It wasn't until I wrote down the title of this post that I realised how long the names of both these games were. Horizon: Zero Dawn and Shadow Of The Colossus (Remastered) are two games I started playing recently but haven't gotten anywhere near completing.
I started with Horizon first for a few hours and then got somewhat fatigued by the predictable nature of how things were proceeding. It's not a bad game - on the contrary it's extremely absorbing, cinematic and intuitive. My issue was with how it felt like the gameplay was going through the motions of every other sandbox adventure game that had come out in the past few years. Learn to move, learn to scavenge, craft upgrades for your weapons, assign skill points to gain new abilities, buy and sell all of the trinkets, etc etc. All elements that had been tried and tested several times before and had been proven to work, and engage the player and ensure a pleasurable experience.
The problem is that once you see the steps laid out before you, it sort of shatters the illusion. Knowing I would have to put in a certain number of hours, before I unlocked certain areas/missions, and saw more of the story, made me feel somewhat deflated. I realise this probably doesn't make a lot of sense, and I'm very likely doing a poor job of explaining all of this. But it's like the game was hollow - which probably isn't going to be a popular statement considering how loved this game is. It feels like the game includes all of this ancillary stuff because it's expected, not because it would be fun or unique or would add a new twist. As if it's just there to fill a quota.
So after having this minor existential crisis on behalf of the game, I decided to stop playing and loaded up another title - the remastered version of Shadow Of The Colossus (SOTC). I had never played the original but had seen the countless praises thrown its way over the years from even the most jaded games critics. And after the initial cinematic and story set up, I felt a refreshing wave of relief wash over me. The simplicity and minimalism was upfront and deliberate, and I realised I wouldn't have to jump through several sets of hoops to make progress.
Shadow Of The Colossus tasks the player with finding and destroying a several absolute units. Why? To bring your dead girlfriend back to life. How do you find them? Your sword points in the direction of the nearest colossus. How do you kill the colossi? With your sword (somehow). What happens after you kill a colossus? You move onto the next colossus via your horse. Simples.
Obviously this won't please everyone. For some people the set up and content might not have enough meat on it. Maybe they want more complexity or nuance in the "combat". Maybe they want more depth to the story, or want more lore from the world the game takes place in. People who want these things will not get them, and that may be a deal breaker. Fair enough.
But for me, it's exactly what I wanted. It is the polar opposite of the over stuffed, over burdened and over subscribed titles that dominate modern triple-A. It is a game I want to continue to work through, to see if the minimalist approach holds up over the entire run time.
I won't be able to do this any time soon however, as I have yet again moved to a new city, for a new job, and my poor PS4 has been left behind. But don't worry PS4, I'll be coming back for you soon.
I am genuinely curious to know what the numbers are of people who have only played DOOM (2016) on Switch, as opposed to people who played it after already playing it on PS4, Xbox One or PC. I'm pretty sure it's a relatively low number. One that I am a part of.
So I got hold of a copy of DOOM for Switch and felt like a man in a desert being handed an ice cold glass of water, since I've been without a new game on Switch for a while now and I still don't have access to my extensive PS4 games library. And not only was I going to be playing a new game, it was a new game that had already received significant amounts of praise on all of the other platforms it had already been released on. But then I had to take a step back as I remembered most of the reviews had focused on how tight the shooting gameplay was, and how the speed and pace were unrivalled in their intensity. And the most intense game I had played on the Switch so far was arguably Breath Of The Wild. An action heavy game, but not exactly lightning fast in its pacing.
First thoughts on starting DOOM were "Wow, this is taking a long-ass time to load". Might as well get that out of the way. The loading times are extensive. Like, noticeably extensive. I thought it wasn't a big deal, hoping that it would just be an initial loading requirement, and that afterwards things would be zippier. Nope. Every death led to an equally long load time leading to my millennial mind wandering off and checking Twitter, somewhat breaking my engagement with the game.
