in buying. PS5 isn’t even out yet and they’ve shown me 10 games I want to play. Now I will say that I make it a point of applying that rule to AAA caliber games and no this presentation did not show me 10 AAA caliber games that I want to play. But it did show me six and that’s without counting Sackboy: A Big Adventure, which I would argue might count since I did count Knack on the PS4. So they’re at nearly seven of 10 with the reveal presentation. And that’s me as a person who isn’t going to pick up Hitman 3, Returnal, or Deathloop. So if I liked shooters, that’s an additional three games right there because all three of them definitely looked to be at the quality I would require to count them in my opening 10. I just don’t like shooters for the most part. And I still could see myself picking up Returnal in the long run. So the showing of games was very strong here as a first announcement.
The one thing I didn’t like about the presentation of games was the lack of consistency between the type of content shown from game to game. Some games were just a cinematic trailer. Some had gameplay. Some didn’t even have actual game content and just showed an unrelated cinematic or a couple flash images. There was no coherency in the quality of the individual game presentations. Like the Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart segment was probably the best segment in the entire presentation because it had everything. It had a developer discuss the game, in game cinematics, and actual gameplay footage. It was a proper presentation of a game. Meanwhile NBA2K21 was literally an actual basketball player saying “here’s a trailer for the game” and then all it showed was that same player rendered in game but not actually doing gameplay. He just plugged the game digitally by shooting alone in a gym and then walking away. It was dramatic, uninformative, and ultimately pointless. It did literally nothing to make you want to buy a PS5 or even the game. All it did was confirm that another annual release was coming even though we already knew that intuitively. So for me that was the flaw of the presentation. Some games, including indies gave you meaningful content. While other ones just sort of participated. I would have wanted every game to have been presented at the level of content quality as Ratchet & Clank regardless of the quality of the individual games shown.
Finally, they were really smart to leave the hardware till the end because honestly people did want to see games more than hardware at this point. We’d already sat through a long discussion from Mark Cerny about hardware improvements on the PS5 and we’ve spent months comparing specs between the PS5 and the XBOX Series X. It was time to focus on games. So ending with hardware was the right choice here. Overall I thought it was a great presentation as far order, structure, and what was actually delivered. So now let’s talk about the console.
I’m just gonna say it. The PS5 is an ugly console. I do not like it. In no way does that affect my decision to buy, because like I said, I buy consoles based on the exclusives. If a console has enough games I want to play and I can’t play them anywhere else (legally) then I’ll buy the console. But the PS5 is a hideous looking machine. SONY dared too hard to be different. And I don’t believe that the airflow will be any better than on the PS4.
Now this wasn’t expressed during the presentation, but the console can lay on its side, which for my current setup is a must. When I saw the console, I wasn’t sure if it could lay on its side or not so I was really worried. Because like most adults, I have an entertainment stand with compartments for different machines. The Switch is super inconvenient in the fact that it has to not only stand vertically when docked also but be accessible at all times so you can undock it, which I do a lot. But if I had to have my PS5 freestanding vertically, that would really inconvenience me. Because it’s a bigger machine and I will never move it save for the occasional dusting. I will buy it, but I do not like the way it looks. My plan is to wait and buy a PRO version, assuming that will still be a thing in the next gen. So I hope everyone bitches and moans about how terrible this console looks so they make a better looking version down the road for me to buy.
They still haven’t shared a price but they announced a Digital Edition. I do not like this one bit. We all know it’s inevitable that eventually all consoles will be full digital, but I do not like this intentional fracturing of the user base. And sure it won’t affect gameplay at all but it will have a drastic effect on the games market. What I do want them to do is confirm to me that we’ve all learned our lesson and will completely do away with region locks for good. Nintendo was behind on this issue for so long and now they’re the absolute best. You can buy a cartridge in any country and activate it on any Switch from any other country with any account set to any region and play the game in whatever language you want and access all DLC content. That is how every game on every console needs to be in the next generation of gaming. I am tired of this bullshit. I plan on getting the regular version of the PS5, because I do like discs, but if there are still region locks I might just go for the digital because it’s just too inconvenient for me as an American living in Taiwan. I have to import all my discs from the US or I can’t play any DLC. And that was fine on the PS3 where many games didn’t have DLC but now every game is constantly getting DLC and patches so region locks between digital and physical content don’t work for me. And I love steel books but it’s just so much trouble not being able to just walk into my local game store and buy games that will work on my US PSN account in English and let me access all the additional content. I buy my Nintendo Switch games locally, and it’s great. But I haven’t been able to buy a PlayStation game locally in more than five years. It’s absolutely ridiculous.
The other thing I don’t like about a digital edition console is what does that mean for hardware pricing? Are these consoles gonna be the same price? That would be ridiculous. But an optical drive doesn’t actually cost that much. Yet you’ve never seen a console priced at like $484.99. So are they gonna take a hit on the Digital Edition and lower the price to a more marketable number or are they gonna go the opposite direction and charge extra for the regular edition in order to justify the Digital Edition’s price tag? Because most people are stupid and will fall for that. They will get angrier about the Digital Edition costing the same as the regular edition than they will about either version costing more than it should. So for me this is a big concern. Again I won’t be buying at launch so I’m not overpaying for the console either way, but the launch price will ultimately dictate how long I have to wait to buy mine. Because the price has to decrease and be bundled before I buy it. So the higher the starting price the longer I have to wait till it gets to a price I’m willing to pay. And again, I’m buying the PRO version so that’s an even longer wait.
I like the accessories they showed. I’m ready to make the switch to full wireless play and charging. I’ll be getting that wireless charge dock. The white color, though easier to get dirty, looks really nice. But chances are by the time I buy mine they will have added variety so I’ll end up getting a God of War bundle or some other theme and red accessories or some other cool color. But for now we really just need to get prices revealed.
A lot of games were shown, but like with any other games presentation, I’m gonna give each game their due and take the time to do a summary of my thoughts for each game. I’ve done my best to keep it short for the purposes of time.
1. GTA V (GTA Online)
It’s a true testament to the quality of GTA V/GTA Online that a PS3 game will now have been ported across two generations as a mainstream title. It’s also a testament to how much money GTA Online makes. I am not happy that this is still being focused on but I appreciate that it’s going to be free for all PS Plus members on PS5 (Note that I have heard conflicting reports about whether or not it’s free indefinitely or just for a limited amount of time). What I actually think is more important is that it shows a shift towards compartmentalized game distribution, which I’ve been advocating for years. The idea that a person has to buy an entire game to play a single mode in 2020 is stupid. Most people don’t want to play COD’s campaign, though it should be noted that the quality of them seems to have improved considerably over the last few years. So why can’t people pay a fraction of the total game cost and just purchase the multiplayer mode digitally? That’s the future I’d like to see. And this decision to only make GTA Online free to PS5 players is a step in that direction.
2. Spider-Man: Miles Morales
This is an interesting one more for what happened after the presentation than during. The presentation was very vague on what this project actually is. All we knew was that it was a direct sequel/spin-off from Marvel’s Spider-Man and that the playable character would be Miles Morales. We assumed it was a new game but we didn’t have hard proof of that. Then someone did an interview and said it was an expansion for the remastered version of Marvel’s Spider-Man exclusive to the PS5. Then Insomniac Games clarified that it was a standalone project. Currently it seems that it will be something like Assassin’s Creed: Freedom Cry where it’s an expansion that will be sold separately that builds off the story and world of the previous game but will be able to standalone, or more to the point be purchased separately. I assume it will be packaged and sold like Uncharted: The Lost Legacy. Meaning it will be really good content, but not enough to be a full game, but most likely launched at a full game price. I will definitely play it but by the time I pick it up it will be severely discounted if not a PS Plus freebie.
3. Gran Turismo 7
Now I don’t personally care about the Gran Turismo franchise but I’ve always respected it. My uncle has been playing them since the very first game on the original PlayStation so I’ve been seeing them for a long time. They have always been top tier games for graphics and realism. GT7 looks like the franchise will continue to live up to that standard.
4. Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart
While this isn’t necessarily the game I’m most excited for from that presentation, it was the game with the best presentation. It was thorough, informative, multifaceted, and showed actual gameplay footage in a context. I love the Ratchet & Clank franchise and this really could end up being the best one yet based on the few new gameplay elements shown. The craziest part is that two of the first three games shown, not counting GTA Online, are from Insomniac Games. And rather than focus on Spider-Man, which was definitely what more people would have wanted, they chose to put more effort into the Ratchet & Clank presentation. Considering I’m a bigger fan of Ratchet & Clank than Marvel’s Spider-Man, this made me really happy.
5. Project Athia
This looks very Square Enix, which in this case I will consider a compliment. The trailer gave me Final Fantasy XV vibes but as a solo experience and full action gameplay. The monsters look really cool by using a mixture of traditional video game enemies coupled with some sort of magical virus type effect. The little bit of level traversal shown gives me the impression that this will be a fluid, fast moving experience, which is always my preference for games with platforming elements. Obviously it’s very early, since the game doesn’t even seem to have a proper name yet, but what they showed looks very appealing to me.
I don’t like trailers like this because they aren’t really video game trailers. They’re trailers that just happen to be for products that ultimately end up being video games. It was a very pretty trailer set in a futuristic world where robots are the new humans but animals still exist. That’s not a bad sci-fi premise. But here’s where the trailer gets too vague. The game is called Stray and the trailer follows a cat, but no gameplay footage is actually shown. Meaning we are assuming the cat is the playable character but really it could be a game where you play as one of the robots and interact with the cat. If you are playing as the cat and it’s a legitimate game with real substance and the graphics quality of that cinematic trailer, then I’m all in. I’m fairly certain my wife will want to play it too. But if it’s actually a game where you play as a robot and interact with the cat then I’ll be very disappointed. And my wife will almost certainly not have any interest. I wish these sorts of announcements didn’t even exist. Games shouldn’t be announced until they have something to actually show.
This trailer also was mostly cinematic, but it appeared to be in game footage. And there was a tiny bit of actual gameplay at the end. My reading of the trailer was that this will be a Soulsborne style alien shooter. Honestly I don’t recall a Soulsborne shooter appearing before now so kudos for trying to evolve the genre to appeal to a different audience. I don’t know if that concept will work for a shooter, but I’m not opposed to finding out. Also this appears to be a third person shooter, which is of course my preference, but I’m not someone who usually enjoys shooters in general. At this point all I can say for certain is that it’s meant to be a scary experience but not one where you feel powerless.
8. Sackboy: A Big Adventure
This is a must buy for me. Over the years I’ve come to grips with the fact that I’m not really into games where I have to create my own levels or play community developed levels. The concept always sounds good to me on paper, but I just can’t be asked to care about gameplay content when it’s not driven by a narrative. I always liked the Little Big Planet art style and gameplay concepts, but I just wasn’t into the community aspect of it. So to be getting an actual adventure game built like a traditional platformer with coop options is really good for me. This is exactly the type of game I want to play from that IP.
9. Destruction Allstars
This looks like Rocket League and Overwatch had a baby at the same time as Twisted Metal and Fortnite and then those two babies grew up and had a baby of their own. A demolition derby game is not a bad idea. I got Roller Champions vibes from this, and I really like that game. And I thought it was cool that you can get out of your car and keep fighting. But that trailer also looked really busy. I was reminded of the game they play in the music video for ‘New Lands’ by Justice. The fact that they used the word Allstars in the title seems like a throwback to PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale. Sadly that game didn’t end up being the successful competitive title they wanted it to be. Mostly because it was too much like Smash Bros. without being better. So here it seems like they took a bunch of familiar concepts and mashed them together to try to create something entirely new so they wouldn’t actually have to compete with any existing IPs for a meaningful spot in the world of e-Sports. I won’t be surprised if this ends up being a free to play game.
10. Kena: Bridge of Spirits
I really liked this trailer. It gave me Pikmin vibes with a great level of maturity and a fantasy themed plot. Not to mention it’s an action platformer, which is way better than the gameplay in Pikmin. And I’m speaking as someone who absolutely loved Pikmin 3. The gameplay didn’t seem revolutionary, but there were hints of Breath of the Wild in there that appealed to me a lot. I’m really happy that SONY included a lot of indies in this presentation and more than one of them looks really good. This was on my list of must watch titles from the presentation and it’s not even my favorite looking indie project they showed.
11. Goodbye Volcano High
For me this was a low point in the presentation. I haven’t done any additional research on this game, but it came off like a visual novel, which I’m not a fan of. That being said, if this really is a visual novel then I think it’s cool that SONY included it because that just ads to the diverse list of genres included in this presentation. They really did try to include something for every type of gamer and that’s exactly what needs to happen when you’re trying to launch a new console. But if this isn’t a visual novel, then I got shovelware vibes. I didn’t like the art style and it seemed very Life is Strange (the first season) as far as themes, which I think is made cheaper when you use non-human characters because it makes the whole experience less emotionally challenging for players while still taking credit for taking the risk of making a game about socially aware themes. I also really don’t like the implications of the game’s logo because I absolutely hate stories where you go through a bunch of stuff only to have everything get wiped out by a cataclysmic event at the end thus nullifying everything you did. And if you can stop the cataclysmic event, then based on this trailer it seems like it’s just a dragon/dino themed version of Life is Strange. And at that point you might as well just go play Life is Strange and save yourself some money and time.
12. Oddworld Soulstorm
I’m not a fan of this franchise. I’ve been seeing them since the very first one back on the original PlayStation and I’ve never had any interest in playing them. I tried one of them once years back and I just couldn’t connect with it. This latest installment looks great visually. But that’s about all I’m qualified to say about it as the sixth game in a franchise. It didn’t look like a bad game, but I’m not one to jump into a franchise six games in.
13. Ghostwire: Tokyo
This trailer killed this game for me. I don’t know exactly what I was expecting after the E3 announcement but I was absolutely not expecting a first person Japanese ghost themed Skyrim game. This gameplay did not look fun for me. Which is a shame because the subject matter will be scary but the type of scary I actually enjoy. So I was looking forward to this one. But alas I will not be buying a game set in first person about shooting magic beams with Naruto hand signs. The art style also seemed a little on the cheap side to me compared to many other things shown. Even some of the smaller indie projects looked better, in my personal opinion.
14. The Far Shore
This looked like an indie game version of the movie Interstellar. That’s not a good or bad thing. But I will say that I’m getting tired of all the No Man’s Sky clones. Suddenly so many games seem to be about exploring new planets just for the sake of wandering and discovering with no fixed narrative, protagonist, or inciting incident. We have No Man’s Sky, Outer Wilds, Journey to the Savage Planet, and so on. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with the genre, it’s overdone at this point and it’s not even that old in its modern conception. I won’t say this game looks bad. And I do like the art style. But I simply don’t need another No Man’s Sky. Even if there’s a bit more narrative to it such as “our planet is dying so you need to find us a new one”.
In the most unsurprising, cliché way possible, I’m really excited for Godfall. But this is contingent on the idea of it being a cooperative story campaign based game. I do not want to play a Warframe clone or any other such never ending cooperative experience. I want a linear or semi-linear campaign that can be played with up to four people. If it’s that, I’m all in. If it’s anything else, I’m most likely out with the exception of a few models. For instance, I’d play it if it was structured like Monster Hunter World. Gameplay wise, it looks like a God of War style action hack and slash game with gear and weapons customization. It’s a fairly obvious launch title choice and the gameplay footage hooked me almost immediately.
16. Solar Ash
I am so thrilled that Heart Machine is making another game. I didn’t even know the studio was still active given the lead developer’s personal story with Hyper Light Drifter. This essentially looks like Hyper Light Drifter done in 3D with what appears to be super fluid movement mechanics. They didn’t show much but given how much I enjoyed their first title and how similar this looks to that as far as setting and art style, I’m fairly confident that it will be good and I will enjoy it.
17. Hitman III
I’m one of those people that actually enjoyed Hitman: Absolution. In fact, it’s the only Hitman game I’ve made it all the way through. I haven’t played the last two games in the franchise. I tried the first one and didn’t like certain limitations about how I could complete kills and just gave up on it. This is the third and final installment of the current iteration of the franchise. Seems a lot of franchises are hitting their culminating trilogy milestone recently. Based on what they showed, it seems like if you didn’t play the first two games in the trilogy then you probably won’t care to play this one either. I did think it was cool that you get to go to Dubai in this one though.
18. Astro’s Playroom
This trailer was actually very misleading and gave me a completely different impression of what this is compared to what it actually is. If I hadn’t of taken the time to research it more before publishing this post, my write up of this game would have been completely wrong. I thought this was another example of a developer following the successful release of a childlike theme/art style game with a shoverlware collection of mini-games rather than a legitimate sequel. What it actually will be is a free preloaded, non-VR 3D platformer that essentially gives users a gameplay based tutorial of the new PS5 DualSense controller. What’s important about this is that in a way it unofficially names Astro Bot as the mascot of PlayStation moving forward. They never really had a mascot like Mario to Nintendo. Just a bunch of iconic exclusive characters. But it seems that they are leaning into the idea of naming an official mascot character for at least the next generation of PlayStation gaming.
19. Little Devil Inside
I need to see some real gameplay footage, but this was one of my favorite trailers from the entire presentation. It has an almost Shadows of the Colossus vibe to it where you apparently play as a lone adventurer hunting down giant monsters. I like the cute, but still serious art style, the Monster Hunter style giant beasts, and seemingly large number of landscapes to explore. I really hope this ends up being something good with action gameplay and not some junk indie experience with slow paced gameplay and mostly QTEs.
20. NBA 2K21
This was probably my least favorite part of the entire presentation. And not because I tend to dislike sports games. This teaser, if you can even call it that, pretty much exemplifies the annual sports franchise mentality. They know you’re going to buy it so they don’t even try anymore. Just telling you it’s coming is enough effort on their part. They didn’t show any actual gamplay footage, didn’t announce any new features, or do anything to even try to sell the game to new players. It was the video equivalent of “blah blah blah blah blah blah Madden”. Kudos if you got that reference.
This looks really weird and that’s not a bad thing. The Octodad: Deadliest Catch team is at it again with another odd concept game. It’s set on an island inhabited by living food bugs that transform the characters’ bodies when they eat them. It’s a bit creepy even just seeing it played out in the trailer. And the cutesy art style makes it even creepier in a way. I can’t say if the game will be fun at this point but it definitely seems like it will be interesting. Also, there’s a monster so it does seem like a game of actual substance and plot rather than just the experience of eating weird bugs and transforming your character’s appearance.
22. Demon’s Souls Remake
I’m not gonna play a Demon’s Souls remake, since I already played the original. But I am very happy that they decided to rerelease this game. I think it’s a shame that there are so many Dark Souls players that never played the game that started the genre. Since this is a remake, I really hope they don’t alter the original game too much. It was very hard and much less balanced than the Dark Souls games and I think it’s important that people, especially those who consider themselves Dark Souls aficionados, get a taste of what difficulty really is. It would be a shame if they nerfed the experience to be less excruciating for the sake of not wanting to turn off modern players.