Second thoughts (after the game finally loaded) were "Wow, those textures are garbage". I don't know if this was just exaggerated because I was only playing the game in handheld mode, but the textures were notably, brutally blurry up close. I knew that some concessions had been made to get the game to run on the Switch, but this was painful to look at at times. And I had not even played the game on another platform previously. So although I had seen footage of the game running on PS4, it's not like I knew exactly what the game was meant to look like precisely.
Loading and texture issues aside, once I started playing, I could see why the game had received such high praise. When a game has clear direction, it comes across in the gameplay. It's clear that the vision for DOOM was intensity, brevity and a visceral presentation. This permeates throughout everything in the game. From the start you are punching and shooting demons immediately. Explanations for controls are brief, you run at an almost comical speed, and there is no reload button. Exposition is light, and your character actively ends exposition pieces with his fists. It's appealingly refreshing for a game not to go through the same motions that many of its contemporaries seem resigned to.
I will say, however, that the Switch version of DOOM is easily the weakest, and that is without even playing it on any of the other platforms. This isn't just because of the presentation being murkier, but because of the Switch controls not being precise enough for the speed of the action. More than once I died knowing that if I was using a different controller, I would have survived. And this isn't a case of sensitivity, it's a case of feeling. The Joy Con analogue sticks don't have the precision of other controllers, or a mouse and keyboard. Maybe the Switch Pro controller does, I wouldn't know. Whether playing with the Joy Con's attached to the console, or in the Joy Con Grip, the controls still felt sluggish and I never felt like I had the precision I was meant to have.
The final disappointment however, although minor compared to the presentation and control issues, was with the ending. It's not that the ending is terrible, it's just that it is so boring, and such an anti-climax for a game all about not following the conventions of its contemporaries. The ending has you going back to hell one last time, defeating the giant, horrific spider, alien, Olivia robot thingy, shutting off the gate to hell, and returning to Mars. And then what happens?
That stupid robot, Sam whatever, delivers a boring monologue, and then just swats you away to some unknown location, with a vague promise that you'll meet again. In a way it sort of mirrors the endings of the first two Half Life games. But whilst this kind of acceptance works fine for a blank slate like Gordon Freeman, for the Doom Marine it is bollocks! He should have stopped the Hayden-bot halfway through his speech, destroyed him with a tin-opener and then crowned himself king of Mars. Or something else equally audacious. Something that matched up with the rest of the games outrageous attitude.
I get they were probably setting up for a sequel, but with the attitude that this title had, I would have been more pleasantly surprised if the game simply set itself on fire the moment the campaign was completed.
Super Mario Odyssey was the first Mario game I actually bought, played for any significant amount of time, and completed. Well, I got to the end of the story - I have not, and will not, try to get all of the remaining Power Moons. I'll leave that to the lunatics.
The Super Mario series is just one of those things that passed me by - like many other Nintendo first party games. So it was with great curiousity that I bought Odyssey, especially considering how a lot of online reviewers were calling it the greatest game of all time, ever, in all realities. Ever. I had a feeling this was most likely a nostalgia thing considering a lot of reviews dropped the holy words "Super Mario 64" about a million times.
Super Mario Odyssey is good. But it isn't great, isn't the greatest game of all time, and isn't even my favourite game on the Switch. That said, I was pleasantly surprised at the level of polish that had gone into it. The opening cinematic, the crisp sound design and brevity of the set up all gave a great first impression. The central mechanic of being able to possess many of the inhabitants is neat and gets used extremely well. It helps add variety to a game where Mario's traditional core abilities are nowhere to be seen.
I don't want to go on about all of the positive aspects of Odyssey, since hundreds, if not thousands of others have already recorded those aspects down for future historians to ignore. I want to focus on two negatives. Two negatives that were such massive issues for me that for at least several minutes during my play-through, I thought everyone else on the planet was a moron.
First up, the checkpoint system. It sucks. There simply aren't enough checkpoints in the game to play without frustration. The number of times I would get past what felt like a dozen different challenges, just to die because of a single, well placed Goomba, and be sent all the way back to the beginning, was too damned high. On more than one occasion I put down my Switch because the thought of going through all of those areas again was too much for me to handle. However, this issue wouldn't have been such a big deal to me, if it weren't for-
The mother fucking camera. How no one had any issue with this garbage piece of garbage is beyond me. The number of times Mario would go flying into a bottomless abyss because the camera refused to look where I wanted it to is more than I care to remember. It was unbearable. I would jump from platform to platform, just to see Mario's stumpy little body go tumbling into nothing and fall to a platform seven levels down, and I'd have to do everything again. A game series lauded for its 3D camera placement for the past 20 years has no excuse having these kinds of problems. I honestly believed that the entire planet was smoking crystal when they talked about this game being perfect when I was having trouble getting Mario to walk in the direction I wanted him to.
Those two glaring issues aside, I did enjoy my time with Odyssey, and I was glad that there was actually a post credits game to continue to play through, unlike in Breath Of The Wild. But that would be the only thing I would put in Odysseys favour, when comparing these two games. I think its a pretty interesting dichotomy between the two, and a great example of good nostalgia and bad nostalgia. A game being considered great because it reminds people of a childhood favourite, versus a game that has its roots set in tradition, but which embraces modern expectations.
Or maybe they're both great games and I just hate really poorly implemented camera systems.
I was planning on writing a post about a month ago. I was also planning on writing said post on Fortnite Battle Royale, not Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. But I've played more of Mankind Divided lately than I have of Fortnite, and I also have way more feelings to express about Mankind Divided than I do Fortnite.
Although I played the original Deus Ex, I wouldn't say I was one of those ravenous fans who constantly go on about what a flawless masterpiece it was. I played it, I immensely enjoyed it, but I never finished it. A mix of both the game engine being shoddily optimised and me getting stuck at a certain point led to me losing interest after a while. But then I played Deus Ex: Human Revolution and I finished that within a week. Although it wasn't as deep as the original game, it definitely captured it's spirit and design (aside from the infamous bosses that you HAD to kill). And on top of that it had a unique look and sound to it that still makes it one of my favourite games from the past generation.
Now we get to Mankind Divided, which I have yet to finish, but have a fully formed opinion of. And unless the ending is going to blow my balls into space with how amazing it is, I'd say Mankind Divided is a massive disappointment. There is something about the opening mission which brought this across in record time. The way the tutorial level played out, the way mechanics were introduced and the way the game controlled - everything felt slightly off. The way your allies spoke to you felt unnecessarily aggressive, and the voice work felt awkward and stiff. Suddenly being thrown into a firefight in the middle of a sand storm whilst on a time limit was also a bit of a dick move on the games part.
As the game and the story progressed, this ill feeling didn't disappear. Even basic things like character animations during conversations started to get on my wick. It's not that they were terrible or anything, they just looked off. And on the gameplay side of things, everything felt half-assed and poorly explained. There was the option to start unlocking new augments but it already felt like I had everything I needed to take on the missions. And the addition of the experimental augmentations ironically add nothing to the game. I have trouble putting this into words, because technically speaking, there isn't really anything wrong with the game. It looks better than its predecessor, and is visually more consistent when switching from gameplay, to cutscene, to cinematic, and the decision to set the game in Prague was a great choice to give it some more personality.
But when it came to carrying out the missions, I always felt like the controls were less refined than before, that the level design wasn't as intuitive as it should have been, and the conversations not as engaging or significant as they previously were. Everything in the game felt like it had been streamlined in the wrong way, with depth taken away from areas where it wasn't needed, and fat left over from the previous game where it could have been cut down. And some things were simply not explained correctly, or not explained at all. I must have been deep into hour six before the game finally started talking to me about multi-tools and their various uses. Conversely I sure am glad the game took time out to explain the collectible QR codes you can find throughout the campaign that you can scan with your phone. That didn't destroy my immersion whatsoever.