When I saw the announcement trailer for this during E3 2019, I was really intrigued and invented an entire game concept in my head. Based on the trailer shown during this presentation, my concept is completely wrong, and I’d argue better, than what this ultimately looks like it will be. I may be reading this wrong, and hopefully I am, but this seems like a grindhouse style soulsborne FPS. I got Wet (2009) vibes from it and that is not a compliment at all. There also seems to be magic powers in it, which doesn’t go with the setting they appear to have created. I just don’t like anything about what they appear to have done here compared to how the first trailer was. Maybe one day I’ll publish the concept I wanted for the game, but as of right now I’m definitely not interested in playing this one.
24. Resident Evil VIII: Village
So I didn’t get that this was a Resident Evil trailer after the first viewing. I missed the subtitle on the title review screen because I was too focused on the letters in “Village” becoming roman numerals. But the odd spacing kept me from reading it as “8”. So I just thought it was a new horror game IP. I was getting Deadly Premonition vibes but like as a game that’s not garbage. I won’t say I was definitely interested even before I knew it was a Resident Evil game, but I was curious. Now that I know it’s a RE game I’m almost certainly going to pass. But it didn’t look bad.
What even is this game? This trailer looked more like a tech demo for the graphics than a game trailer. I got serious Kojima vibes, which is not a compliment. The trailer didn’t tell us anything about what this actually is as far as gameplay or even story. Do you play as the astronaut or the little girl with technopathic powers? It was just a pretty looking trailer set in a futuristic dystopia and buzzword trailers with no substance piss me off a lot. Especially when you have games like Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart going the extra mile to actually try to sell you the game based on actual merit rather than just pretty graphics.
26. Horizon: Forbidden West
Talk about ending on a high note. While I didn’t like this trailer for much the same reasons I didn’t like the Pragmata trailer, the difference here is that we’re talking about a sequel to an established and successful IP. They don’t really have to show me anything new other than settings and monsters to get me to want to play the game. The first game proves the concept and if you liked that then you will almost certainly like a sequel. And I’ve always been of the opinion that a sequel only needs to stand on the writing and improvements to the gameplay. Meaning if the gameplay was flawless in the previous game, which I’m not saying it was in Horizon: Zero Dawn, then you don’t actually need to change anything. A lot of people and developers fall into the trap of change for the sake of change. I don’t agree with that line of reasoning. If they have a new story to tell that’s compelling and the gameplay is pretty much the same with just slight tweaks and improvements then I’m totally fine with that. Because the first game in this case was good. So yeah I’m all in for a Horizon: Zero Dawn sequel but as I’ve already said multiple times in this post, I do not like trailers like this. A console reveal presentation is not the time or place for cinematic trailers lacking of any real substance other than pretty graphics.
That’s every game shown in this presentation. SONY called this presentation “The Future of Gaming” and I think they have lived up to that claim with this show of games. They focused on new games and introduced new IPs, both indie and AAA. They revealed a new console and how it will allow players to enjoy new gaming experiences. I’m glad that this presentation wasn’t more appropriately called “The Yesterday of Gaming” by focusing on ports and remasters. That being said, Jim Ryan opened the PS5 reveal presentation by saying this will be the “biggest generational transition our industry has yet seen”. That is a bold claim that this presentation did not live up to for me. I put that statement on par with the book Life of Pi which starts with a character saying “Let me tell you a story that will make you believe in God.” Now I do believe in God and if I heard that story and believed it to be true it would have no effect on my religious views nor change them in any way if I didn’t believe in God. It’s just a nice story about a boy and a tiger surviving on a boat for a long time. It’s a good story. It’s not a revolutionary story. And that’s how I felt about this presentation.
Every generation since the N64 has claimed that this generation will be the “biggest generational transition our industry has yet seen”. And they rarely if ever deliver. In my opinion, the transition from the SNES to the N64 was such a depth defying and industry changing generational transition. Gaming changed from 2D to 3D. Suddenly the entire way we saw video games was altered. Our expectations for what games could be were revolutionized in every way. It was like seeing in color for the first time after a life of black and white. The Gamecube/PS2/ XBOX era did not fulfill the same level of revolutionary transition. I would argue the Wii kind of delivered on this by revolutionizing the motion aspect of games but it didn’t revolutionize the industry as a whole. Or even Nintendo. They still make most of their games work without the necessity of motion based controls. The Wii was more of a branching generational transition than a mainstream one. One could argue that the XBOX 360 and PS3 revolutionized the social aspect of gaming by making online interactions a much more central part of game design. As well as the digital distribution of games. But I would argue that gameplay itself wasn’t changed that much. And that’s even more so with the PS4/XBOX One generational transition. I’m still holding controllers that look pretty much the same as they have for the last two generations. I’m still playing 3D games that operate pretty much the same way. Sure we’ve added a second set of shoulder buttons and a touchpad, but gameplay for the most part has only gotten faster and prettier but not much different.
Games are bigger now. Games are smoother now. Yes these are all improvements that we’ve seen with each generation. But they’re not revolutionary. They’re just improving on already existing foundational concepts of gaming that have existed for the past three or more generations. I would say the Switch is revolutionary in the fact that it bridged the gap between home and portable gaming and gave people the ability to have home console quality gameplay and graphics with optional motion controls on the go. But as far as actual gameplay is concerned it revolutionized local multiplayer more than gaming itself. The motion controls come from the Wii. The graphics aren’t monumentally different than games we’ve seen in past generations. Really the Switch revolutionized convenience. But not gameplay.
For me the promise of the “biggest generational transition our industry has yet seen” means that the fundamental way I view and play games needs to change. There needs to be a moment where my expectations of what a game was and now is are clearly different and defined by specific differences that are objectively measureable. Better graphics isn’t objective. It’s an opinion. 3D graphics vs 2D graphics is objective. It is a measureable difference in what games looks like compared to what they used to look like that has nothing to do with preference or opinion. That’s what I need to happen for that statement to have any real meaning to it. And it doesn’t have to be graphics. It can be gameplay. It can be storytelling elements. But it needs to be measureable and consistent among a majority of AAA titles. We said/say that one day everything will be in VR. That would be such a generational transition. I don’t like VR personally but when the day comes that a console is 100% VR and it’s not an option to play without VR, that will be a legitimate generational transition of noteworthy magnitude. But if all the PS5 will offer is shorter/non-existent loading times and cleaner graphics then that’s not really anything to write home about. It’s good and I want it. But it’s not the “biggest generational transition our industry has yet seen”.
Now supposedly the DualSense controller has new gameplay altering features that will change the way we play video games. I hope that’s true. But anyone who has been playing Mario Kart since the SNES will tell you that the karts go faster the harder you push the button. Haptic feedback and gameplay sounds cool but it doesn’t mean anything if it doesn’t actually change the way I play games. Unless I actually have to press buttons differently than I do now then it’s not revolutionary. I will say that it does sound like they are working towards revolutionizing the audio experience of gaming on the PS5, and that’s cool. But I don’t know if I would count better audio as revolutionizing gaming, no matter how much it improves, until it changes the way I play games. Like you can make a game where I can hear the direction of my enemies to a perfect level where the sound experience actually affected my perception of what was going on. But if you also give me a mini-map, an on screen directional sensor for damage, and all these other quality of life features that games have added over time then is the sound really going to change much about how I engage with the game? I’d argue not really. Now you could say well you can turn those features off, but that’s not the point. Revolutions aren’t optional. Either the gameplay is revolutionary or it isn’t. If we all aren’t going to experience this change together then it’s not really change. That’s basically how VR is right now. We’re not all using VR. We don’t all own VR headsets. All games aren’t made for VR. Thus VR has not actually revolutionized gaming . . . yet. And let me be clear. I do hope that the PS5 ushers in such a revolutionary generational transition. I want that to be the case. But this presentation didn’t lead me to believe that this was actually going to happen. From what I’ve seen so far, it just looks like gaming will be exactly the same but faster and with better graphics. Just like it has been for the last two generations of gaming on PlayStation. I might be inclined to agree that the shift from PS1 to the PS2 was revolutionary. I would not say the same about the PS2 to the PS3, unless again you want to focus on online interactions and digital distribution of content as the revolutionary factor. The PS4 I would absolutely not call revolutionary compared to the PS3. Save for the amount of money I was asked to spend to play multiplayer games online. And from what I’ve seen so far, it looks like the PS5 is just a faster more powerful PS4. And that’s speaking as someone who never owned a PS4 Pro. The transition will probably be even less noticeable for the people who did get a PS4 Pro, based on what we’ve seen so far.
Overall this was a good presentation. I liked it and I liked a lot of the games shown. I am excited for the PS5. What did you think of the presentation? Are you sold on the PS5? What games impressed you and why?
If you read my blog regularly, then you may have noticed that I did not do posts about either the Ghost of Tsushima or The Last of Us Part IIState of Play presentations. This should have seemed strange to my normal readers because up until this point I have done a post about every State of Play episode since the beginning. So I wanted to talk about why I chose not to do posts for those two presentations and will continue not to do posts for State of Play presentations done in the same style as those ones moving forward.
I really like the original State of Play format. It’s very similar to the Nintendo Direct format, but in some ways I like it even better. I won’t go into too much detail, because I’ve already written at length about this previously. But basically what I like(d) about the State of Play format was the highly informative, time efficient, look at multiple upcoming games. Even more so did I value the fact that they often gave time to games that were not highly anticipated AAA titles that had already been hyped up for more than a year. These recent single game presentations have betrayed that original format/style.
The last two State of Plays were your run of the mill AAA E3 presentations done via video. You could have taken either one of those presentations and played them live at E3 and they would have been no different. And I think it’s fairly obvious that they happened because E3 will no longer be happening this year. And let me state clearly that I have no problem with such presentations and that I was already planning on buying both of those games. I’m especially excited for Ghost of Tsushima and preordered the Special Edition before this presentation even went live. What I do have a problem with is that these presentations are being given the State of Play label.
By labeling these extended single game presentations as State of Play episodes, SONY has essentially betrayed the original format and altered it to be pretty much any game related content they choose to put out digitally. That’s a bad thing, in my opinion. It’s disorganized and completely derails the user base’s ability to set expectations for future State of Play episodes. The next time we get a State of Play announcement, we will have no way of accurately setting expectations for what it will be. Will it be a single game presentation, multiple snapshots of upcoming indie games, a new game announcement, or something completely different? Note that I’m not saying that any of those types of content is more of less valuable than any others. What I’m saying is that users have varied interests and should be able to decide whether or not they want to watch a presentation before hand based on the expectations of what it will be. But SONY has removed our ability to accurately set those expectations, thereby trying to manipulate everyone into sitting through presentations they may or may not have an interest in.
The weirdest thing is the fact that the, now rightfully delayed, June 4thPS5 presentation wasn’t labeled as State of Play. This was billed as a presentation of upcoming games by multiple studios of various sizes. Other than the longer running time, this was way more in line with the original State of Play format than the single game presentations and yet they labeled it The Future of Gaming. So the question I have is why create an entirely new name for this presentation that falls more in line with the original State of Play format while not creating a different name for presentations that don’t fall in line with the original format?
Truthfully they didn’t even need to give those single game presentations a label to begin with. They could have just billed them as gameplay presentations of their respective games. That is a commonly occurring form of content released by publishers and developers. The decision to label them both as State of Play presentations was an intentional one and I find that disappointing. Because I want more of the original State of Play format content. I don’t want the only type of presentations from PlayStation to be long form presentations of AAA titles I already know I’m going to buy. That type of content is pretty much useless to any informed gamer. It just builds hype. I know plenty of people who didn’t even watch The Last of Us Part II presentation because they had either already decided to buy it or already decided not to buy it, because we’ve already seen previous presentations, hype build up, and for some the leaks. Meaning the presentation did very little to push people in either direction. Whereas a presentation of upcoming titles that weren’t already super hyped and highly anticipated would have been much more valuable and informative to a larger number of players.
I know I probably sound like Grandpa Simpson yelling at clouds, but these sorts of choices are important. They can mean the difference between calling attention to an otherwise unknown game and getting it some much needed, and often deserved, time in the spotlight and an indie studio going bankrupt. They also affect users. I don’t necessarily care to watch an extended gameplay presentation of a game I’m already decided on. But I absolutely want to watch a presentation of multiple game announcements or snapshots for titles I’m not aware of or familiar with. And like most people, my time is both limited and valuable to me. But next time SONY says a State of Play is incoming I won’t necessarily know what to expect. So in a way they’ve taken away my agency as a viewer because I’ll potentially be going in blind and can very possibly be highly disappointed with the content. Not because the content is necessarily bad. But because it’s content I have no interest in watching.
Again, I like the original State of Play format. I’m sad to see it already being betrayed after only four episodes. I hope SONY hasn’t decided to kill it off altogether this early on and opted for exclusively traditional single AAA gameplay presentations. For me, that would be a real tragedy. It’s only because of the State of Play presentations that I took a serious interest in games like Untitled Goose Game, Predator: Hunting Grounds, and Wattam. And it doesn’t matter if any or all of the games were ultimately good or bad. Predator: Hunting Grounds is bad by the way. What matters is that the State of Play episodes got me looking at games that I otherwise was never going to consider buying or probably even trying. That’s what the original format of State of Play was accomplishing: alerting gamers to games they may not have had on the radar. And that’s what it needs to continue to do. As such, if PlayStation continues to put out State of Plays as AAA game presentations for games that have already been hyped up and had lots of previous content released, then I will continue to not cover them on this blog. Because talking to you about previews we didn’t need serves even less purpose than the presentations themselves. It makes more sense just to wait and review the full games after I’ve played them at that point.
Having now played Animal Crossing: New Horizons for 170 hours, I can say two things. The first is that the game is a depth defying evolution of the concept since the original game released on the Gamecube almost 20 years ago. It’s accessible, simple, and addictive while not taking advantage of any of the predatory microtransactions Nintendo could absolutely get away with. It’s complicated enough to hold the attention of adults, both causal and serious gamers, while also being simple enough to be played and enjoyed by children. While it is not the best game ever made, it may be the most Nintendo game ever made in the last two generations or more of Nintendo consoles. The second thing I can say is that the game is riddled with quality of life problems. Not glitches or coding errors, but intentional problems that ultimately hurt the gameplay experience.
I have been absolutely floored by some of the island designs I’ve seen posted online. People have accomplished things that I couldn’t even imagine. The amount of things you can actually accomplish/build in Animal Crossing: New Horizons is insane. Yet my island still looks like garbage. One could argue that my island looks like garbage because I simply lack creativity, but I don’t agree with that statement. Now I’m not saying that I’m as visually creative as everyone else. I’m a writer by trade so visual design isn’t really my strong suit. But I do have plenty of ideas and a vision for my own epic island design. And I’m happy to acknowledge that the chances of the design I have in my head, or reference notes after I took the time to draw and plot out everything I wanted to do on paper, probably isn’t as impressive as many of the things that I’ve seen go viral online. But at the very least my island wouldn’t look like garbage if my vision could be realized. The problem is that at every turn the game goes out of its way to arbitrarily limit my ability to create my own vision. And again none of these limitations are due to glitches. They are intentional design flaws that can easily be fixed, but simply won’t be because Nintendo gonna Nintendo.
Landscaping and Island design isn’t the only place where the game has monumentally inconvenient limitations that are easily fixed but simply won’t be because reasons. There are a host of quality of life issues that simply don’t need to be present in the game. So for this week’s post I wanted to go over my top 15 complaints about Animal Crossing: New Horizons. This is not an exhaustive list; and I’m sure some people will disagree with some of the things mentioned. But I believe every one of these issues could easily be patched out and would make the gameplay experience better for a majority of players. Better being defined as giving players the ability to maximize their own personal enjoyment and/or creative freedom. List is in no particular order.
1. No Natural Island Features Should be Permanent
When you first start the game, you are asked to pick an island layout. If like me, you started the game on day one with little to no prior knowledge or plans in the works, then you chose a layout that seemed the most convenient at the time without knowing exactly what you were committing to. My island’s natural layout has been a nightmare for pretty much my entire time playing the game. It of course started with house placement. I knew exactly where I wanted my house to go when I first looked at the map layouts. That has never changed. What I didn’t know going into the game was that I wouldn’t be able to reach the location I wanted for my house until much later into the game. I thought I would be able to get the vaulting pole and ladder from the start and place my house exactly where I wanted it. Instead I was forced to put it in the complete opposite side of the island from where I wanted it because not only did I want my house on a mountain, but I also wanted an island with a single continuous river that went from end to end, locking me to only about 40% of my island’s total land for the opening portion of the game. As you can imagine, this was very annoying. But I was OK with it because I knew eventually I would be able to move my house and even reshape my river, if I wanted to.
Eventually I was finally able to reshape the land and the water, while also having the tools to go wherever I wanted. By the time I unlocked K.K. Slider (about 110 hours in), I finally had an established vision for what I wanted my island to look like. I set out to complete this task only to then realize my plan wasn’t possible because my river inlets from the ocean weren’t located in the right places. This cannot be altered, which I wasn’t aware of when I devised my grand plan. You’re simply stuck with the river to ocean connections you have. Now yes I could technically build my own rivers from scratch and just not connect them to the ocean at all. But that’s not really what I wanted. Furthermore, one of my inlets is located too high on my map which blocks me from having the perfect cliffs I wanted.
Along with the river mouths, you also have to contend with beaches and even worse beach stone. These black rocks eat up the sides and corners of your map for literally no reason and prevent you from having perfectly square edges to your cliffs. Some may also refer to them as OCD stone. Why Nintendo decided to make all these physical features permanent is beyond me. What I do know is that not only have they dashed my island landscaping dreams multiple times, but they also cost me so many hours of hard work because I had to alter several map units of land to account for them. This entire issue is stupid and shouldn’t be a thing. Just let me redesign my island however I want once I’ve reached the landscaping portion of the game.
2. The Game Needs Mass/Rapid Landscaping Options
Being able to reshape land and water is extremely convenient. It’s one of my favorite aspects of the game. Even with the many limits it has to it, the fact that you can reform cliffs and rivers to create the landscape you want (mostly) allows for every island to be truly original. That being said, the process of landscaping is one of the most tedious and troublesome endeavors I’ve ever experienced in a Nintendo game. You have to manually shape each block unit of land in the game one at a time. It is appalling that there isn’t a Mario Maker style landscape editing mode where you can just build entire sections of cliff and water in a few seconds. I have spent literal weeks trying to build, and rebuild, the cliff structure I wanted. And this doesn’t include all the time I’ve had to spend moving around trees and flowers to do it. I wouldn’t even mind having to pay a bells fee to do it. I just don’t want to have to spend hours to build a cliff after I’ve already taken the time to clear all the land. The cliff should be the easy part. And joy-con drift never angered me so much as it does while trying to landscape in this game. The game already has a unit based map. Allowing the player to draw cliff or water on it quickly rather than unit by unit landscaping would be an easy thing to implement.