On a final, petty, personal note, the music is nowhere near as incredible as it was in Human Revolution. I still have that games soundtrack saved on Spotify. And whilst Mankind Divided has some of that same ambience and atmosphere about it, it doesn't come close to bringing out the feelings Human Revolution made me feel. To me, the soundtrack is a microcosm of the entire game; hitting the same beats as the original, but with nowhere near the amount of creativity or energy.
I might end up doing a second write up once I finish Mankind Divided, although that will take a while since I am without a TV for at least the next several weeks, maybe months. And once I do get a TV to hook my PS4 into, there's a good chance I'll just end up playing Fortnite: Battle Royale again instead.
Ninja Theory is a company I have a great amount of respect for. And that isn't just because I tried interviewing with them four years ago and got down to like the last two. I have followed their work for a numbers of years, and whilst they haven't always sticked the landing with the execution of their games, it is clear that they are at least a creative and ambitious bunch. They always seem to be trying to do something different or that is at least noteworthy.
Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice is somewhat of a testament to that. It's different, creative and ambitious in what it sets out to do, but it doesn't hit all the notes it needs to.
The game has been on a lot of peoples radars for a number of years due to Ninja Theory being very public about their goal to create a title that lived up to AAA standards, but one that was made on a fraction of the budget and resources normally required. They also spoke a lot about one of the core themes of the game being centered on mental health and dealing with psychosis in a way that video games hadn't managed before. That's a lot to take on, so at least they got the ambition part right.
Thinking back at my time with the game, I didn't have an issue with the length of the playthrough, or the presentation of the environments, or the competency of the gameplay. All of those things were realised quite well and didn't provide any problems. My biggest issue with Hellbade was the fact that at times, quite tragically, it still felt cheap. The emptiness of the levels, the usage of post-processed video footage to show characters, the constant droning narration from just one voice actor and the repetition of the enemies, emphasised just how many corners had been cut to make the game on a (relatively) low budget.
It's a shame because at other times, the game can be quite mesmerising. It's use of binaural sound design, the voices making you question your decisions, the impressively detailed and animated title character Senua and use of subtle transitions to cut scenes make the game feel more cinematic than many others. These high points in the games presentation, and the presentation of its story, make the low points all the more sore to see. And although the story is at times well presented, the story itself doesn't feel fully realised.
The long and short of the story is that you are Senua; a Nordic warrior on a quest to save the soul of your dead lover. Senua has to deal with voices in her head, visions of the past, and terrifying monsters that may or may not be real. As the game takes place from Senua's point of view, we have no idea if anything that happens in the game is actually real, or entirely a figment of her psychosis. There is also a sort of sub-plot told entirely through the Norse mythology equivalent of audio logs detailing cataclysmic past events. The problem with the sub plot is that it is easily one of the most boring things I've had to listen to since I stopped going to Sunday school. I couldn't decide if it was the voice actor's delivery or the content of the script, but something about these stories was so apocalyptically dry that I stopped seeking them out after the first hour or so.
The main story itself, whilst at times engaging, didn't draw me in because it was simply too muddled for me to follow. Maybe that makes me an idiot and I should get a dunce cap stiched into my hairline, but I don't care; I didnt find the story to be captivating. When you pass out in one environment, then wake up in another with no notion of relative time and space, you have no context. Did we die? Are we already dead and just going through the different stages of the afterlife? How did we get here or are we just imagining ourselves here because we need to? If we are alive then does magic and mysticism exist in this world or is this all meant to be metaphorical? It is fine for a fictional world to not follow the rules and conventions of the real world, but it must have at least some of its own internal rules and conventions to provide the player with an idea of what can happen. There is so little context given to the player that it can be difficult to find something relatable to grasp onto in the story.