3. Build and Destroy Landscaping Functions Should be Separate Buttons
In order to keep the coding simplistic, Animal Crossing: New Horizons throws all landscaping functions into two buttons. You select what kind of landscaping you want to do by pressing the plus button and then the A button to make a selection. Then you use the A button to interact with the unit of land directly in front of you, assuming your joy-con doesn’t drift. If the landscaping selection you currently have active isn’t on the unit in front of you, the A button adds it. If the active landscaping selection is on the unit in front of you, the A button removes it. While simple in practice, this causes a lot of problems. Again, many of them are the result of joy-con drift. Often you end up removing land when you intended to add it. Or adding water when you intended to remove it. And vice versa. This could easily be remedied by dedicating the A button to adding landscaping options and a different button being dedicated for removing landscaping selections. Of course this would only be the case while the landscaping app is active. Having this function would save users so much time by not having them make unintentional landscaping mistakes throughout the entire process of terraforming their islands.
4. Why Can’t I Build Giant Walls?
I have absolutely no idea why you can’t build two story cliffs, but it’s one of the most irritating limitations the game has. For some reason you can’t build a cliff on top of a cliff. You have to leave a space of at least one unit between the first level cliff and the second level cliff. So instead of building high cliffs you end up with big two step stairs. If I had to hazard a guess, I’d say the reason for this probably has to do with the incline limitations, which I will get to. You can’t make two story inclines, so building two story cliffs would prevent you from being able to access the tops of them. But I don’t see why that’s a problem because if I’m building a two story cliff then clearly I don’t want it to be climbed to begin with. Also, couldn’t’ the ladder just extend if it was really an issue that needed solving? Not only is this issue visually troublesome, but it also wastes a lot of real estate. You only have so much land. Having to waste the outer edges one unit in all directions is quite a loss of total available land.
5. Inclines Have So Much Wasted Potential
The only way to reach a higher level without a ladder is an incline. This is fine. Even the process of adding inclines for a fee is fine. What isn’t fine is all the things inclines should be able to do but can’t. First, inclines are locked to one cliff unit up and two ground units wide. Inclines are extremely useful but they could do so much more. You can’t build them adjacent to each other either vertically or horizontally. They need a gap of at least one space. So if you wanted to make a two story cliff with an incline it would have an annoying one unit step between the two inclines. You also can’t build them side by side. Meaning you can’t build hills or epic continuous grand entrances.
You also can’t repave or plant flowers on inclines. Meaning if, like me, you wanted to use floor paths to build long “roads” that went up cliffs, you would not be able to fully coordinate their colors because inclines can’t be customized past picking from a limited selection of incline designs. The inability to plant flowers on them also means you can’t have continuous flower paths for your “roads” that go up cliffs either. While some of this may be a lot of trouble to remedy, much of it shouldn’t have been part of the game to begin with. There’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to install adjacent inclines and bridges.
6. Construction Delays Progress so Much
Construction projects are a sensible idea. Moving buildings and adding/removing inclines being a bit more special so you aren’t constantly changing everything on your island makes you appreciate your decisions more. Having to pay for them does this adequately. But making me have to wait for the day to flip and only allowing me to move one building and one incline/bridge a day is such a waste of time. If I’m trying to reshape my entire island after acquiring the landscaping license, I shouldn’t have to wait a day to move each house on my island. I shouldn’t have to wait a day to demolish or move each bridge/incline I built in the early game while just trying to access more of the land and amass resources. It’s no wonder why some players, myself not included, use time travel. So much progress is stopped by limiting construction projects to one of each type a day. Just charge me express work fees and let me do everything in the same day. At the very least let me reshape the island in mass at least once after unlocking the landscaping license. Because obviously most players wouldn’t have put things where they are if they had had full access to all the tools and landscaping abilities you eventually get from the start.
Also, it’s completely ridiculous that you have to pay twice to change the surrounding landscape of a building or incline. I had my house in the perfect spot the first time I moved it. But I did not yet have landscaping abilities. Once I unlocked them, I wanted my house in the same general spot, but moved over three units and on top of a cliff. Doing this required moving my house to a completely different location by paying a fee of 30K bells and waiting a day for construction, then reshaping the land where I wanted my house, paying another fee of 30K bells, and waiting another day for construction. This sort of process was required for four of my islanders’ homes as well, ultimately costing me 460,000 bells and 10 days of waiting. The process should not have been that long, that expensive, or that troublesome.
7. Housing Development Shouldn’t Be Limited
You can expand your house’s interior by paying off loans. This is fine. The prices may seem a little high but once you start playing the stalk market “correctly” money becomes almost a non-issue once you get past your initial landscaping costs. But there’s a limit to how big your house can be. In reality, this makes sense. But this is a video game. Why can’t I just keep expanding my house indefinitely? Or at least past the point of realistic practicality. You can only have a maximum of six total rooms in your house. You can’t control or expand the size of them and their dimensions are kind of inconvenient as well. Why can’t I just pay more bells to expand these rooms or add additional ones? If I want a living room, a kitchen, a bathroom, a workshop, a gameroom, a bedroom, and a guest room, why can’t I? I have plenty of bells. So just let me keep expanding. And let me keep expanding storage as well. You can get up to 1600 storage spots by the time you fully upgrade your house. But why place a limit at all? Just let me keep paying a flat rate of bells to expand my storage indefinitely. Why does it matter?
8. Why Can’t I Stack Items Based on Space?
Certain items can have other items placed on them such as tables, chairs, and rugs. But then other items can’t even if there’s enough space to do so. For instance, the wooden speakers. This stereo system is quite big and it looks cool. But it takes up a lot of room. The top of it has enough surface area to act as a table or stand. So why can’t I put things on top of it such as potted plants or trophies? That’s something a person would actually do in real life. Yet because the game doesn’t designate it as a piece of stacking furniture, you aren’t allowed to do this. You can’t even put things on beds. So much space is wasted in an already limited space environment.
9. Just Let Me Store Turnips For Goodness Sake
Once a week you find yourself having to store turnips in the most inconvenient of places. First I was storing them all over my house. Every open space of my floor would be covered in turnips. I wasn’t even decorating my basement because I needed the storage space. Then, like many other players, I took to building an outdoor storage area for them. This is more convenient in many ways, but it’s also a complete waste of real estate. Having to essentially sacrifice a large piece of land to store your turnips every week is an unnecessary inconvenience that adds no enjoyment to the game. Either let me store them in the storage or raise the single item volume considerably. I buy 16K turnips a week. That’s 160 item slots to store. That’s a ton of wasted real estate. And sure you don’t have to buy turnips every week, and certainly not in those large quantities. But in the weeks that you do, you need that space available so it makes more sense just to leave it open rather than build on it at all.
10. Why Can’t I Turn the Camera When Outside my House?
The camera in Animal Crossing: New Horizons can be quite troublesome. You often can’t see things behind buildings and trees. But there are often important things there such as dig spots and bugs. You can turn the camera in the house just fine. In fact, it’s very convenient. But you can’t do this when outside your house and I can’t think of a single justifiable reason for this.
11. Add a Fossil Record to the Museum
In the game, you have a phone that catalogues every fish and bug you’ve caught and whether or not you have donated them to the museum. Why the same is not true for the fossils is beyond me. I don’t even need a fossil record on my phone. Just put it in the damn museum, like literally any real museum would have. Finishing the fossil collection, which I finally managed to do by trading in the fossil market on Discord, is such a hassle because you literally don’t know how many or which fossils you’re missing without looking it up online. Even when you do try to look it up, it’s still fairly unclear what you’re actually missing because you have to manually walk the museum and try to figure it out. Just add a damn fossil list to the museum so it’s like an actual museum.
12. Let Me Mass Buy Clothing in the Fitting Room
The fitting room in the Able Sisters clothing store is really nice. It’s exactly what you want when trying to decide which clothes to buy. But damn if it isn’t the most inconvenient thing in the world when trying to buy multiple colors of the same piece of clothing. If an item comes in multiple colors and I want more than one, why can’t I just buy all the colors I want at once? Making me have to pay, then exit the fitting room, then reenter the fitting room, find the item again, and pay again is completely unnecessary. Just let me buy as many items as I want at once.
Also, let me know which items I already own. The crafting table tells you what items you already have in your pockets and in storage. Why doesn’t the fitting room do the same?
13. Why Do the Store’s Close?
I work a full time job. I am not alone. I have to commute to my job. I am not alone. I can’t use my Switch at work. I am not alone. Nook’s Cranny doesn’t open until 8 AM and closes at 10 PM. This means that anyone who has to leave for work before 8 AM can’t sell things they are carrying from the night before and can’t check the morning prices of turnips, much less take advantage of them. Anyone who works late can’t purchase or sell anything at Nook’s Cranny either. There are days where I have to leave for work before 8 AM and don’t get home till almost 8 PM. Then I have other responsibilities like cooking dinner and walking my dog. That makes the operating hours of Nook’s Cranny very difficult for me. And I don’t even have children. But one must ask why does the store close at all? This isn’t real life. They don’t need to sleep. Tom Nook and Isabelle never close the Residential Services office. So what’s the deal with Tom’s nephews? The store should definitely reset every day like the calendar does with new announcements. And if for the sake of balance you wanted to argue that the turnip purchasing time should still be locked to specific hours of day, I could understand an argument for that. But the store closing is unnecessary. Or at the very least remove the fees for using the box to sell items. I don’t mind waiting till the next morning to get my funds in the mail. That’s a realistic mechanic I guess.
Don’t even get me started on the Able Sisters shop. Why does it close an hour earlier than Nook’s Cranny? What is the justification for that? Realistically you only need to visit it once a day, assuming you aren’t strapped for bells, in order to do all your business there. But it’s still the same issue of availability. If someone isn’t able to get to their Switch between the hours of 8 AM and 9 PM, then when do they get to purchase and design new clothing items? The game may be geared towards kids, but adults play it. If the shops have to be open for limited hours, at least let the player set those hours for their island. Maybe the employees sleep during the day and work through the night.
14. Why Doesn’t my Nook Phone Have a Debit Function?
I have a bank account and a smart phone. That is literally all a person needs to make purchases without carrying cash. So why can’t I purchase things from shops without the cash in hand? Just let me pull the funds needed directly from my bank account. Not for Daisy and NPC purchases, because that wouldn’t be realistic or practical. Though Zelle is a thing. But if I want to buy a chessboard from Nook’s Cranny with 3 million bells in the bank but not 95,000 bells in my pocket just let me purchase it with funds directly from my bank account so I don’t have to run to Resident Services, access the bank account, withdrawal the funds, and then run all the way back to Nook’s Cranny.
While we’re at it, let players access their bank accounts from other islands. Not their storage because that would be unrealistic. But as with my digital purchases argument, the technology is already there. The entire purposes of bank accounts is so you can access your funds anywhere that has an ATM. Every island has an ATM so let players pull bells from the Resident Services on any island.
15. Add a Dynamic DIY Vendor
Much of the game is built around the idea of interacting with NPCs and the environment to get new recipes. Characters like Celeste are key to making the most out of your crafting experience. But in my opinion there are serious issues with the volume of DIY recipes acquired as well as the ability to get the ones you want. I find it very irritating when I’m trying to complete a seasonal set like the bamboo collection and I get drops of repeat bamboo recipes before I’ve even finished the collection. That forces players to have to try to deal with the market and convince other players to trade them the recipes they want/are missing because the game itself doesn’t seem to be providing them.
While I won’t outright say you should just be able to buy every recipe in the game whenever you want, I do believe there should be a constant stream of DIY vending that takes bells or even Nook Miles. Technically the game kind of has this at Resident Services, but the list of available recipes is fixed. That shouldn’t be the case. As with the Nook Shopping service, the DIY choices should be changing daily. Like with turnip prices, it should be completely random with some days giving you repeats or junk recipes while other days can include super rare ones. Every day players should have the ability to acquire at least one new recipe no matter how much time they put in. This also makes every day seem eventful in some way even when nothing particularly special is otherwise going on.
So there are my 15 biggest complaints about Animal Crossing: New Horizons. I want to clarify that I love the game. I have played it literally every day since it released. I have never time traveled and I take my progress in the game very seriously. I play the stalk market like a pro and have great aspirations for my island and its residents. But the game is severely lacking in a number of quality of life features that would make the experience of playing the game way more convenient and fulfilling. The game is by no means bad, but it could be considerably better.
When I was a youth, the very first Animal Crossing was released for the Nintendo Gamecube. It was such an odd game. The concept was different from anything I had ever considered playing before. It was like The Sims and DinoPark Tycoon had a baby. But it was intriguing, so I bought it. It was a surprisingly fun game. I still remember it quite fondly. And I’m speaking as a person who doesn’t play games like Minecraft, Stardew Valley, or The Sims and have never had any interest in those types of games. But Animal Crossing was just the right level of resource management and progress to be fun for a casual sim player.
More than one sequel to Animal Crossing has been released since the first one launched in 2001. The franchise expanded into handheld consoles and mobile games. I skipped all of these. It’s not that I didn’t want to play more Animal Crossing. It’s just that I never owned any of Nintendo’s handhelds after the Gameboy Advance and didn’t want to. It wasn’t until two decades later that I finally purchased another Animal Crossing game for the Nintendo Switch. This is of course the recently released Animal Crossing: New Horizons.
I really like New Horizons. It’s by no means a perfect game but it is quite fun, for whatever reason. It delivers that same feeling I got playing the original all those years ago. It is interesting how the game is very much driven by money and Capitalist ideals while also being very relaxed and easy going. People often joke about Tom Nook being a robber baron type but if we’re honest he gives you interest free loans and lets you pay them off at whatever pace you like. He’s very fast about completing construction projects and doesn’t charge you extra for labor. Money is certainly a component but it’s not the driving force of the game. Really the game is just about building a community that makes you happy. I have seen so many amazing creations, designs, and concepts developed in New Horizons. I have visited islands that made me feel like an inferior Resident Representative because of how shitty my island looks by comparison. It is a delightful game that allows people to express themselves in ways I couldn’t have even conceived of when playing the original Animal Crossing back in 2001. But money is still a part of the game and that fact has brought out the worst in Nintendo’s user base.
Nintendo fans, which I do include myself in, often get a bad rap. We are known for our incessant complaining and unruly demands. We are often labeled as some of the most virulent members of the gaming community. While XBOX and PlayStation users are constantly at each other’s throats, Nintendo users are usually fighting each other and attacking the people who make the games we play. Look at how people responded to Pokémon: Sword & Shield. Look at how the Smash Bros. Ultimate community behaves when it comes to discussing DLC characters. One has to admit that Nintendo fans are often guilty of heinous levels of nonsense. Many people see Nintendo fans as childish. The fact that most Nintendo games are geared towards younger audiences definitely adds to that image. At the same time, that childish image has allowed Nintendo fans to be seen as some of the most wholesome members of the gaming community as well. Nintendo fans aren’t complaining about loot boxes or the level of gore in a game. We just want to be able to give our characters purple hair and green shoes. Or at least that’s how the stereotypes tend to come off. If you had asked me which group of gamers were most likely to try to take advantage of each other for profit, I never would have said Nintendo users . . . until I played Animal Crossing: New Horizons.
While money is not meant to be the main focus of New Horizons, it does play a crucial role. Money allows you to do all the fantastic things you want to do. Increasing the size of your house costs money. Changing the layout of your island’s buildings and infrastructure costs money. Adding new villagers to your island costs money. Buying the awesome clothes you want like the Royal Crown (sold at the in game store for 1,200,000 bells) costs money. Now the point of the game is to take your time. Things don’t cost money to make you care a lot about money. They cost money to give you a concrete reason to keep playing the game. To keep catching and selling fish and insects. To keep cultivating fruit. The money is there as a motivator to keep you playing the game. But the online component of this particular Animal Crossing installment allows money to control the way players play the game both alone and with others. And it has brought out the worst in people.
Over the 105 hours I’ve played New Horizons I’ve come to understand the game as having three main stages of gameplay which I will refer to as early game, mid game, and late game. Note that I’m not saying this was Nintendo’s intent when building the game. I’m just saying that based on what I have witnessed in other players and felt myself, this is how users are playing/experiencing the game.
Early game is some of the most gratifying but also depressing gameplay. Everything is new. Everything is fun. You are motivated to do all kinds of things without complaining. I chopped so much wood during the early game. Every day I went through my entire island and shook all the trees for twigs and then hit them all for wood piles. I did this almost religiously without complaining. I made sure to hit every rock, dig every dig spot, and catch as many fish and bugs as I could. Why? Because I needed more money. I needed to turn my tent into a house. I needed to expand that house for more storage space. I needed to buy land plots so I could add more villagers. I needed money. In the early game, I was happy to do manual labor in order to acquire that money. For me, it was about work ethic. If I wanted to expand, I had to be willing to earn it. And for a long time I did earn it. I paid off all the home loans save for the last two with manual labor. I paid off two inclines and two bridges with manual labor. Every piece of furniture or clothing I acquired was either crafted, sourced from the environment/villagers, or paid for with manual labor. I didn’t even get to play the stalk market for the first time until I was already on my second to last home loan, built the Nook’s Cranny store, and had manually paid for at least five villagers to move in. I did this because I had a vision for what I wanted my island to be and I was motivated to work towards it.
Late game is when the player has finally reached their vision. It’s when you’ve paid off everything, gotten the clothes you want, gotten enough houses for the number of villagers you want/need, and have finally built the island you want. The infrastructure, the building placement, the land marks. All these things that make your island a home are finally acquired and in place. It will have taken you lots of time and several million bells to accomplish, but it can eventually be done. Late game, which I haven’t personally reached yet, is an interesting place, because it’s like the early game in that you’re playing for the enjoyment of it. You don’t have things you have to do anymore. You have things you want to do. You don’t have to farm every day for bells. If you want to fish or catch bugs you just do it for love of the game. Money is no problem. You have millions of bells stored in the bank. You simply play the game because you want to and wait for special occurrences and events. It’s the way the game was meant to be played and it took time and hard work to get there. It’s a beautiful place that all Animal Crossing players hope to reach some day. But to get there you have to get through the mid game.
Mid game is a bad place. It’s where most players are currently and where you spend the bulk of your time and effort. This is where you are now a bit jaded and tired of manual labor. You have found certain ways to make money faster. You play the stalk market regularly. And worst of all, you’ll do just about anything to make a quick bell. Because you need those bells. You’re not in it for the fun anymore. You’re in it for the vision. You want to build that amusement park with giant robots and rides. You want a perfectly paved road system lined with Imperial walls and high end bridges. You want that royal crown. Fun is gone. Now it’s about respect and prestige. You know what you want and you see it in reach. But it will cost you a lot of money. And making that money manually is just gonna take more time than people in 2020 want to devote to hard work. So you start wheeling and dealing. And you become a monster.
New Horizons has an optional online component. They want players to interact with each other both locally and online. In order to motivate players to do this, they have built in a number of incentives. People, being people, took advantage of this fact and have turned to profiteering. This is the mid game in a nutshell.
One of the quickest ways to make money in New Horizons is the “stalk market”. The fact that it’s a play on the phrase “stock market” is intentional and sadly prophetic. Every Sunday morning, you can buy turnips. They are sold by a single traveling vendor at a price that fluctuates from week to week. You then have seven days to sell them to a different vendor and hopefully make a profit. The vendor that buys them from you changes prices twice a day every day except on Sundays when they aren’t buying. If you do not sell them within seven days of purchase, they rot and become useless. As the old adage states, “buy low, sell high” is the name of the game. The way it’s meant to be played is one week the vendor may sell the turnips at 104 bells and then the other vendor will hopefully buy them from you at an increase. Say 155 bells as a common example. You then have to choose if you want to sell at that price or wait for a better one. Sometimes a better price comes and sometimes it doesn’t. Sometimes a price lower than the best you saw comes that will still net you a profit and sometimes the price is lower than what you bought at. The name of the game is knowing when to sell. Most of the time the sell price is relatively normal. It usually falls somewhere between 80 and 200 bells. The price you bought at usually ranges between 90 and 120 bells. So if you invest 100K bells you’ll probably net about 50% in profit or about 50K bells total, give or take. But every so often the buyer will offer a crazy high price like 600 bells. Enter predatory human capitalism.
Now you can play the right way and just buy and sell on your own island. Or you can play the smart way and buy and sell on whatever island you can get to with the best price. This week my island had a turnip selling price of 108 bells. That’s a pretty meh price all things considered, but it’s very normal. I didn’t buy on my island. Instead I went to the Discord and found an island selling turnips at 91 bells. I bought my turnips there. Then a day later my island was buying at 107 bells. Now if I had bought at 108 from my local vendor, that’s a losing price. I would absolutely have needed to wait for a better price later in the week and hope it eventually came. But since I bought at 91 bells on a different island, I could have turned a profit selling at 108 bells. I didn’t do that though, because it’s not smart and only mildly profitable. I found another island buying turnips at 621 bells. I sold there. I flipped 250K bells worth of turnips in less than 24 hours for a profit of about 1.6 million bells. Before that, the most money I had ever had at one time was 750K bells, which I earned from manual labor. I made more than double that in a fraction of the time. It’s a great way to get to the late game faster. It should be no surprise that islands that can offer those services are in high demand. And anything with a high demand can be used for profit. Even when used by Nintendo gamers.
Nintendo wanted people to interact with each other in friendly ways. They wanted people to help each other with the occasional friendly trade or visit for fruit. That’s not how people are playing the game though. People are using the benefits of their islands to make staggering profits. Here’s the scenario. Person A has invested one million bells into turnips at a price of 94 bells. That’s a good price. It’s also a big investment. Person A only has seven days to flip those turnips before they rot. If they aren’t sold in time, that’s one million bells down the drain in the form of 10,638 rotten turnips, which cannot be sold for anything. In fact, I think there’s even a fee to dispose of them. Person B has a vendor buying turnips at 600 bells. If Person A can manage to sell his 10,638 turnips at Person B’s island, he will net a profit of about 5,382,800 bells. Assuming he can flip those turnips at those prices on the first day, that’s more than five million bells made in less than 24 hours. Now Person B can choose to be a good Samaritan and just let Person A come sell at his/her island. But that doesn’t help Person B at all. Person B has to do some things in order to let Person A sell at their island. Person B has to be online the entire time it takes Person A to sell. If it takes multiple trips, because of carry inventory limits, then Person B has to wait around for Person A to make multiple trips. Person B can’t do much on their island while Person A is there, due to limitations set by Nintendo to make sure nothing nefarious happens like thefts or people being trapped on foreign islands. Person B also has Person C, Person D, and many other people also wanting to sell their turnips at 600 bells a piece. Person B will logically feel entitled to something in return for helping Person A make all those bells. And arguably Person B isn’t wrong.
Person A understands Person B’s situation and offers to share some of those bells or something else they might have that Person B wants in exchange for letting them sell their turnips at a profit. But Person C also wants to sell on Person B’s island. And Person B only has a limited amount of time before the turnip price changes. So Person C offers Person B more than what Person A offered. Now Person B is in a position of power. Person B can make demands. Person B can hold an auction. Person B has a supply that’s highly in demand. And Person B knows it.
I didn’t get to flip my turnips for free. I got to buy at 91 bells for free because I found a good Samaritan, but those are rare. Most people on the Discord are charging an entry fee to buy/sell turnips on their island, when the prices are good. And some of those fees are absolutely ridiculous. I had to pay a fee to sell my turnips at 621 bells. It cost me six Nook Miles Tickets (NMT) to travel to that island and sell my turnips. NMT are weird in the fact that their value is very relative. There are many different ways to qualify them. For whatever reason they have become the main currency in the Discord market. I think the best way to qualify them is based on the amount of manual labor it takes to acquire them. Without getting into the minutia of it, it’s fair to say that one NMT takes about 2 hours to acquire on average if we’re talking minimum earning rates. So six NMT equals about 12 hours of gameplay labor time on average, if you earned them honestly. I did not, but we’ll come to that later.
The point is that the owner of the island where I flipped my turnips charged me 12 hours of labor as an entry fee for something he did not earn. And I paid it happily. Because that was actually a really good price in the market. A large number of players charge astronomically high prices just for entry to their islands. 10 NMT is common. Rare materials and recipes, special items, and large numbers of bells are all common demands. The most ironic part being that they often refer to these taxes as “tips”, as if they’re optional. It’s a disgusting display of greed and opulence. But again, this is what happens when you’re in the mid game. Because you don’t want to be there so you do whatever it takes to get out as quickly as possible. And I am just as guilty as everyone else.
The problem with this predatory profiteering behavior in New Horizons is that it spreads like a virus. One person doing it leads to more people doing it because they all need to come up with fast ways to acquire the means of paying the entry fees to other players. I needed to flip my turnips. This required NMT. Now I could spend my Nook Miles and buy them, but as I said, that’s about two hours of labor per a ticket. It was much easier and more efficient to take part in my own greedy business dealings . . . and that’s exactly what I did.
Celeste is an NPC that occasionally visits your island at night. She visits maybe three times in a month at most. Every time you speak to her on a new date or island, you get a special rare recipe. There is a list of these rare recipes that can only be acquired from her or from someone else who acquired one from her. Some of her recipes are also seasonal, meaning you have a limited amount of time to acquire them before you have to wait an entire year to get them again. So being able to visit islands that have her is very high in demand. So high in fact that people will literally line up to visit them and happily pay a “modest” fee. The night I bought my turnips, Celeste showed up at my island. I had already spent several hours trying to find an island that would let me sell my turnips at a good rate (600+ bells each) for a “fair” price. The demands were often atrocious. 10 NMT, super rare recipes, 5% of the total turnip earnings, and other ridiculous demands. It was a gross display of greed. Eventually I realized that I simply couldn’t afford to pay these entry fees if I did not also play the game in order to amass resources to pay them. So I too succumbed to the allure of predatory Capitalism.
I advertised on the Discord that I would let people come to my island to see Celeste for their choice of 99K bells (the minimum unit currently used in the market for passage to other islands), one NMT, or any number of rusted parts. Let’s be very clear what I was doing. I was charging people to come to my island to spend a few minutes with Celeste. Celeste is not part of my island. I did nothing to get her to come there. She just showed up for a visit and I trapped her there so I could sell visits to her off to needy strangers for personal gain. Essentially I participated in forced prostitution. Nobody’s going to call it that, but in reality that’s what it was. And it was damn profitable. In a span of just two hours, Celeste had serviced more than 20 customers. I amassed six NMT, four or five rusted parts, and enough money to pay off my second to last home loan (1.7 Million bells). Business was booming. The only reason I finally stopped pimping out Celeste was that it got to 3AM and I had to work the next day. Ultimately I used those six NMT I “earned” to pay for passage to sell my turnips. All of this was/is gross. It’s a disgusting display of greed, selfishness, and a complete lack of ethical business practices. Even Gordon Gekko would be ashamed. Yet so much of the player base is doing it, and they’re unapologetic about it.
The online business of New Horizons is so commonplace and so lucrative that someone created a website to help people manage their visitors. Turnip Exchange lets users post their island to a public list and automates the entire process of finding and queuing players to visit their islands. It’s scary how well it works and how realistic it is to real world business practices. It’s impersonal, it’s efficient, it’s Capitalism at its worst. Yet I played along. We all do. That’s just how the mid game is. You don’t want to be there and people are charging. So you have to charge in order to be able to pay the fees other players are charging. It’s an endless cycle of mindless consumption and greed. And it’s all happening with wholesome intentions. We all just want to build our dream islands and reach the late game. That desire has turned us all into monsters and ultimately the game is made worse for it. But I need to amass like 10M bells to accomplish everything I want, so what choice do I have?
I’ve never been a fan of the games as service model. It’s honestly crippled my experience with a lot of games. More specifically a lot of Ubisoft games since that’s become their staple model for games. The fact is that, like many if not most gamers, I’m severely backlogged. Like I have games I bought years ago that have never been opened. I’m not alone in this. It’s a common “problem” for gamers. Especially for those of us who buy in bulk during sales. Because of this, I rarely have the time or patience to go back to a game I’ve already “beaten”. I put the term beaten in quotes there because it’s hard to even declare a game beaten in the games as service model. That’s why “finished the main campaign” has become the more appropriate way to describe the experience of playing these games in the last several years.
I have played some great games from Ubisoft and missed out on much of the later released content, even though I basically always get the gold edition of their games. The Division is the best example of this for me. I think The Division was one of the best online cooperative experiences I’ve ever had. I had an active clan that played daily. We did everything. Beat every side mission, got every collectible, and dominated the dead zone. But eventually we all got bored and moved on to other games, as is normal for gamers. Then months after we had all moved on they started introducing new content. But we weren’t all in the same place at that point. Some of us did come back right away. Others never came back at all. I tried to go back in super late and it just didn’t work out. And I heard the newer content was really good. But I never really got to enjoy it. I was busy enjoying other games. This was my experience with The Division 2 as well, save for the fact that I never formally linked up with a clan in that one. It’s these sorts of experiences that have sort of ruined a number of great games for me because I always feel like I’m missing out on the content I paid for (Gold Editions). But I simply don’t have the time, or patience, to wait around in a game that is currently idle while waiting for new content. This is kind of why I’ve steered away from games as service titles as of late.
All that being said, I started playing Ghost Recon: Breakpoint day one. I thoroughly enjoyed the campaign and side missions. I had a terrible experience with the raid, which did release while I was still playing the campaign, so I do at least commend Ubisoft for that. But once I was done with the campaign, I was pretty much done. I completed my time with Breakpoint at the very end of December. Since then I’ve completed six other games. January was a rather productive month for me. At the very end of January, almost exactly one month after I finished and moved on from Breakpoint, Ubisoft held the Terminator event. The trailer was/is very good. The marketing email I received was also very compelling, as many Ubisoft emails I receive for games I’m already playing/have played are. So I decided to jump back in. Breakpoint was still fairly fresh in my mind and I happen to be a big Terminator fan. But I have to say that the main reason I was compelled to jump back in was that I had literally just finished a game and hadn’t yet started my next one coupled with the fact that this was a limited time event. Those two factors just happened to line up perfectly. If either wasn’t true then I can’t honestly say that I would have given this event a shot. But I’m very glad I did.
The Terminator event was really good. One of the best limited time events I’ve ever played in a shooter. I usually hate limited time events but this one handled things correctly and that’s what made it fun. The first thing I want to absolutely praise about the event is that it was short. I don’t mean short as in the amount of time it lasted. I mean short as in the amount of time it took to fully complete. There were 21 available rewards in this event plus two plot based guns. We were given nine days to finish the event (beat both the main missions and enough side missions to collect all 21 rewards) but it only took three days to actually accomplish this. And when I say three days, I don’t mean 72 hours. I mean three days of completing two daily missions a day plus the two main side quests. Overall this only took me about six to eight hours of actual play. And I consider that a good thing. This event wasn’t asking me for a new commitment. It was just asking me to visit an old friend for a little while. That made it enjoyable. I got to remember what I liked about the game without having to dive back in whole hog. The rewards were good. Mostly cosmetic, but stuff I actually enjoyed using. I bought those in-game store Terminator skins and used those Terminator shades. Are they useful? Not at all. Are they fun for old school movie nerds? Hell yeah!
It was fun playing story missions that only took a few hours but that tied in directly to the Terminator narrative. It was interesting fighting Terminators and having to use a special gun to destroy them. It was cool having a boss fight where you pretty much fight Arnold Schwarzenegger by another name and haircut. It was a nice weekend experience. That’s the kind of content a backlogged gamer is comfortable going back into an already beaten game to do. No long winded commitment that’s gonna make me have to learn an entirely new gameplay scheme. No months long timed daily missions scenario. Just a nice story driven weekend where I get to shoot killer robots instead of run of the mill soldiers.
The story worked really well because it was based on an already well established IP. They didn’t need to explain too much about what was going on because everybody already knows how Terminator works. So they could quickly throw you into the action and let you start fighting killer robots immediately. It also fit really well with the fact that Breakpoint is already about fighting killer drones. This event also worked well because of the large map size. While most will agree that the Breakpoint map is way too big, this actually does make implementing events like this way easier. They can easily drop random stuff into the map without it being too noticeable to those who aren’t interested in playing the events. They could drop Decipticons into the map and there’s still a good chance you might never see one.
My only real complaint about this event was the microtransactions content. There were a few skins I really wanted that required spending real money to get even when I have the gold edition of the game. I didn’t buy them but I have to say that this was the first instance where I actually took issue with microtransactions in Breakpoint. Up to this point I always felt the complaints were unnecessary because they didn’t actually affect the gameplay experience that much. And while sure they didn’t affect actual gameplay in this instance either, a Terminator event where cosmetic Terminator stuff is locked behind an additional paywall is pretty much the equivalent of affecting gameplay, in my opinion. But that also comes down more to the limited selection of Terminator cosmetics available without using microtransactions. If there were more skins than just Terminators available at no additional cost then I wouldn’t care so much that I couldn’t get things like a Kyle Reese skin.
While I absolutely loved this event and would most likely play more like it, I have to say that the game as a whole is still riddled with glitches. Even after 12 GB of patches and updates before starting the event, I still experienced a ton of problems. My entire experience with the final boss of the event was odd because the boss room didn’t even render for me. I was walking around only able to see enemies and completely blind to the room’s layout. It’s a wonder I got through the mission at all. Joining up with other players is still a lot of trouble. The fact that there was no event specific matchmaking options was quite annoying but I actually did end up doing some co-op play for the event missions a couple times anyway.
All in all, I consider the Terminator event to have been rather successful. It’s certainly the type of content I’d like to see more of and the way it was managed was very convenient and accessible. I have never gone back in and tried to do the raid again but if they keep doing events like this then I can definitely see myself returning to Breakpoint every so often for more short term events.
I’m a big fan of GOG and have been for many years. They’re actually my favorite storefront to buy PC games from. Though their selection is limited compared to Steam and other PC game distributors, I try to buy from them wherever applicable. One of the main reasons I really liked them when I first found out about them was how convenient their distribution system was. There was no launcher. You just went to their site and downloaded the entire DRM free game you purchased directly to be used offline. For me, this was always a better, more convenient option than Steam. Some years later, they released the GOG Galaxy launcher, which I was against at first because it meant having to have yet another launcher and that suddenly DRM was slowly, and sadly, becoming a thing for GOG. Make no mistake, requiring a launcher to access your games is a form of DRM. Having to login to access your games is a form of DRM. Eventually I gave in and started using GOG Galaxy. It’s good as far as launchers go, but there’s nothing particularly better about it compared to other launchers.
In the time since installing GOG Galaxy 1.0, I have had to add a number of additional game launchers to my system. Uplay, Origin, Bethesda, Epic Games Store, and so on. Every publisher has decided they need their own launcher now. I’m not one of those people who gets angry at companies for not putting their games on Steam. I understand their desire to want to make more money and spend less of it distributing their games. But like with TV streaming services today, there’s a point where there’s just too many entities offering what is essentially the same service with disjointed content. This is what first attracted me to GOG Galaxy 2.0.
GOG Galaxy 2.0 offers a simple value proposition: manage all your games in one place. It’s a launcher that allows you to see and manage all your games, including those you have on PS4 and XB1, in one organized collection. Honestly it sounded too good to be true when I first heard about it. While simple from a technological standpoint, I didn’t see how GOG, or really any company, would deliver something that actually connects all the games I have, except for those on Nintendo Switch, in one convenient location with user data and preferences from that many separate launchers and two non-PC gaming platforms. So I jumped at the chance to download the beta build as soon as I saw the announcement. I’ve now spent a fair amount of time using the launcher and thought it would be beneficial to write a review of my experiences.
The first thing I want to say is that GOG Galaxy 2.0 (GG2) absolutely delivers. I can honestly say that this is the last launcher I will ever use for my normal day to day gaming needs. That being said, there are a number of caveats which sadly still requires me to make use of other launchers to get the full spectrum of PC gaming and management services I require for all my PC gaming needs. The second thing I want to say is that this is absolutely still a beta build and while I have been using it as my go to launcher, it has a number of bugs and fixes that need to be made. It lags at times when trying to apply tags to games from the grid view. It even crashed once and made me have to restart my whole system.
In practice, GG2 is basically Facebook for your games via other game launchers. I say that intentionally with all the good and bad that comes with the Facebook platform. The way it works is that you manually connect each launcher you have installed on your system into GG2’s interface by logging into each launcher via GG2. You can connect or disconnect launchers/services you have connected at any time. To me there does seem to be a level of security risk with linking and logging into all your platforms at the same time and handing that login information to GOG. But you make the same sort of decisions with connecting your social media to your phone every day. I will also acknowledge that each launcher you connect has you login to the launcher’s official login window as opposed to a special GOG one so maybe they aren’t actually being given your login information directly. You can’t actually buy any games, other than from the GOG store, in GG2. In fact, you can’t even access stores from other launchers from within GG2. It’s strictly a platform for managing your games while replacing GOG Galaxy 1.0 for GOG related purchases and gaming.