Getting to the gameplay side of things, Hellbade is a mish mash of walking simulator, mandatory combat and puzzle solving. Each is executed competently; the quiet walking parts at least take place in nice looking/interesting locales, the combat has a nice visceral feeling and the puzzles are unique and creative in their execution. However none of these elements ever really evolves or gets used in any new or interesting ways as the game progresses. The puzzles themselves are an interesting idea; lining up elements of the environment to match a required symbol. But looking for the last symbol of the game basically requires the same amount of skill as looking for the first symbol in the game. And towards the end of the story I was getting less and less patient with each puzzle section, which is never a good sign.
I don't know how to review games properly or analytically, all I can do is talk about what I feel after having finished a game. And thinking about it now, I had more interest and praise for the development of Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice than I did for the game itself. I want Ninja Theory to try out this development strategy again, and I want other studios to try it out too and see what they can create knowing they have a bit more creative flex with a smaller budget.
So if nothing else, I think Hellbalde is a step in the right direction for game development. Even if the game itself is nothing more than a series of multiple mis-steps. (Ouch).
Playdead's 2010 indie hit LIMBO is one of my favourite games ever. It was one of the only games I ever bought off the XBLA and I bought it based solely on its imagery, as it looked like it would be super atmospheric and mysterious and all that jazz. And naturally, I was very correct. But on top of the impeccable atmosphere and visuals, the game design is what truly stole the show. LIMBO was a masterclass of game design; game design in its purest form. No additional modes, or options or fluff - just a handful of simple mechanics and a linear world to use them in. I adored the game and couldn't wait to see what Playdead did next.
Fast forward seven years, and I have finally played what Playdead did next - INSIDE. On paper it simply looked like LIMBO 1.5 - a side scrolling puzzle platformer where you play as a small child in a mysterious and uncaring world. And whilst that is pretty much what INSIDE is (and that isn't a bad thing), it is also enough of a step up and away from LIMBO for it to be considered as doing more than just retreading old ground.
The set up is about as simple as it can get. You control a young boy who starts out in a forest, and he is either running away from or towards something. You can run, jump, push and pull objects, flip switches and eventually use a device that allows limited control over human-like drones. That last bit sounds like it doesn't really mix well the other abilities you have, but within the context of the game, it makes sense. Just like in LIMBO, the story of INSIDE isn't really about characters or events. In fact there is even less story in INSIDE. At least in LIMBO you were told that you were looking for your sister who was lost (or dead, or you were both dead the whole time and you were finding you way to heaven, or whatever). INSIDE just gives you a direction and tells the rest of its story with its locations, and with its atmosphere.
It's difficult to put into words the feelings that INSIDE's atmosphere and world building evoked in me. The feeling of desolation, alienation, isolation and urgency all hit me more than any other game I've played this year (except for maybe The Last Of Us). It's not like there are jump scares or horrific amounts of blood and gore (although there is the occasional gruesome death); there is just this sense of absolute dread from all of the little details you witness in your three hour play through. From your first steps into the forest being chased by men wearing blank masks, to goose stepping with mindless drones, to fending off hideous under water trolls, everything has a creepy edge to it.
Besides the solid atmosphere, INSIDE also excels at game design. Just like its predecessor, it has zero fat on it. Every single element of the game is used to full effect, and is used in multiple, varying scenarios, testing you in new and creative ways. Visual cues as to how to proceed are executed perfectly, but still allow for you to mess up the first one or two times. So it remains challenging without getting frustrating. Playdead takes each mechanic that LIMBO introduced and cranks it up to to a new level in INSIDE to the point where you think "There is no way they have another way of using this mechanic!". And yet they do, and they use it in a way that isn't repetitive or derivative.