What GG2 actually does is import your library page from each connected launcher, along with whatever play progress data it can find, and mashes all those libraries together in a single, convenient UI. The launcher separates each connected platform via convenient tabs, but the default page shows you your entire collection of games as one massive list. It can be viewed in either grid view with imported cover images for most games, or list view which shows the name and platform each game comes from. When you choose a specific launcher tab it just filters the same view to that one platform’s games.
I was quite impressed with the amount of information GG2 imported for each game from each platform. It shows all your achievements/trophies, the date they were acquired, and your play activity for each game. As a note though, it only tracks data from PS4 on for PlayStation and GOG data after a certain year, when I guess they officially started tracking play data for users. Many of my games have no data shown. It imports your friends list from each platform and shows you a comparison of how you’ve done compared to your friends in each specific game. On the subject of friends lists, there’s a feed on the right of the launcher that shows friend activity across all platforms in real time, organized by platform. In one convenient location I’m able to see which of my friends are online in Uplay, PSN, Steam, and so on all at the same time. I’m able to see what games they’re playing and what they’re accomplishing in real time with time stamps. Even though the feed isn’t interactive, it’s super convenient when trying to pick which game to play, if you’re looking for a multiplayer experience. You can also hide/show the feed with a single button on the UI. The add friends and chat functions only work for GOG friends though.
It needs to be said that GG2 is still limited in what it can actually do in reference to non-GOG games. As the other launchers aren’t actually ceding control to GOG, you can’t directly launch games from GG2. When you press play on any PC game a login window for that game’s launcher will pop up before you can actually play the game. Even if you’ve told GG2 to remember your login information for all platforms, you will still have to manually login to each game’s perspective platform every time. Launch a Steam game, you have to go through the entire Steam login process. Launch a Uplay game, you still have to go through the entire Uplay login process. What GG2 is doing is essentially creating desktop shortcuts for all your games and organizing them into a single unified and curated list for you. I will say though that there are a number of bugs, as this is a beta. For instance, not all my games showed up. Sometimes they show up and then other times they don’t. Often a specific connected account disconnects the next time I load up the application and I have to reconnect it. Thankfully though, when this happens my tagging/filtering options remain intact.
From a security standpoint, this is a good way to do this. GG2 doesn’t actually have full access or control of your other accounts and thus if it was hacked, that wouldn’t necessarily allow the hacker to have access to all your games and account information. At the same time, it’s very inconvenient. Having all your games in one place with access via a single login regardless of where you purchased the games would be amazing, and GG2 almost gets there. Having to login again for that last step to actually play your games is depressing but ultimately manageable. Especially considering the time you saved by not having to open multiple launchers to figure out which game you want to play.
As far as PlayStation and I assume XB1 titles, obviously you can’t play them from the launcher. GG2 simply says “launch this game from your console” when you click the play button for a console game. What would have been nice is at least being able to activate the app on console from your PC, but we’re not there yet apparently. It’s also important to mention that, at least for the PlayStation games since I don’t have an XB1, GG2 will only track games tied to your PSN account with a digital footprint. What this means is that all digital PS4 games, including ones you own but don’t have downloaded, will show up in your GG2 list under the PlayStation tab. But only PS4 games that you have actual progress in will show up when it comes to physical versions. I think this is because it’s using the trophy list to figure out which non-PC games you have.
I really like that GG2 shows when you own multiple versions of the same game on multiple platforms. It very clearly shows you how many versions you own, which platforms you own them on, and lets you select which version you’d like to interact with and check player data for. This is a clutch feature that I’m not sure I would have even thought about on my own. It’s not perfect at this point though as some games do show up twice in your list. I think it comes down to naming within each platform more than anything else. For instance, The TellTale Game of Thrones Season 1 game shows up twice in my list. One version on PS4 and the other on PC. But the one on PS4 is just called Game of Thrones while the one on PC is called Game of Thrones: A TellTale Series. So I think that’s why it happened. And yet it didn’t separate my three versions of Batman: Arkham Asylum, each with a slightly different name. In fact, it shows each slightly different name in the game’s main page when you click the versions owned tab. So it’s not an exact science at this point.
What is actually much more useful and convenient than the tabs is the manual tagging and filtering system. All your games on all platforms are shown together in one giant list as a default until you use the filters. GG2 gives you the ability to manually tag and filter all the games in your list in whatever way you want. You can also manually hide games from your list. The filtering system lets you use as many tags as you want concurrently to filter the list and tells you how many games using the tag(s) are currently hidden. As a bonus feature, you can click the notice and it will reveal the hidden games and hide the normally shown ones and then go back to normal when you click it again.
The filtering system is a feature I’ve had to do manually for years with folders on my PS4. It’s super convenient in GG2 and makes managing a combined list of more than 600 games much easier. I created three custom tags for filtering: Beaten, Backlog, and Trash. I tagged the games I have already completed with “Beaten”. This allowed me to filter out all the games I’ve finished when I’m trying to pick a new game to play. I tagged the games I actually would like to play from my collection with Backlog. This allows me to set apart games I would actually like to play at some point from the rest of the group, thus streamlining my decision making process. Finally, I tagged the games I would absolutely never play with Trash. My one complaint about the tagging system is that it has to be done manually one game at a time. You are unable to select and tag multiple games at once. This is a non-issue once you’ve gone through and gotten all your tagging done, but it’s hell when you go through and tag your entire collection the first time.
There are also a number of small quality of life features that aren’t necessary but make for a way better experience. For instance, when you are scrolling through the grid and you click into a game’s page there’s a back button. Pressing it will take you back to the place in the list you were at when you clicked that specific game. You can give the games star ratings. You can look at your user data measured in daily, weekly, or monthly increments. There’s a general activity feed that shows everything you’ve done such as add games, get trophies/achievements, and play sessions. There are lots of little things like that which make for a great overall launcher experience.
My one big complaint, which doesn’t surprise me and I doubt it will ever be fixed, is that you can’t connect multiple accounts of the same platform. For instance, I have 2 PSN accounts and 2 Steam accounts. This is because I live in Asia but for the most part purchase games in American digital stores. Sometimes I’m forced to purchase a game through my Asian account(s) for various reasons. GG2 doesn’t account for this though so all my secondary account games are not shown in my collection. This is a problem easily fixed that will most likely never get added.
Overall, I really like GOG Galaxy 2.0. It’s not a finished service yet, but as far as launchers are concerned, it’s the most convenient game organization and management tool I’ve ever seen. I wish I could connect my Switch account to it too. Even people who don’t use GOG can find a use for this if they’re buying their games on more than one launcher/platform. The organizational tools available make it a must for anyone with a large selection of games. I look forward to using the launch version of the software.
*This beta took place in early November but because of my crowded publishing schedule I wasn’t able to get this review up until now. The game doesn’t release until March 2020 so it’s not too late for this review to help you make an informed buying decision about the game.
I’ve been a Nioh fan since the alpha for the first game released. I’ve featured the alpha, the beta, the final pre-release demo, the full game, and most recently the beta for the sequel on my YouTube channel. To say I like the franchise would be an understatement. I’ve been chomping at the bit to play Nioh 2 since it was first announced like two years ago. To finally get to play a beta for it was a much needed experience.
For those unfamiliar with the franchise, Nioh is essentially Koei Tecmo’s take on the Soulsborne genre. In simplest terms, it’s a samurai themed Dark Souls clone. I believe that the first game’s success is the reason Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice was made. FromSoftware didn’t like the idea of another studio, especially one as large and successful as Koei Tecmo, taking their formula and, for all intents and purposes, improving it. But in my opinion that is exactly what has happened. I haven’t played Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice yet, but it’s on my list. I have played Demon’s Souls, Dark Souls I & II, and Bloodborne. I have to say that Nioh is my favorite game in this genre. And it’s not just because I prefer the samurai theme. There are specific quality of life differences that make the game more enjoyable for me. I’m not going to get into that here, but if you want to read a comparison of the two franchises you can find the one I wrote last year here.
I spent about 20 hours in the beta and I was very impressed. There are a lot of new ideas here that I could spend a lot of time talking about. But what I’m actually happier about are the improvements to the original game. Visually, it’s a great game just like the first one was. The beauty of the Japanese settings coupled with the demon infested, war-torn character of the franchise once again delivers something eerily beautiful and daunting at the same time. The game uses landscapes to intimidate you before the action even starts. The high level of detail to create an authentic looking feudal Japan is awe-inspiring. The temples, castles, and even gear make you feel like you’re really visiting feudal Japan. Meanwhile the dark hues, black demonic auras, and mountains of corpses transport you into a nightmare that your only hope to survive is by fighting your way through. And remember, you will die. The subtle but effective use of sound helps support this atmosphere as well. There’s actually not a lot of noticeable music in the beta, but the effects are quite good and informative, just like in the first game. Using your ears can be just as important as using your eyes. Sound can notify you when you’ve been spotted, what kind of enemy has you in their sights, and much more.
Enemy design is one of the most impressive things about the franchise as a whole. The level of detail put into creating monsters that intimidate the player long before actually fighting and dying against them is one of the things that makes Nioh a superior game. The sequel has not only lived up to the enemy design of the first game, but surpassed it. One of the things I was really happy to see was that for the most part enemies were not reused. At least not in the beta. Between the two stages I played in the beta, there were only four or five enemies I remember fighting in the first game and some of them were altered in some way.
The new enemies are somehow even weirder and creepier than the ones from the first game. Some examples include an amalgamation of corpses walking around like a spider with eight different human heads and a one legged boar demon with flowing anime style hair and a giant hammer that hops around like a frog. I was also really happy to see more female enemies in the beta. Not counting bosses and DLC, the first game had only one clearly female enemy in the entire game. The Nioh 2 beta featured two over the course of just two stages. I really like this because the addition of gender allows the monster designs a new level of creativity and variation. The new snake yokai works so well both visually and in terms of behavior because it’s female in form. As a male, it would be much less effective as far as presentation and believability.
The level design impressed me a lot in the first stage of the beta. In reality, it’s not that big of a map. But the way it has been weaved together with crisscrossing paths, locked shortcuts, and multiple floors makes it seem way bigger than it actually is. It’s very similar to Bloodborne in that regard, where the world is not open but it feels like it is. The first stage has only three shrines (the Nioh equivalent of bonfires), but the level plays like it has at least seven or eight different sections. Koei Tecmo’s level design shows that it’s not the size of the map but how you use the space that matters. They do so much with only a little total area and it makes for an action packed experienced that doesn’t offer too much down time between fights unless you want there to be.
I am rarely a fan of character creation in story based games, and make no mistake, this is a story based game/franchise. That’s one of the main reasons I prefer it to Dark Souls. This isn’t a game that just throws lore at you and expects you to fill in the narrative on your own. There is an actual plot to the game that you’re a part of. Not much was shown in the beta, but the trend from the first game of interspersing cutscenes sparingly around the start of levels and to introduce boss fights continues into this sequel. The difference is, and I hope this is just because the beta wasn’t showing much, that the story seems less character driven. While I thought the concept of making a samurai themed game set in feudal Japan starring a white guy from Great Britain was odd, I actually liked William. I liked following his story and seeing him interact with people from Japan. I liked that a couple levels went back to the UK and had you fight other Brits. Story was an integral part of the game, as was dialog between your character, William, and NPCs. Parts of that seem to be weakened in place of character creation in Nioh 2.
There is still a story, but your place in it appeared less pronounced in this beta. That being said, the character creator is great. You can choose your gender and manipulate their appearance in a great many ways. But the process is also fairly smooth and doesn’t take long. I grew quite attached to the female character I created over the course of the beta and may very well recreate her in the final game. Or I can just use the character import feature, which is really convenient. You can create characters and then upload them for other players to download with a character creation share code. This means when you see a cool looking character online you can copy them directly rather than trying to rebuild them yourself from scratch.
The foundational gameplay is the same. If you played the first one then you will have little trouble walking on to Nioh 2. I did all the tutorial missions as a refresher and was back in fighting shape fairly quickly. There are some new features that you will need to learn if you want to master this game though. The gameplay was already great, but it’s the little tweaks that make this a sequel worth talking about in a sea of rehashed ideas, constant remakes, and lazy annual releases. So many things have been added or changed to make the gameplay, both in combat and in menus, better. For starters, there are now six controller layouts to choose from. I would still prefer fully customizable button maps, but six layouts is a solid number of options. There are various quality of life settings you can choose from in the menus, which can be accessed at any time during gameplay, remembering that like in Dark Souls you can’t actually pause enemies unless you’re at a shrine. You can choose how many item shortcuts you have ranging from four to sixteen. You can choose the color order/scheme to show item drop rarity. You can choose which notifications appear on screen during play, how big they are, and for how long they stay on screen. You can choose if/how the game notifies you in menus about new developments and acquisitions. This game really goes out of its way to make sure you’re happy with the gameplay experience on both a macro and micro level. They even added a small vendor to shrines that will sell you a limited amount of additional ammo and useful consumable items.
One of the best improvements is the new skill development system. Rather than the old layout with scrolls connecting in a mostly linear path, you now have more customization options with a Final Fantasy style sphere grid. This makes it easier to see what you’re building towards when unlocking skills and buffs. It’s also visually easier to understand and see how much progress you’ve made in each development category. In the same mode of thinking, there is now a lot more information shown in the status menu with detailed stats showing things like weapon proficiency by type. The one thing I didn’t really like about the new skill development system is that nodes require all connected nodes to be unlocked before you can unlock them. This was irritating because it meant if I wanted something with two connected nodes unlocked that I had to unlock two other nodes. Often one of the nodes would be something I didn’t care to waste skill points on.
Combat has been improved as well at the micro level. One of my biggest issues with the first game was ki pulses. If you press a button, that isn’t actually part of combat, at the right time you get a key pulse which helps regenerate your ki (stamina) faster. I was terrible at doing these in the first game. Because it’s not at all intuitive. You had to actively choose to press a button that wasn’t going to actually be part of the combat in the middle of combat to get a ki pulse. In Nioh 2 you can unlock a skill that lets you ki pulse by dodging. This makes the game so much better for me because I actually do dodge all the time during combat. These sorts of tweaks and changes are what make this game a superior sequel.
Nioh 2 also adds two new weapons to the already large arsenal from the first game, delivering a total of nine physical weapons types and three projectile weapons types. The two newest weapons are the switchglaive and dual hatchets. The switchglaive is a great weapon. It’s arguably too OP. It can be a spear that feels like a quick axe in mid stance, a scythe that feels like a hammer in high stance, and a single hand blade that feels like a tonfa in low stance. More impressive is that you can unlock skills that allow you to quickly change between forms. It’s like carrying three completely different weapons in one. One of the best things about the switchglaive is that its power is tied to magic. That means that every time you power up the weapon you are also powering up your magic and increasing its capacity. This alone is a good enough reason to main the switchglaive because developing it is killing two birds with one stone. The dual hatchets are two short axes. They feel like the dual swords with slightly less range but more speed like the tonfas. I really like both new weapons and decided to main them for the duration of the beta and possibly the full game as well.
One of my biggest complaints about Nioh was the summoning system. Summoning other players was bothersome and being summoned by other players was bothersome. It’s probably why I played the whole game solo and only let other people summon me a handful of times. They fixed this problem by negating the need to actually summon real other players live. The first game had revenants. These are the fallen corpses of other players that you can summon and fight in hopes of obtaining pieces of their gear. This was a great mechanic that I’m glad was preserved in the sequel. But what they’ve done now is add a summoning component to this concept. Players can now drop a ceremonial grave wherever they like to be summoned for help by other players. But it’s not the player being summoned actually playing. It’s an NPC based on the build used when the false grave was dropped. Summoning these is so much more convenient than summoning real players. It’s instant for starters. It’s also much easier to control because you can summon anyone regardless of their stats and know exactly who is going to assist you. These summons cost ochoko cups which are easy to come by.
The other great aspect of the new summoning system is the rewards you get for letting people summon you. You need a special consumable item to drop a summon sign but once you have it’s permanent until you drop another one within the same mission. A seemingly unlimited number of players can use it and you get rewards when your NPC is summoned and helps people. The first time I checked, I had already been summoned by 20 people. My one complaint about the system is that the rewards are trash. I didn’t even get 20 rewards even though it said I had helped 20 people. And you don’t get any amrita (the Nioh equivalent of souls) for being summoned in this way. The game should award you at least some amrita based on the amount that the user who summoned you earned while you were assisting them.
Though it’s not a requirement for me, many people would say a sequel needs to do more than just rehash the previous game with better graphics and cleaner gameplay. There needs to be some new mechanic or idea that revolutionizes the way the game works. In the case of Nioh 2, this new mechanic is yokai forms. In the first game you had guardian spirits. These were creatures that enhanced your combat by granting you special buffs and could be used for a god mode sequence that temporarily made you stronger and impervious to damage. It was a good system that worked well and made sense. But it wasn’t epic. Yokai are what make these games interesting. There are countless human enemies in Nioh and no one cares about them. It’s facing and defeating the yokai that matters. But you never felt at their level. Even when defeating them, you still felt like a human in a world of monsters. Now you get to be the monsters.
You still have guardian spirits, but rather than just amp up your normal character with fancy lights like in the first game, you now transform into a yokai when you use your god mode. There are three yokai forms, each with a different combat style. Different guardian spirits are tied to each of the three forms. This means you now have to think about how you want to play the game and choose your guardian spirits accordingly rather than just picking the coolest looking one and forgoing some minor stat boosts or special bonuses. What might even be cooler than your god mode yokai forms are soul core transformations.
Every yokai has a soul and sometimes when you kill them these drop as collectable items, called soul cores. Soul cores allow you to transform into a yokai and unleash a powerful attack that’s signature to that specific yokai. It’s a one off attack that depletes sections of your anima bar based on the cost of the attack. These cores are developed just like gear. You can fuse them with other soul cores to improve them and set up to two at a time for each guardian spirit. Each soul core has its own individual power level and additional buffs. Like with justsu, you have a soul core capacity limit. Each core has a specific cost. You can only equip two that combined don’t go over your cost limit. But that limit is increased as you develop your yokai level. My one complaint is that souls cores seem to have a development cap but it’s not clear when you reach it. You can keep fusing cores to a higher level core even when you stop making progress. Or at least it appears to work that way. There needs to be a clear cap that notifies you when fusing additional cores would be a waste.
Yokai forms also have their own skill grid and are developed just like weapons skills, magic, ninjutsu, and general samurai skills. This new system revolutionizes the gameplay in ways that I’ve only begun to explore in the beta. The god mode now has way more applications outside of boss fights and the individual yokai attacks via soul cores can fundamentally alter your combat style, if you want it to. And maybe most importantly is there is now a reason and reward to fighting the same enemies over and over. Soul cores, like gear, fuse best with souls cores of the same type, which means you have to kill the same yokai to get more of them.
The game’s structure is the same as the first one. Individual stages that are accessed from a world map. There are still twilight mode levels that have you play the same level again with harder enemies and better rewards. And there are still specialty missions such as duels with prestigious warriors. The game is stacked with replay value between the twilight mode, additional character development features, and a plethora of weapons to master. Even without the DLC you’re looking at 50 hours minimum if you don’t cut corners. I’ll also say that at this point the game, or at least the boss fights, seem quite a bit tougher than in the first game. But I’m also willing to admit that there’s a lot of nuance to using yokai forms and attacks that I haven’t figured out yet.
What I wanted from a Nioh sequel is easy to define, but hard to identify. Or at least it was until I tried the Nioh 2 open beta. I wanted the same foundation with a number of slight adjustments, more/another story, and new monsters and stages. That’s all I wanted but Koei Tecmo delivered much more than that. This beta was excellent. I was only going to do the first stage to get the DLC reward and then stop but once I was in I was hooked and ended up doing the second stage as well. Now I have a Soulsborne itch and have to wait till March 2020 to scratch it. Might finally play Dark Souls III in the meantime if I can’t wait that long.
As we enter 2020, it’s not just a new year of gaming but a new decade. In a way it seems appropriate that we’ll be getting a new PlayStation and XBOX this year almost as a way to usher in a new era for the gaming community. There were a lot of wonderful things that happened in the last 10 years of gaming. There were also a lot of terrible things.
Looking back at my own gaming history over the last decade has been very surreal. In 2010, I was still in college. I was still using an XBOX 360 and had no interest in switching over to PS3. I borrowed a PS3 from a friend just to play God of War III. The next year I finally got a PS3 and have been a committed PlayStation user since then. I’ve played on three different Nintendo consoles in the last decade and in my opinion they showed the most improvement and innovation from generation to generation. They’ve also had the smallest library of noteworthy games and the highest prices. Or more accurately the slowest price drop rates. PlayStation and Nintendo have proven time and time again that single player gaming is not only not dead but thriving. There have been a great many phenomenal single player games that have released over the past decade.
Gaming hasn’t been all sunshine and roses over the last ten years. We saw many controversies, problematic movements from the public, blatant lies from many companies, the introduction of predatory practices and rampant profiteering, and some very depressing cancellations among other things. I’m still not over the cancellation of Scalebound and don’t think I ever will be. Politics has gotten way too close to gaming both from a policy and public opinion standpoint. Games are being shaped and censored based on the views of people who don’t even play games. While I consider this a bad thing, it would be inaccurate to say that it hasn’t worked in the favor of consumers in at least one situation, namely Star Wars: Battlefront II.
The state of gaming journalism has become a combination of disappointing, depressing, and insulting. Also related to politics worming its way into gaming discourse from outside the player base, we have seen countless examples of writers blessed with the opportunity to get paid to write about video games wasting that opportunity on insulting players for things they don’t actually deserve to get insulted for. This is especially ironic considering the many things that players actually do deserved to get called out for like continuing to support microtransactions financially. Made all the more ironic by the fact that gamers keep complaining about microtransactions even while continuously spending massive amounts of money on them.
The games as service model was formed and proliferated way past the point of sustainability over the last decade. Some publishers have even stated publicly that they’d like all their games to use this model and have no plans of making single iteration story focused games anymore. At the same time, some publishers seem to have learned at least one or two lessons over the course of the last 10 years. Even EA delivered Star Wars: Jedi Fallen Order with no microtransactions or multiplayer.
We’ve seen the gaming community accomplish massive achievements as a group. Not all of which were positive. Some good examples include shifting how EA managed Star Wars: Battlefront II by organizing the most downvoted comment in Reddit history, getting Shenmue III released, and supporting a number of independent projects such as Cuphead. But we’ve also seen the negative side of that level of power with movements like GamerGate, many people trying to force developers to change their games even at the expense of their own creative vision, and as a result some games weren’t localized to US. I think the last decade was fairly great for gamers and quite profitable to some developers/publishers, too often at the expense of artistic integrity.
It seems that in one way or another companies have tried to disrupt the current market by attempting to introduce new platforms and methods to access games, but just can’t seem to deliver something serviceable and accordingly priced for the current market. Examples of this include attempting to introduce new consoles, store fronts, and subscription services like the Ouya, Epic Games Store, and the latest attempt with Google Stadia. Subscription services seem to be the way many companies are trying to go in the next decade of gaming with Ubisoft introducing Uplay+, EA introducing Origin Premium, and Microsoft introducing XBOX Game Pass. What’s interesting is that all these services were announced after the mostly disappointing PlayStation Now failed to take the market by storm.
VR has become the gift that keeps on failing because companies seem to keep focusing on power and gimmicks while ignoring the main reason these headsets continue to be for niche audiences i.e. accessibility. The software has finally started to come around to a more normalized gaming audience with a selection of options, both AAA and indie, that actually have markets outside of rich kids who like FPS. But the headsets themselves are still too expensive and require too much power behind them, especially for players on PC, to become a widely used gaming medium. This fact is multiplied for users outside the US. I do think that in the next 10 years we’ll finally see this problem remedied though.
Ultimately I’d say it was a good decade of gaming, but a number of problems were revealed and created that if not solved and/or put to rest can have drastic long-term consequences for the gaming community and industry. The current system of predatory practices, political conflicts, and inaccessibility is not sustainable. But the death rattle will last a quite a long time if nothing changes.
Now I’d like to look at my own gaming history over the last 10 years. Every year I make and usually publish a list of all the games I beat that year. Going through all of them and looking back over the many great games that were released was very nostalgic. I was also reminded about just how backlogged I am and how many great games I’ve still not played. I honestly could spend the next decade not buying any games and I’d still probably come out at the other end with a decent sized backlog remaining.
I want to take the time to summarize the decade by discussing three games I played in each year: my top game for the year, an honorable mention that accomplished something special that year, and the worst game I played in that year. I want to note that I will only be addressing games I actually completed. Games I tried but never finished and games I have yet to play are not included in this. There will be much worse games than the one I mentioned in pretty much every year, but I didn’t play those so they weren’t included. It’s also worth noting that “worst game” is hyperbolic in nature. Really it’s more the game that I was most disappointed in or had strong negative feelings about because of issues that were a detriment to the experience of playing them. The fact that they’re even being mentioned in most cases is still an honor because it means they were memorable enough to have any sort of feelings about and seemed good enough for me to take the time to play all the way to the end to begin with. I also want to make it clear that I separated these games by release year, but didn’t necessarily play them all in the year they were released.
My Last Decade in Gaming: 2010 – 2019
Best Game: God of War 3 (PS3)
This was the final installment of the original God of War franchise and characterization of Kratos. I had to borrow a PS3 to play this game because I had followed the franchise since the beginning but had gone for XBOX 360 instead of PS3 up to this point in that generation. It was so fulfilling to see the end of that story and even more impressive that Santa Monica Studio was ballsy enough to end the game with a supposed suicide. I had actually hoped that this was Kratos’ last installment but then they decided to milk him more with God of War: Ascension three years later, which was mediocre at best. We all know what ultimately happened to Kratos but if you had told me about God of War (2018) at this point I wouldn’t have believed you. The Nemean Cestus is still one of my favorite weapons in all of gaming and the way you get them in this game was absolutely phenomenal.
Honorable Mention: Bayonetta (XBOX 360)
Bayonetta is like a cult classic that’s also main stream. She’s had her ups and downs, jumping between platforms, getting a sequel, multiple ports, and then the announcement of another sequel while also moonlighting in Smash Bros. This first installment of the character was a great game because it denied pretty much all convention and normalcy. Even now it seems like a fever dream when you write out what the game actually is on paper. But both men and women still love this female protagonist even as she kills angels, shoots guns with her ridiculously tall heels, and casts magic spells that require her to get naked on screen. She defies all logic and maybe that’s what makes her so special to gaming.
Worst Game: Fable III (XBOX 360)
I was really unhappy with how Fable III turned out. The first game was one of the best modern fantasy RPGs ever made. The karma system was good, the choices mattered but didn’t necessarily limit you, and the game didn’t take itself too seriously. Fable II wasn’t an all-around better game, but it too delivered on the fun factor with a funny, but forgiving karma system tied to a narrative that was serious but not annoyingly so. The third game just took the karma system past the point of enjoyment. Being the brother of a king who had lost his mind and ultimately having to rule a country in his place sounds fun but it wasn’t because they focused on all the worst parts of ruling a country and then bound the ending to all decisions you had made along the way in order to try to get you to play the game a second time to see the opposing karmic ending. It really just wasn’t a fun game.
Best Game: Uncharted 3: Drake’s Deception (PS3)
This was a tough year to judge. I went with Uncharted 3 because it was the supposed culmination of Naughty Dog’s spectacular treasure hunting franchise. Nathan Drake and Sully had been through so much by this point and it was nice to see it all wrapped up nicely, or so we thought. A lot of people didn’t like this installment, but it’s actually my favorite of the original three games. Visually it was amazing for the PS3, the gameplay had some great moments like the plane cargo sequence, and the characters had a great ending. The fact that they pushed out a fourth title that worked even better than this one truly shows just how capable Naughty Dog is at telling compelling stories.
Honorable Mention: Mass Effect 2 (PS3)
The reason I listed Mass Effect 2 in 2011 instead of 2010 is because this is when we got the PS3 version with all the additional content. This is one of the few RPGs I’ve played more than once over the course of just a few years and the only one I’ve played on multiple platforms in the same generation, since I played the XBOX 360 version first. What’s important to note is that the PS3 version is the definitive version of the game. The original sans DLC version is a completely different game that’s not nearly as impressive. It showed just how problematic it is for games to be released “unfinished” and lacking all the story content because the DLC directly affected the events leading into Mass Effect 3, which released the following year. Now when you buy the Mass Effect Trilogy collection you get all the content, but at the time of release this wasn’t the case and people were experiencing widely different narratives depending on which versions of both 2 and 3 they played.
Worst Game: Catherine (PS3)
I absolutely hated Catherine. I hate that it was rereleased in 2019. I hate the gameplay. I hate the preachy, nonsensical writing. I hate that people tried to apply real world politics to it and argue it was saying something about the LGBTQ community. I hate that it was taken seriously as a mainstream game. Everything about it was hacky and ridiculous while the gameplay was unnecessarily unfair. I won’t say difficult because the basic mechanics weren’t hard to grasp. It was how the game manipulated the levels in real time that made playing it way more troublesome than it really needed to be. Not to mention the developers had the nerve to include three different endings as if the game was worth playing through more than once. It’s still a wonder that I finished it a single time. I’ve said this multiple times in hyperbole, but it’s the most appropriate way for me to describe Catherine. I would rather jump out of a window and slit my own throat on the way down than play that garbage game again.
Best Game: Mass Effect 3 (PS3)
There are very few games that deliver as much catharsis and gravity as Mass Effect 3. The culmination of Commander Shepherd’s good work trying to bring the galaxy together and fight the Reapers was absolutely phenomenal. The only other “end” of a franchise that was as powerful as this one was God of War III. The irony being that both games went on to release another installment. But it’s not actually the single player mode that I think was most impactful for me in Mass Effect 3. This was the first massively fulfilling online cooperative experience I’ve ever had. The non PVP, cooperative multiplayer was so much fun to play. I literally played more than 500 hours of the multiplayer and at one point was in the top 10% of players in the world. I may have even been in the top 1% at one point but I don’t want to overstake my accomplishments without evidence present. It was so well made, so challenging, and so enjoyable. I made friends, tracked achievements, and got good at shooting in a game like never before. Since then I’ve never had another cooperative multiplayer experience as fulfilling as Mass Effect 3 though I have gotten close a few times.
Honorable Mention: Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning (PS3)
I don’t think there’s ever been a game as externally problematic and scandalous while concurrently being so good as Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning. A game created by an ex baseball player that cost a state millions of dollars because of embezzlement just sounds like a train wreck, but it’s honestly one of the best fantasy RPGs ever made. The gameplay is phenomenal and has definitely inspired later games. In my opinion, it still has the best mage class and the best class restructuring system of any long form RPG. It was a full length game with tons of side quests and a compelling main questline. The ending was good but left open ended for a sequel which even today people still want to see made even though the company and development team is completely disbanded. Usually projects with such troubled development either don’t release or come out terrible. This came out great and is still worth playing even in 2020.
Worst Game: Prototype 2 (PS3)
Prototype 2 is not a bad game so much as it’s a lackluster sequel with a stereotypically mediocre main protagonist, which I find personally disappointing because of how rare Black main protagonists are in AAA franchises. It’s the story of a Marine whose daughter gets killed in an accident, caused by the protagonist of the first Prototype(a much more interesting game), so he’s out for revenge. The gameplay is pretty much the same, which is fine. But the story is way less interesting. The first game is about politics, corruption, profiteering, and the runaway military industrial complex in America. This game is “white man killed little girl so Black daddy have to kill him”. It delivers stunning dialog from the main protagonist like “I hate f&$king computers.” A line that I still think was offensive in the portrayal of an African American in a time where pretty much no African Americans were being portrayed as main protagonists in video games. It’s by no means a terrible game. But it is terribly unoriginal.
Best Game: Tomb Raider (PS3)
I was not a Tomb Raider fan growing up. I was aware of the games but never had any interest in playing them. To this day I own all the old ones on Steam but have never taken the time to try any of them. The 2013 reboot of the franchise was given away as a PS+ freebie back in the days when that service was actually good. I played it and absolutely fell in love with the franchise. The gameplay is excellent, the writing is good, and the graphics are beautiful. It’s a brutal, semi-realistic survival game with magical elements and interactive puzzles. I’m so glad I got to play this game and that they made another two games after it. I’ve yet to play Shadow of the Tomb Raider but I just got it on Black Friday so I’ll be getting to it soon hopefully. I’d say this is one of the better reboots of a franchise in the last 10 years.
Honorable Mention: The Wonderful 101 (Wii U)
Nintendo never fails to lead the gaming industry in noteworthy innovation with a focus on fun. They may not always be successful in their innovative endeavors, but every risk they take is in pursuit of fun. They don’t change the formula in order to make a political statement or try to corner a market that doesn’t even exist. They simply want to create experiences that people will enjoy simply by experiencing them. No game expresses this better than The Wonderful 101. It’s a fairly ridiculous game that conceptually makes no sense when looking at the physics of it all but it’s super fun. It’s one of the only games I actually would like ported to the Switch from the Wii U because once people play it, they’ll realize how good it actually was and demand a sequel. Many games try to appeal to the minds of children and appear to be cool. Few games actually feel like they came from the mind of a child that just wanted to do something they thought would be cool. That’s how The Wonderful 101 feels.
Worst Game: Anarchy Reigns (PS3)
It’s hard to mess up a sequel this badly but Platinum Games, a studio I actually really like, managed to do it here. MadWorld (2009) for the Wii is one of the best motion control games ever made. It’s probably the best third party game that ever released on the Wii. The writing was solid, the action was super over the top brutal, the graphics were phenomenal, and the main character was a complete badass. It was as close to a perfect game as could have been released on the Wii. The sequel on the PS3 was complete and utter trash. I still can’t believe I platinumed this game. It had six full game completion trophies with no retroactive difficulty trophy gains, meaning you had to play it six different times on three different difficulties in order to get the platinum. It was nothing like the original game, the story was mediocre, and don’t even get me started on how broken the multiplayer was. The sad part is the game actually had good ideas. They were just executed so poorly pretty much across the board.
Best Game: Alien: Isolation (PS3)
I am not a fan of either horror or survival games. I am however a fan of the original Alien film. What this game does so well is simulate that same feeling in the form of a game. Written as almost a direct sequel to the original film, this game handles literally every aspect of game development well. It’s scary, it’s well balanced, it’s fair, and it’s unforgiving. It is the best horror game I have ever played and the fact that a sequel was never made is borderline criminal. The one flaw this game has is that you can’t do anything about the Xenomorph. You can’t scare it away with any of your weapons and you can’t escape from it. You have to execute the stealth perfectly for the Xenomorph sequences. I feel like you should be able to scare it away with fire or certain weapons and items. Other than that, it’s a perfect game and I will die on that hill.
Honorable Mention: The Wolf Among Us (PS3)
It’s sad what became of Telltale Games. Their software was fun, though dated visually and a bit repetitive. In a way, The Wolf Among Us kind of started it all. They had several other games before this one like the Sam & Max series, and The Walking Dead season one had already been released, but the company didn’t really get popular until they introduced us to Bigby Wolf. They created an episodic model that most studios would get lambasted over. Their graphics engine was over used and out of date by the end of the company’s run. But for many The Wolf Among Us was this magical experience that just worked. It was compelling writing, a justifiably comic book art style, and a great main character. Honestly the entire model was unsustainable, but this specific game was the sweet spot. The fact that we’ll probably never actually see a season two is kind of a shame but probably for the best at this point.
Worst Game: Dragon Age: Inquisition (PS3)
I want to point out that I’m specifically referring to the PS3 version of Dragon Age: Inquisition when I say it was the worst game I played. The game actually won GOTY for 2014, but that wasn’t the PS3 version. This was such a broken experience on PS3 that it’s the game that finally made me retire the console and move to PS4. It constantly lagged and skipped. My first save file got corrupted like 30 hours in and forced me to start the whole thing over. It was just too powerful a game to run on a last gen system. It’s actually a phenomenal game that I thoroughly would have enjoyed if I had been playing it on the appropriate platform. If I wasn’t so backlogged I’d have probably picked up a complete edition on PS4 and replayed it with all the DLC.
Best Game: Splatoon (Wii U)
What I like most about Splatoon is that it’s another example of Nintendo circumventing conventional wisdom and proving that fun trumps everything. They showed that you can make a highly competitive shooter that isn’t violent, graphically intensive, or at all realistic and still make a widely successful and engaging experience. I played so many hours of Splatoon PVP even though I hate shooters and I usually can’t stand PVP. I didn’t end up connecting with the second one nearly as much as the first but Splatoon was definitely one of my most played games on the Wii U for the simple fact that it was really fun, even for someone who doesn’t usually go for shooters.
Honorable Mention: Toukiden: Kiwami (PS4)
Toukiden: Kiwami was such a great game because it was almost the game that ultimately is Monster Hunter World. In my opinion, that game inspired MHW in many ways. It’s a demon hunting game with up to four teammates in a squad. It gives you the option of using NPC teammates, which is really helpful. The demons come in many shapes and sizes and have removable limbs. It was clearly inspired by older Monster Hunter games but improved on the formula in a number of ways. There is a huge amount of content and a decent enough but ultimately ignorable story. It’s the game that made me ultimately want a game like MHW to get made.