As much as I love Playdead's two games so far, I do hope that they don't do side scrolling puzzle platformer for their third game. There is perfecting a concept, and then there is milking one beyond belief. LIMBO and INSIDE are perfect, and, unless Playdead can make lightning strike a third time, a third puzzle platformer would just start being a detriment to their past titles.
Although to be fair, if any studio could make lightning strike a third time, it's Playdead.
My feelings about Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain have been well documented over the past few weeks/months through a number of posts both on here and on Twitter. This past week, after a particularly brutal bullshit play session, I decided that enough was enough and I gave up on the idea of completing the game. As much as I wanted to complete the story and see the resolution of the characters and the tying up of the remaining dangling plot threads, I'd be buggered before I had to deal with any more of the tedious, nonsensical gameplay or overly verbose exposition.
To put this into context; the reason I so desperately wanted to finish the main story was simply because I have always liked the MGS lore/backstory. Although I think Hideo Kojima's writing is at times terrible, and I wouldn't trust him with a blunt crayon, I do think his creativity and imagination is incredible. The whole reason I loved the first MGS game was because it felt like it existed in a fully realised world with its own history and mythology. This whole idea of an elite group of soldiers and agents, each with their own storied codenames and dark secrets, taking on even more ridiculous enemies and world-destroying villains, was incredible to 11 year old me.
The MGS series had its up and downs for me. Whilst I completely adored MGS' 1 and 3, I completely despised 2 and 4. So when I first heard about The Phantom Pain I had no idea what to think. It sounded like a ridiculous concept at first, and carried on a story from one of the handheld entries into the series which I never played. But then the idea that this game would tie into the original Metal Gear and tie up the entire franchise sounded too good to pass up. So I eventually bought it (when it was on sale, fuck paying full price on something as dicey as an unfinished, Kojima-led, Konami published AAA game) but soon realised that I had made a gargantuan mistake.
Let's be clear on one thing - the core gameplay of MGS V is great. The movement, shooting, stealth and overall feel of controlling Snake/Boss/Larry is near perfect. I have very few complaints about the core gameplay. It is the setup around this core gameplay, and the progression (or lack thereof) that really gets on my wick.
The biggest problem is the switch to open-world, and the complete lack of structure that the story inherits from it. Whilst previous MGS games were short and linear, it also meant that the story was a lot more structured and escalated appropriately when needed. Since MGS V decided to go with the sandbox approach, it means now you just carry out a meandering set of barely connected missions in whatever order you choose. This in itself wouldn't be a massive problem, but the fact that 90% of the missions have the same kind of objective, leads to the game feeling arduous and repetitive much sooner than it should.
This repetitiveness is then what leads to every other issue the game has to feeling much more painful than it actually is. You start to notice how truly bad a lot of the writing is, and the delivery from many of the characters just sucks! Miller is probably the biggest culprit; delivering every other line in his stupid Christian Bale-esque half growl, like he's always just caught up to you after you forgot your bag in the coffee shop. Listening to this complete clown for hours and hours makes me wish he'd lost more than just an arm and a leg.
As big as the game world is, it's meaningless when missions all take place around similar looking outposts and facilities. The structures are always the same, the setup is almost always the same, and it all looks the bloody same! The giant world map does nothing but pad out the games runtime even longer, which is unforgivable. Again, not to keep comparing with previous MGS games but at least the scenery changed in those. The environments changed, some were wackier than others and some were downright dumb, but at least there was variety! Even in MGS 3: Snake Eater you spent 95% of your time in a jungle, but the scenarios, atmospheres and tones changed with each new section.
I'll wrap this up with the final two points that really fucked me off about this game. One is the story, and the absolute mess that it is. I won't go into detail on it since so many others have already done that, and also because I would be lying if I said I totally understood every single facet of it. What gets me the most about the failure of the story is that this game was marketed as the missing link in the MGS saga. It would show the completion of Big Boss' character transformation from the greatest soldier that ever lived, to a maniacal tyrant hell bent on being his own nuclear power. The game doesn't show any of that. And let's be blunt here; in a very real way, this game shows almost nothing of Big Boss or his character development. Moreover, the fact that Big Boss went from being a fairly charismatic action hero, to a near silent protagonist, was also a bad choice. I know this gets somewhat explained in the story, but I still think it was a bad call.
Finally, we have the Skulls unit. The elite group of soldiers that act as semi-boss fights every so often. In a few of the scenarios it is entirely possible just to run away from them, but at other times you have to stand and fight. There are usually four or so skulls, each with very powerful physical attacks, as well as very damaging ranged attacks. And to be short, fuck the Skulls. Their ability to appear out of nowhere, shoot the life out of you, and block every attack you use except for using explosives, is pure bullshit. It is not fun to fight them, the same way it isn't fun fighting the Prometheans in Halo 4. They are frustrating to do battle with. The fact that you can take out three of them, just for the fourth to get in a cheap shot and kill you, and you have to start the fight all over again, is just double-layered bullshit. That was the point I stopped playing. No half-baked summary ending was worth putting myself through more of this garbage.
After I stopped playing I decided to watch a compilation of the cutscenes/story moments that some lunatic had edited together and put onto YouTube. Even after watching all of it, I still had no clue as to what was going on, or why, or when or how. Nothing mattered any more. As far as I was concerned, the MGS series ended with Snake and Meryl riding off into the sunset on a snowmobile.
Whilst I have been disappointed with the way the MGS series has panned out, I see it as a triumphant testament of the potential of video games. Despite Kojima being about as coherent as a half-inflated bouncy castle begging for death, he has shown the world how well games can be used to tell a cinematic story. I am looking forward to seeing what he does next, but I'll keep my expectations low for it to be anything even remotely sensible.
The past couple of weeks have been a bit of a mess. With no job to anchor me I have just floated around Mainland Europe until I sort out new employment. In that time I have played a myriad of different games. So rather than doing a dedicated post for each one, I'll just spew my feelings about each in no particular order.
Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain
Fuck this game. I'm only still playing it because I want to see how it ends. The Skull enemies are the least fun enemies to play against since the Prometheans in Halo 4.
Every bullshit death, every stupid cry from Ocelot and every stupid focus on female anatomy in the cutscenes just makes me hate this game more and more.
But I need to finish it.
Super Mario Odyssey
It's alright. I have played bits and pieces of previous Mario's before, but this is the first time I've bought it and sat down to play it properly.
More than the gameplay, the thing that stuck out to me most was the level of polish in the game. Everything looks slick and well presented, it sounds great, and there so far hasn't been any minor oddities that remind you you're playing a video game.
I'll keep at it and see if I get to the point where I'm creaming my pants the same way everyone else is. Assuming of course that it isn't just a massive nostalgia binge that everyone is trying to deny.
I've completed my first in-game week of Stardew Valley and it's been perfectly pleasant so far. Not a lot has actually happened but I can see the potential enormity of this game. I thought it was literally just farming and raising animals, but I've been assured that that's not solely what this game is about.
I'll put more hours in, but it's currently third priority compared to the other giant behemoths I'm playing.
Power Rangers: Legacy Wars
So this game sort of came out of nowhere. It's a mobile fighting game where you have one main fighter and two back up fighters that have special moves to aid in defence/offence. I was a massive Power Rangers fan as a kid, and I've always had massive nostalgia for the series, but it's not like I still watch the series (the 2017 movie was pretty sweet though).
Like any other free to play mobile game it has a bunch of waiting mechanics, as well as loot boxes and in-app purchases. But, that said, the game is still pretty entertaining, and the mechanics hit a nice sweet spot between easy to pick up and hard to master.
However I started feeling my addictive personality getting a bit too much oxygen with this game so I uninstalled it before things go too out of hand.
Thirty five fucking hours. That's my approximate time put into MGSV so far. But by God does it feel longer.