Worst Game: Star Wars: Battlefront (PS4)
The Star Wars: Battlefront reboot was bad for two main reasons: no single player campaign and no bots. The addition of those two things would have made it a much different and far better experience. The game had modes I wanted to play, like the dogfighting mode, but you couldn’t play them unless you had a full lobby. The player base dropped off so quickly that this became nearly impossible for any except the most common modes. This made completing certain achievements nearly impossible. The gameplay actually wasn’t bad and the concept worked fine, as it had in the original Star Wars:Battlefront games. But this version was executed poorly do to assumptions about traffic that just didn’t happen.
Best Game: Tom Clancy’s The Division (PS4)
The Division was good because it was a number of new experiences coupled with an interesting setting that pretty much only Ubisoft seems to be trying to deliver in recent years. An RPG style shooter set in New York City in the holiday season where you play as a dark ops agent for an organization so secret that agents don’t even know who else is a fellow agent. Not to mention the Dark Zone concept was a great blending of single player and multiplayer gameplay without separating the game into differentiated campaign and PVP modes. As with most games as service games, the content lagged behind the player base in the late game, but it was still a massive achievement and had a fairly large amount of content ultimately delivered. It was one of the few instances where I was an active part of a clan and devoted a large number of hours to playing the game with other people. Sadly I didn’t connect with The Division 2 nearly as much as the first game but I did develop an overall appreciation for Ubisoft shooters.
Honorable Mention: The Last Guardian (PS4)
The Last Guardian isn’t so much an amazing game as much as it’s an amazing moment in gaming history. This was a game that was supposed to follow one of the most highly respected cult titles ever made. Shadows of the Colossus was neither AAA or particularly main stream and yet it is widely loved by pretty much everyone. It’s been ported to both the PS3 and the PS4 from the original PS2. The sequel took like 10 years to finally release. I waited with hope the entire time. Many people said it would never happen but it finally did. Honestly the game is just so so. It’s my least favorite in the boy with horns franchise but I was glad to see it release, glad to play it, and happy that I got the collector’s edition. Trico is also one of my wife’s favorite game characters of all time.
Worst Game: One Way Trip (PS4)
This is an indie game you haven’t played and you’re better for it. It’s the only game on this list that I was “forced” to play in order to write a review. I know we’re supposed to respect and value games for the achievement of having even been made and distributed to main stream platforms but not this time. One Way Trip is what happens when you tell everybody that if they just work hard enough they can make their dreams come true regardless of their talent for something. It’s pretty much what happens when a college student says “it would be cool if they made a game for drug addicts to play while high”. It’s so bad that it’s even worse than so bad that it’s worth playing just to experience it. Calling it a game is dishonest because really it’s more of a visual novel with choices and the occasional slightly interactive gameplay sequence. The writing is off the walls ridiculous and the graphics look like you’re expected to be high to truly appreciate them. This is the only true indie I mentioned in this entire list because it was so bad that I couldn’t even look past it for something more meaningful from 2016. Don’t ever play this game.
Best Game: Super Mario Odyssey (Switch)
I knew I was going to buy a Switch as soon as they were announced. I have bought every Nintendo home console since the NES and that’s not going to change anytime soon. At the same time, I also knew that I wasn’t going to buy a Switch at launch. I needed them to release a pile of games I actually wanted to play and a nice bundle deal before I was going to buy one. Super Mario Odyssey was the straw that broke the camel’s back. I literally shed tears the first time I watched the Odyssey trailer. It was the Super Mario game I had been waiting for since I was a boy. An open world Mario platformer with HD graphics that I could play at home and on the go. They had me at open world Mario platformer. The game delivered so well and I have no regrets about buying it or a Switch.
Honorable Mention: Nioh (PS4)
I’m a big Nioh fan. I’ve written extensively about the franchise, posted several hours of gameplay videos, and played all the prebuilds before it launched. Personally I prefer it to Dark Souls. What is interesting about the game is that it showed that a studio other than FromSoftware could both do the genre successfully and use it to construct a main protagonist focused narrative without detracting from the gameplay experience. I believe that it was the success of Nioh that directly led to the creation of Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice. Samurai Dark Souls just makes sense but for whatever reason Koei Tecmo was the first studio to figure that out. I am so happy that we are finally getting Nioh 2 this year and I look forward to more from this franchise.
Worst Game: Mass Effect: Andromeda (PS4)
I am not one of those Mass Effect: Andromeda sucked people. I didn’t have major graphics errors when I played it. I didn’t have game breaking bugs or glitches. I had lag at times and some stuttering, but nothing as bad as what I’m getting in Ghost Recon Breakpoint on PC right now. It’s not that it’s a bad game. In fact it’s a fairly good game in comparison to many of the other games that released in 2017. The problem with Andromeda is that it didn’t live up to its legacy. I, like so many others, bought it because I wanted more of the experience I got playing the original Mass Effect trilogy. What I got just didn’t live up to that. And in a way it might be precisely because the game took too much from the original games rather than innovate and create something new. So much of the game references the original trilogy while simultaneously failing to live up to it. It’s not a bad game. It’s simply the most disappointing game I played in 2017.
Best Game: Monster Hunter: World (PS4)
The reason MHW is here instead of God of War is because Capcom accomplished something that Santa Monica Studio didn’t have to. They took a franchise that I wanted to love but always hated and made it playable for me. I have always loved the Monster Hunter concept. The idea of working together with others to hunt giant monsters has always appealed to me. The basic concepts of the franchise such as tracking, choosing your preferred hunting weapons, and causing injuries to ultimately bring down monsters all appeals to me. But the gameplay has always sucked before MHW. Every time they put out a new Monster Hunter, I would try it and hate it. The controls were always rigid and confusing. The mechanics always asked too much of the player in order to make it arbitrarily more challenging. This was never the way to go about this. MHW changed all that by making the game accessible for non-hardcore Monster Hunter players. The gameplay is much more fluid. The character development is way more straight forward. The graphics are really good. It’s the Monster Hunter game that I had spent years waiting for and they delivered that past my expectations and continue to do so. I had to force myself to stop playing the game because it was so addicting and had so much content but I had so many other games I wanted to play. I know there’s a version of me in the multi-verse that’s still playing MHW and hasn’t gotten the least bit tired of it.
Honorable Mention: God of War (PS4)
Obviously this was an amazing game. Cory Barlog should be commended for both using a character that everyone, including myself, wanted retired and for changing the God of War franchise so drastically while still delivering such a phenomenal game. I’m still shocked that Kratos delivered a Thor gameplay experience better than any of the games actually featuring Thor as a playable character. I went into the game a naysayer and I was proven wrong. There’s a reason it won GOTY in 2018.
Worst Game: Starlink: Battle for Atlas (Switch)
I actually really like Starlink. There’s a lot about it that’s superior to many other games of the same type. In my opinion, it’s what No Man’s Sky should have been in many regards. But it’s so broken by microtransactions and the toy gimmick, which they ultimately did away with for the PC version of the game. I played the deluxe edition of the game on Nintendo Switch and as such my experience was much better than that of many players. Plus I got to use Star Fox. But if you didn’t have the deluxe edition your experience was severely degraded. So much so that I ended up writing two separate reviews for the game to account for the difference in enjoyment players would have depending on the version they bought. So really it’s not that this was the worst game I played as much as it was a game I played that was worse for many other people who might have also played the game.
Best Game: Kingdom Hearts 3 (PS4)
This choice is riddled with bias, if I’m completely honest. For one, I’m currently playing it as opposed to having already beaten it like all the other games in this list. Also I have yet to play Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice, Death Stranding, or any of the other GOTY 2019 nominees, save for Smash Bros. Ultimate so I’m much more limited in my personal 2019 experiences at this juncture. There’s also the fact that I’d been waiting 14 years to play Kingdom Hearts 3. I spent much of 2019 playing all the other games in the franchise in order to prepare for this game. It really is quite good and visually stunning, so I’m not sure how it got snubbed on a GOTY nomination in the first place. But in any case playing it was more cathartic than anything and I’m glad to finally be done with the franchise (fingers crossed).
Honorable Mention: Pokémon Sword and Shield (Switch)
The last time I played a mainline Pokémon game was Gold and Silver on the Gameboy Color. I was just starting middle school, had essentially no real life experience, all I cared about was catching ‘em all. Now literally 20 years later I find myself playing a new Pokémon game. There are six generations of Pokémon I’m only slightly familiar with because of Pokémon GO. There are mechanics I had never even heard of before like Surprise Trade. And for the first time I’m breeding Pokémon with eggs. You could do that in Gold and Silver but I wasn’t aware of that as a kid. Pokémon Sword and Shield are phenomenal in the fact that a game I haven’t played in two decades still interests me so much. I’m enjoying these games immensely. The graphics are unimaginable coming directly from Gold and Silver. The number of Pokémon available is insanity. In my head there’s still only supposed to be 151. It’s like waking up in the future and seeing how far technology leaped. I couldn’t care less about what the haters say. These games are great and I’m happy to be playing a new Pokémon game on a home console for the first time. That’s the main reason I haven’t played in five generations. I stopped buying handheld consoles after the Gameboy Advance.
Worst Game: Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon Breakpoint (PC)
As with Dragon Age: Inquisition, I don’t think this is actually a bad game, just an unoptimized one. In fact, I really enjoy Ghost Recon: Breakpoint immensely compared to Wildlands. There are a few changes that I didn’t like but ultimately this is a much better game that I find considerably better mechanically, visually, and narratively. But the game is riddled with performance issues. My PC is pretty solid. I have a GTX 1080 GPU, 32 GB of DDR4 RAM, an i7-6800k CPU, and the list goes on. It’s not the current highest end PC you can build but for a system built more than two years ago it’s fairly respectable. But I get so many bugs and glitches while playing Breakpoint. Lots of stuttering and lag, countless minor glitches, and a number of errors that have caused me to fail missions and get locked into loops forcing me to reload a checkpoint. I’ve even had the game glitch on me at the end of a mission and force me to replay an entire mission objective. It’s a really fun game when it’s working properly but it just doesn’t run smoothly enough. I don’t know if it’s just the PC version or the game as a whole, but it is a shame that such an impressive game is crippled with so many performance issues.
So that’s my last decade in gaming. It was actually really good. A lot of these games still hold up today and are worth visiting if you haven’t tried them. Many games from the past decade are still in my backlog and honestly I may not move forward for a while and just spend some time focusing on completing more games from this era. There are seven Yakuza games plus a spinoff (Judgement) that I’d like to play, as a good example. I think that a lot of lessons could be learned from the past decade of gaming. I just hope both the industry and the community actually learned them. I look forward to the next decade of gaming. It already looks promising with the many power house titles announced for 2020. Out of the gate we’re already looking at some real fire games like Cyberpunk 2077, Ghost of Tsushima, and Marvel’s Avengers. How was gaming for you in the last decade? What were your favorite and least favorite games? Let me know in the comments.
WARNING: This is not a spoiler-free review. If anything this is more a discussion piece meant to be read post viewing rather than a traditional film review. Many spoilers ahead. You have been warned.
I saw Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope for the first time in 1997 when it was rereleased to theaters. Greedo shot first! I was eight years old. Without warning my mother took me and my younger sisters to see this movie. To this day I still don’t know why she took us to see it. She’s not a sci-fi fan. My sisters aren’t sci-fi fans. I believe she just thought I would like the movie and decided to force herself and her two young daughters to sit through it for my benefit. In any case, I absolutely loved the movie and became a Star Wars nerd. To this day A New Hope is still my favorite Star Wars movie of all time.
I consider myself a classic Star Wars fan. I believe in the canon. I believe in the established rules of the universe. I have taken the time to learn a lot about Star Wars outside the movies. I don’t hate the prequels but I’m happy to admit that they’re bad. I do hate Revenge of the Sith and I don’t know why people defend it. I was angered by The Force Awakens. I had massive problems with that film and to date I have never watched it a second time. But I do not hate the film. It has tons of problems, but honestly I believe most of them could be corrected with a few minor changes. Maybe one day that movie will get the George Lucas style patch treatment and become decent. I absolutely loathe The Last Jedi. I don’t even consider it a Star Wars film. It’s the most insulting, condescending movie ever made within an established IP built around a developed universe with fairly well defined rules. It left me so bitter that I considered not watching Episode IX, for just a second. My wife was so unhappy with The Last Jedi that she refused to pay money to see it in theater and had me go watch it alone so I could let her know how it is. She plans to watch it at home when it’s available for streaming.
Given how I felt about Episodes VII and VIII, I was very apprehensive going into The Rise of Skywalker. I expected it to be bad. Let me clarify, I didn’t think that highly of J.J. Abrams before he made The Force Awakens. I liked Super 8, but I wasn’t amazed by it. I enjoyed his Star Trek films as much as any diehard Star Wars fan can enjoy them. But to say that I turned on him because of Episode VII would be a false statement, because I wasn’t with him to begin with. Rian Johnson I had even less of an opinion on than Abrams. I liked The Brothers Bloom. I did not like Looper. I haven’t seen anything else by him. So my judgment of these latest Star Wars films has nothing to do with the directors/writers and everything to do with Star Wars and Star Wars alone. And to be clear I’m speaking as someone who has a B.A. in Cinema Studies and believes that the original Star Wars script (the original pitch script not the shooting script) is one of the worst screenplays ever written by an employed member of the Hollywood film industry. George Lucas is an abominable writer in his own right. So please don’t read my judgments as comments made with rose-tinted glasses.
As I have already said, this is NOT a spoiler free review, but I am taking the time to warn you one more time before we get into the real meat and potatoes of Star Wars Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker. For those who haven’t seen the film, go see the film. I highly recommend it. For the rest of you who will continue reading, let’s get down to business.
I’d like to start by presenting my rankings of the nine mainline Star Wars films as it currently stands.
Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope
Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back
Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi
Star Wars Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker
Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace
Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones
Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens
Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith
Star Wars Episode VIII: The Last Jedi
Look at that list again. I ranked The Rise of Skywalker fourth best. That’s basically the highest praise I could possibly give any Star Wars movie not in the original trilogy. I need you to understand how impressed I am with J.J. Abrams after watching that movie. He made a movie I ranked third from the bottom, let some joker follow his movie with the worst of the worst, and then jumped to the highest possible rank that anyone could ever hope to achieve outside of George Lucas himself building a time machine, going back to 1977, and ruining the original trilogy. I was so impressed with Episode IX that I hope they never make another Star Wars film, because no future film, possibly from any IP, will ever hit me as positively on an emotional level as The Rise of Skywalker did. I’ve watched 11 different feature length live action Star Wars films. I’ve only cried in The Rise of Skywalker, and I cried multiple times. This ladies and gentlemen is a real Star Wars film. Now allow me to tell you why.
I’ve thought long and hard about this and I’ve come to two conclusions about Star Wars films. The first is that Star Wars films are not actually for children and haven’t been since Return of the Jedi. They are marketed as for children, as Disney wants it to be so, but this is inaccurate. At most they are child friendly, as in children can safely watch them without parents having to worry about the content shown, but they are not for children. Star Wars movies are for adults. The only real topic of debate is which adults are they actually for? The second, more important conclusion, is that good Star Wars films, at least in the mainline sagas, are not good films. In fact, I will go as far as saying that it’s fairly impossible to make a good film that’s also a good Star Wars film.
I have a Bachelor of Arts in Cinema Studies. I know a hell of a lot about “good film making”. I know why the movie that makes the most money every year almost never wins the Oscar for Best Picture. I know why established paid film critics grade a film one way and then the audience grades it completely opposite. It’s because the established conventions of traditional quality film making are very clearly defined over several decades of intentional implementation. The problem, if it can be called that, with the textbook definition of good film making is that it almost directly opposes good Star Wars film making. A New Hope was considered good film making at the time of release because it revolutionized special effects, established the modern sci-fi genre, and possibly began the modern day blockbuster film system. But it’s also full of hacky writing, plot holes, and it’s fairly predictable. I’m not saying these are bad things. I’ve already stated that A New Hope is my favorite Star Wars film. I’m just acknowledging the fact that even the very first Star Wars film isn’t an example of “good film making”. The fact that every single film in the mainline nine has the line “I have a bad felling about this” should tell you everything you need to know about the quality of Star Wars films in comparison to movies that most people agree are just objectively good movies. Because again, good Star Wars movies aren’t the same thing as good movies and vice versa.
What makes a good Star Wars film? This is the question that has plagued writers and directors since 1983. Possibly 1980, if you’re one of those Return of the Jedi nay-sayers. I believe that the question is hard to answer because the question isn’t framed correctly. The question shouldn’t be what makes a good Star Wars film. The question should actually be “What is the goal of a Star Wars film post 1983?” The answer to that question ultimately shapes how a person approaches making a Star Wars film in 2019. Disney would say the goal of a Star Wars film is to captivate and excite new audiences to the franchise with a focus on children and non-nerd females with the understanding that the established audience is already established and thus will go see the movies regardless of how they are. If this is your thought process going in then it makes sense that you would do things like ignore established canon, create Mary Sue characters, and shit on old favorites, and their fans, by doing things like killing off Han Solo in the opening film of the saga. In my opinion, it’s not that Episodes VII and VIII were made incorrectly. It’s that their objectives were wrong to begin with.
I vehemently disagree with Disney’s answer to the question “What is the goal of a Star Wars film post 1983?” As an old school Star Wars fan, I believe the goal of post 1983 Star Wars films should be to create films that continue to prop up the original trilogy as the greatest films in the series while rewarding fans for their long-term loyalty to the franchise. If that’s your mindset, you’ll make a much different film than you would going in with Disney’s goals. Now obviously the goals I’ve stated as correct Star Wars filmmaking aren’t nearly as lucrative in the long term. They aren’t going to expand the franchise’s market nearly as much. They aren’t going to appeal to outsiders at all. It’s simply not as profitable on paper. That’s not to say that Star Wars films can’t work to expand audiences while accomplishing these goals. It’s just to say that the expansion will be much more tempered and not nearly as fast. I think the way a good Star Wars film expands the franchise’s market is by including moments that get new audiences interested in checking out the older films. Episode IX absolutely takes the time to do that. The best example of this is the inclusion of and dialog surrounding the character and legend of Lando Calrissian. The movie goes out of its way to make you like Lando, show you that everyone knows and respects Lando because of events in the past, and establish that Lando’s character could still do even more. So when you leave the movie, if you don’t already know who Lando was prior to Episode IX, you will leave wanting to know more about him and that will encourage you to go back and watch the original trilogy. That’s how you expand the Star Wars audience while still making good Star Wars films. The reason The Rise of Skywalker works is because it understands the goals of making a good Star Wars film, while its two direct predecessors don’t.