Maybe it's because I suck at most of the missions. Or maybe it's because a lot of the missions feel like they repeat. Or maybe it's because everything feels so generic that there is no real feeling of progression or artistry that there was in the previous games.
Whenever Kaz or Ocelot (I honestly can't tell the two apart over radio) guides you through a mission and says the "target" or the "prisoner" my eyes start to roll involuntarily. It's because me and my eyes know that it's because the dialogue has been made generic in the interests of efficiency. The prisoner or the target will not have their name mentioned and will just be referenced in the most fleeting manner.
The MGS games have never been perfect, and one of the common criticisms of the previous titles was that they always felt short, or always left the player wanting more. MGSV almost feels like Hideo Kojima read these criticisms and went "Oh you want more? I'll give you fuckers so much more you won't ever want to play an MGS game ever again!" Or something to that affect. The gripes I have expressed about MGSV both on here and on Twitter wouldn't normally send me into the nark-osphere, but the fact that this entry into the series is so long, and so repetitive, just highlights all of the flaws whilst diluting any positive aspects.
I'm on episode 25. I have read that there are 50 episodes. So, assuming I don't get worse, or the game doesn't get exponentially more difficult, I should be on track to finish the game with about a 70 hour play time logged.
That is more than the entirety of Breaking Bad's entire run. And at no point during Breaking Bad did I think "Oh my God please just fucking finish already!"
So I finally finished my first The Legend Of Zelda game. Whilst on a plane. In the middle of turbulence. I'm a terrible flyer and I was trying to do anything that would take my mind off the inevitable crash that I knew was about to transpire. But after 55 hours of playing I was happy that the adventure was finally over, and the ending was satisfying enough for me to not throw a hissy fit. Even if I was slightly unpleasantly surprised that there was no post-credits sandbox.
Looking back, I have a feeling TLOZ: Breath Of The Wild (BOTW) will not leave as lasting an impression as I thought it might. Considering I was willing to buy my first Nintendo console solely based on the trailers for BOTW, my opinion of it has definitely muddied somewhat. That isn't to say it's a bad game. It's a great game with plenty of great ideas, interesting challenges and gorgeous scenery. But there was definitely something missing from it, although what that "it" is, I'm not entirely sure of.
I knew something was up when I had to take a break from my constant playing of the game. After playing the game fairly steadily from April to June, I then took a month off as I was travelling South East Asia (snort). Once I arrived back home at the end of the month, I had zero urge to play BOTW. No urge to complete any of the side missions, or explore more of the map or finish the main quest to destroy Ganon. I think after having already completed the four boss dungeons, finding all but one of the hidden memories and finding (but not quite yet receiving) the Master Sword, I had a feeling of "yeah, this is close enough, no need to carry on." I didn't think that the game could throw any surprises at me at this point. I would get the Master Sword, face Ganon, save the princess and that would be it. And I was correct, naturally.
In a sandbox-esque game like BOTW you really do need interesting side missions/quests/activities to keep the player from turning off the console and going back to Rocket League. That is something I think BOTW sorely lacks. The NPC's don't do enough to differentiate from one another, and all of their side quests feel so token and lacking in stakes that they're not worth bothering with. If you compared it to some of the side missions in Skyrim, some of which are more interesting than the main quest itself, the side missions in BOTW just fall so, so, so short.
BOTW was a bold, new direction for the Zelda series, and naturally on a first major attempt at something new, not everything is going to be perfect. Nintendo has already confirmed that they're going to be sticking to the sandbox formula for future Zelda games (or at the very least the next one), so hopefully they will be working on fine tuning and improving the areas where BOTW fell short.
Again, I enjoyed the game immensely, so don't look at this post as some kind of ignorant hate speech. I'm still trying to get through MGS V at the moment, and believe me, I would much rather be starting BOTW for the first time again than going through this overly-verbose nonsense.