Rogue One is an objectively good movie. It has good characters, solid character interactions and development, real stakes, and a surprising ending. Or at least it would be surprising if it didn’t have the name Star Wars attached to it. You could have easily released that film and never connected it to Star Wars and it would have been just as well received. Maybe even more so. But in my opinion it’s a terrible Star Wars film. It accomplishes literally nothing other than taking people’s money in exchange for telling them a story they already knew going in. There is nothing of consequence shown in Rogue One. No characters that actually matter are shown, save for cameos of Darth Vader and Moff Tarkin. No information that we didn’t already know that has any long term consequence to the Star Wars film universe is given. It’s basically Star Wars fan fiction. That’s why I didn’t like that the film was made. It’s a good film but it’s a bad Star Wars film. It doesn’t include any of the things that make Star Wars movies Star Wars movies. Again save for the cameo of Darth Vader at the end.
The problem with The Force Awakens is that J.J. Abrams refused to commit to a side. He tried to make both a good film and a good Star Wars film. As a real Star Wars fan, it feels like he was talking to a room full of people that we were invited to enter but he wasn’t actually talking to us. He simply included us in the room because it seemed like the right thing to do. That’s why it’s a bad Star Wars film, but it’s still absolutely a Star Wars film. The Last Jedi on the other hand isn’t a Star Wars film at all because Rian Johnson did commit to a side. It just happens to be the incorrect side for making good Star Wars films. Watching Episode VIII is so angering for old school Star Wars fans because it feels like we weren’t even invited into the room. He was absolutely not talking to us at all. He just wanted to make a good film that people with no background in Star Wars would enjoy and connect with. He even went as far as saying that he wasn’t trying to do Star Wars in an interview. He wanted to do something completely different. I believe he made the wrong choice and that’s why I ranked his film at the very bottom of the totem pole. I will however commend him for at least committing to a side. I would rather see a director make a hard decision and risk the entire franchise being destroyed then see one fence sit and pretend to make a good Star Wars film while really just trying to cater to his/her Disney overlords.
The Rise of Skywalker succeeds where The Force Awakens fails because J.J. Abrams finally committed to making a good Star Wars film. Watching it didn’t just feel like Star Wars fans were invited into the room. It felt like everyone else was asked to leave the room and he was only talking to us true fans, occasionally inviting Rian Johnson in for a stern lecture about following the rules of Star Wars. That’s what makes it a good Star Wars film. That’s not to say that the film is perfect. It’s absolutely not. I have a number of notes. For instance, the film goes out of its way to pander to Black viewers. So much so that it made me uncomfortable and I am an African American. A Black female character, not the first in the film with a speaking role, is introduced fairly a ways in. The only two characters she talks to for the entire rest of the movie are Finn and Lando, the only two Black male characters with speaking roles on the rebellion side. Her exchange with Finn came off like a weird callback to slavery and the exchange with Lando makes absolutely no sense. They defeat Emperor Palpatine and the first person she talks to is the old Black guy? And after talking to him for less than 60 seconds they decide to go off on a new adventure together? That’s not how Black people interact. Because that’s not how people interact.
There are plenty of other flaws I could list. Like why was Babu Frik in the ship with Zorii Bliss at the final battle? It would make no sense and has never been established that high level engineers just jump into battle ships to go along for the ride. Like he’s literally just standing on the dashboard looking cute. The movie is definitely flawed. But none of the flaws I mentioned make it a bad Star Wars film. They make it a politically questionable one. And, as with all Star Wars films, not a good film in general. But as far as Star Wars films go, the flaws don’t detract from the movie.
If I had to sum up why The Rise of Skywalker is a great Star Wars film in one sentence that sentence would be “Chewie finally got a medal.” Leia dies and leaves a medal from A New Hope to Chewbacca. This adds literally nothing to the story in this film. It doesn’t affect the plot in any way and if you completely removed that scene it would change nothing to the non-Star Wars fan viewer. But it’s one of the most important moments in the entire post 1983 franchise for real Star Wars fans. A New Hope was an amazing film that featured no non-White humans. Not one. So in a weird way Chewbacca filled this sort of every other man role for minority viewers and pretty much anyone who wasn’t a straight white guy with short hair. Now later we, as in Black people, got Lando. But pretty much anyone who couldn’t identify with a straight white guy or girl in A New Hope only got Chewie or a droid. And no one identifies with the droids. At the end of A New Hope you’ve watched a pretty much perfect movie and the best Star Wars movie that has ever and will ever be made and the heroes get medals but for some reason, that to this day I still don’t know the answer to, Chewbacca gets snubbed. He just doesn’t get a medal. No explanation. No answer. He stands on the stage and just doesn’t get a medal. For more than 40 years real Star Wars fans, of all races, have complained about the fact that Chewie didn’t get a medal in A New Hope. J.J. Abrams making the choice to feature that scene where Chewie gets a medal from Leia is exactly what post 1983 Star Wars is supposed to be. It’s supposed to be referential, nostalgic, and self-aware. And that’s exactly what The Rise of Skywalker is.
I cried multiple time while watching Episode IX. Not a single tear was shed due to some emotional sympathy for any of the characters. Not a single tear was because the narrative was so powerful and emotionally moving. Every tear I shed was a tear of nostalgia. The movie is 142 minutes of J.J. Abrams apologizing to real Star Wars fans for the last two films by acknowledging and rewarding them for 42 years of dedicated service as fans. They brought Lando back. They brought Han back. They brought Palpatine back. This was the first time since 1983 that all the original heroes appeared in the same movie. Luke, Leia, Han, Lando, R2D2, C-3P0, presumably Obi-Wan Kenobi and Yoda’s voices, and the Millennium Falcon all appeared in the same movie 36 years after the last time that happened. Of course I cried in that movie. It’s not particularly original, and it’s not supposed to be. The plot has twists but ultimately isn’t too unpredictable, and it’s not supposed to be. It’s not an example of generally good film making, and it’s not supposed to be. What it’s supposed to be is Star Wars, and that’s exactly what it was. Apology accepted J.J. Abrams. You’ve earned my forgiveness, because you did your research and listened.
I haven’t actually read any of the other reviews for Episode IX but I’ve seen the headlines and it’s very divided. Now I don’t really see how an OG Star Wars fan could not like this movie. Because it’s basically a movie made to clean up the messes made in the last two films. When viewed from that framework I don’t really know how it could have been any better other than nitpicky issues like the ones I brought up already. It’s literally made for us. And that starts from the beginning of the film. In fact, the movie goes out of its way multiple times to trick you into thinking that it’s going to be another The Force Awakens and then flips it on you to let you know that they actually listened this time. In the first 10 minutes of the film Poe light speed skips the Millennium Falcon. Now any traditional Star Wars fan knows that YOU’RE NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT. Why? Because the late, great Han Solo said that you’re not allowed to rush light speed travel back in 1977 when Luke suggested it. So seeing it in the opening minutes of the film was really jarring. Until you realize why it happened. As soon as they land the Falcon, Rey who wasn’t with Poe and Finn in that light speed skipping scene, shows up and the first thing she says is “You can’t light speed skip the Millennium Falcon.” This is one of many important meta moments in the film. They’re intentional and they matter. These are moments where J.J. Abrams is acknowledging that the last two films got it wrong, that the rules actually do matter, and that when they’re not adhered to that needs to be addressed and apologized for in some way.
Another big example of the film acknowledging and apologizing to the true fans was the faux death of Chewbacca. You spend about 10 – 15 minutes thinking Chewbacca is dead and it’s an angry 10 – 15 minutes. It’s like a consider walking out of the theater in disgust 10 – 15 minutes. But then it’s revealed that actually he’s alive, he gets saved, and he gets a medal. I believe this was an apology for killing off Han in such a vainglorious way in The Force Awakens. And bringing his ghost back to redeem Ben Solo was exactly what I needed to see happen. So was Ben dying at the end of the movie. Him turning back to the light side was great. Him giving up his life and saving Rey was great. Rey kissing him was great in such a meta way. But he still needed to die. Because you don’t get to just kill Han Solo. Again J.J. Abrams, apology accepted. So my assumption is that the negative reviews aren’t from old school Star Wars fans, save for those who disliked VII and VIII so much that they just refuse to enjoy Episode IX regardless of how good it is, but from new agers who actually liked Episodes VII and VIII. I understand how those people could hate Episode IX because it basically fixes most of the things wrong in VII as best as it could and pretty much erases VIII. Like there are multiple moments where the movie openly shits on The Last Jedi, and I loved every second of it. Like the fact that Rey is Palpatine’s granddaughter was just the best reveal ever after that garbage orphan nonsense in The Last Jedi. Screw the broom boy. I don’t care about him.
As I said at the beginning, I hope they don’t make more mainline Star Wars films. I know they will but I don’t want them to. But since they will, I hope Disney and future directors takeaway the key lessons that this saga and this individual film have hopefully taught us all. Star Wars is not about gender. A woman can be the protagonist or a man can be the protagonist. It doesn’t matter. What matters is the rules surrounding the Force and how that person navigates them. To say Rey was disliked because she’s a woman is dishonest and inaccurate. Rey was disliked because she didn’t adhere to the established rules of the Force. She also had some attitude problems. I particularly liked that her main takeaway in The Rise of Skywalker was that she couldn’t do it alone. She spends the whole movie getting her ass metaphorically kicked until she finally accepts that she has to trust her friends and let them help her. Star Wars isn’t about sexuality, unless we’re talking about bloodlines being built up for the next generation of great Force users. In general, characters can be gay or straight. It doesn’t matter because that’s not, nor should it be, the focus of Star Wars. I was really happy with how tasteful their inclusion of a lesbian couple in Episode IX was. It’s not talked about. It’s not focused on. It’s simply shown in a celebration scene and then they move on, like normal people would in a story that has nothing to do with sexuality
Star Wars can and should include everybody, but it shouldn’t change to suit the whims and desires of anybody. Star Wars shouldn’t focus on or justify anybody specifically because of their race, gender, or sexuality. Star Wars is a universe of rules. As the long as the rules are followed, the rest of the stuff doesn’t really matter one way or another. And thankfully all the rules only concern how the Force works, who gets to use it and to what level, the limitations of technology, and respecting established canon. Other than that, have at it. Make a Black Jedi. Make a gay Sith Lord. Make a trans rebel commander. It doesn’t actually matter. Because if we’re talking about that then the movies have already gone too far by focusing on those things when that has nothing to do with Star Wars. Nobody in the movies ever calls Lando Black. He just is Black and that should be good enough for Black viewers. And it was for Black viewers in 1980.
Star Wars is about good vs evil and good always wins in the end. But good doesn’t win because it’s stronger. It wins because those on the side of good are stronger together. The climactic scene near the end when Lando shows up with an armada of random ships was beautiful because that’s exactly what Star Wars is supposed to be about. I especially liked the line delivered by the Final Order Commander’s first mate when asked where this navy from. He says “It’s not a navy sir, it’s just people.” That’s what Star Wars is actually about. It’s not that everyone is an epic hero that gets to lead an army or wield the Force. It’s about how while there are some people who stand above everyone else, everyone else has a role to play and even if we don’t know their names, they’re just as important because good only wins when everyone helps. That’s why we don’t need random people sprouting up around the galaxy being the next great Jedi. Because that’s not their role. But that in no way diminishes the fact that they are needed for good to triumph over evil. For most people, that’s your role in Star Wars. And if you have a problem with that, the problem is with you, not Star Wars.
In conclusion, Star Wars Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker was a roaring success. It was everything I wanted from the final act of this saga and more than I expected from it. J.J Abrams has redeemed himself as a Star Wars director in my eyes and I’m glad that I’m able to say that. If you’ve read this far, I commend you. If you’ve read this far and haven’t seen the movie, I hope you now choose to go see it. Thank you for reading and may the force of others be with you. Sorry scratch that. That’s actually the garbage original phrase that was written in the first draft of the original Star Wars screenplay by George Lucas. What I meant to say was May the Force be with You.
I’m not particularly a fan of horror games. Nor do I like FPS titles. Especially not the ones that “require” four player co-op to play. So really it makes no sense that I would have any interest in the upcoming Steam Early Access game, GTFO from 10 Chambers Collective. And yet I am part of their ambassadors program. This is because while I don’t have a personal interest in the type of game they’re making, I do have a general interest in independent games and the studios that create them. I also tend to take an interest in learning about game projects that claim to be at the next level of horrifying to play even if I don’t generally like playing scary games. I still remember the very first thing I read about the first Dead Space (2008) long before that name meant anything. It was an article in a printed game magazine, though I can’t recall which one, that was specifically focused on the design aspects that the sadly now dead Visceral Games was implementing to create “the scariest game ever made”. This intrigued me.
The discussion within the Dead Space article about the design philosophy of creating a really scary game was what I took an interest in. Not getting scared myself, but how developers defined and created fear within games. Over the years I have seen a great many games that were sold as scary. I’ve played through very few of them myself but I have observed other people playing them out of this almost masochistic interest in the creation of horror. I remember watching a friend play parts of F.E.A.R. (2005) and being very impressed with some of the subtle elements of how the game’s atmosphere was presented. It’s this interest in the creation of horror games that drew me to follow GTFO. Not a personal vested interest in playing it, but really more an interest in seeing it and establishing for myself just how scary it actually is and why. So please take my judgement of the alpha with a grain of salt, because as I’ve already stated clearly, this is not traditionally a genre I particularly enjoy playing myself.
Last week was the first closed alpha for GTFO. As a member of the ambassador program, I was granted access to the alpha and given the ability to invite up to three friends to play with me, since the nature of the game is four player co-op. Sadly I was not able to get three friends to play concurrently. I was only able to get a maximum of three players concurrently, so off the bat my experience with the game was not perfectly authentic to what 10 Chambers Collective intends for the gameplay experience to be. But I still feel like I can give an informative review of my experience that will hopefully help interested readers make an informed decision about whether or not to keep an eye on and possibly invest in this game. I use the word invest here because it is an early access game as opposed to a traditional straight release.
In all honesty I have to say that I was really disappointed with this alpha both from a horror standpoint and from a gameplay standpoint. GTFO’s definition of horror is dark underground warehouses with crab walking knock off The Last of Us clickers. That pretty much sums up the game visually. The atmosphere is not bad. The graphics, though not AAA quality, were fairly solid. I actually really did like the underground world they built with dim lighting, intense shadows, and lots of junk scattered around. But I wasn’t really impressed by the enemies. They really do just look like clickers with no clothes on. And for some reason some of them crab walk while other walk/run on two legs. The only other type of enemy I encountered was a really tall clicker that moved slowly compared to the normal enemies. I can’t say at this point if there are other enemies in the game, because I couldn’t get very far into the map. More on that later.
I felt the buildup at the start of the game is actually scarier than the game itself. The menus and opening cinematic leading up to actually playing the game are really well done. They’re very bleak and barebones with a fairly ominous presentation. I definitely went into the gameplay expecting to get scared. But ultimately this didn’t happen and sadly a large part of that was due to the gameplay, which I’ll get into later. The alpha ran fairly smoothly, but everything looks a bit unpolished. This is especially true in the menus and map. On one had this helps set a tone that is bleak and scary and that works fine for the menus. But that map is unacceptable. It needs a complete overhaul with much clearer indication points, a mini-map function, and the ability to set beacons. Not getting lost in that system of caves and doors is a challenge all on its own.
My biggest issue with the alpha has to be the gameplay though. The game is being sold as a “hardcore” FPS experience but when did the definition of hardcore become little more than not enough ammo and no health regen? The gameplay is not hard. The shooting isn’t particularly difficult. The enemies, though resilient and usually in decent sized groups, are mostly fair. They shoot a long range projectile that makes no sense based on what they look like, but I never felt like the encounters were unfair. My only real complaint about the combat is that the gameplay loop is nonexistent. Shooters work based on the idea that each encounter is challenging but for the most part disconnected from all other encounters, in most cases. You kill the enemies, you get additional ammo and health, and then you find and kill the next group of enemies. But that’s not how it works in GTFO.
Rather than an established gameplay loop, GTFO has a single continuous gameplay line that never resets until you die and start over. Imagine playing Dark Souls with no XP or bonfires. That’s what this game is like. Everything resets at the end of each excursion. All the doors you opened, all the enemies you killed, and anything else you’ve accomplished reset every time you die. It’s not even that the encounters are particularly hard, even when playing a man short. The game is only hard in the fact that when you finish a battle you never seem to find any ammo or health restoration so over time you just sort of run out of ammo and then die in the next encounter. I also couldn’t get my special weapons to fire at all. I’m not sure why but they just wouldn’t activate. This meant playing the game with just two guns and one of the most useless melee attacks I’ve seen in a shooter. You carry this big, slow sledgehammer that takes forever to use. But it doesn’t get one hit kills on basic enemies, which is just ridiculous.
I can honestly say that in the hour that we actually played the game, we didn’t find a single ammo pack between the three of us. This is really just unacceptable. And since you always restart in the same place, we never made it noticeably farther than in previous attempts from round to round because we always ran out of ammo too quickly. Perma-death and limited ammo are both mechanics that can be used to make a game more difficult. But the two should never be used together. The game needs to drastically alter its ammo system so that you refill from drops after every fight. This one simple change would transform the gameplay experience in a considerably positive way. It was the lack of progress that ultimately drove us to quitting out of boredom. And that boredom came from constantly dying due to being out of ammo. I would also attribute the lack of horror to this issue as well. You’re so focused on ammo problems that you don’t even have time to get scared.
Hardcore should mean challenging, but not unfair. It should mean you have to shoot at a high level of accuracy and work together to watch each other’s backs. But making it so that players can’t play the game because they keep running out of ammo and can’t refill it is not hardcore game design. It’s bad game design using faux difficulty as a shield from criticism. The game needs a properly functioning gameplay loop from encounter to encounter. A few simple changes could establish this fairly easily.
I was fine with the game’s audio. It wasn’t as intense as it probably needs to be for the game to be as scary as they’d like, but it sounds fine overall. The real problem is that the game doesn’t have a voice chat function . . . yet. So coordinating your team audibly requires outside software. We ended up just using the text chat, which was probably the best working thing in the game.
The writing was not really present in the alpha. I got the impression that there was at least some level of plot development that’s pieced together as you find clues within the caverns, but I never found any such clues myself while playing. It’s obviously not meant to be a plot focused game. But I do hope there’s an endpoint you’re actually moving towards as you progress farther into the game.
It’s impossible to speak on the replay value at this point in development, but based on the perma-death mechanics, my assumption would be that it’s all replay value that you eventually just get bored with without ever actually getting to leave the underground setting.
I had/have really high hopes for GTFO. The marketing was fairly strong for an indie shooter and the horror aspect was pitched in a very convincing manner. But sadly this alpha left me highly disappointed. Obviously it is just an alpha build and still has a ways to go before being finished, leaving it a lot of room to grow and be changed before launch. But in my experience the sorts of changes required to make this game better very likely won’t happen. There are good ideas here but if they don’t redefine what “hardcore” means they will ultimately release a game that fails to obtain a healthy player base because it’s simply not fun the way things work now. Also, for the love of gaming they need to add public lobbies and matchmaking.