Under the christmas tree (2015)

Well I've been trying and doing different articles, but with things being as busy as they have been lately, they're mostly turning up late and unfinished. I still plan to work at some of them, but things it might be a while. Furthermore I'd also like to announce the GOTY piece might be late, but with good reason, and some potential merit to that lateness. I'm considering to extend things a bit to go with awards beyond a top 5 list (or rather in addition, top 5 count is still present and will likely always stay, as will honorable mentions). However the other reason is that... well, to be honest, I haven't actually completed the game that is supposed to be #1. Sounds dumb to put it there you may be thinking, but its just such a big game that I haven't had the patience to endure it all in one consistent run-through, or even the multiple ones I've given it. Nothing to do with the quality of it. However while I'm okay with putting powerful yet incomplete games on the list (see Darksouls 2), I don't think its acceptable to publish the list without beating the supposed definitive GOTY choice. So until then, here's an article I really WILL complete real quick. As with last year, its a quick impressions run of everything I got on Christmas day.

If I were to be honest, I didn't actually get a lot in terms of direct game presents this year, but I'm also kind of okay with that. Sure I would have loved Fallout 4, GTAV, or Mario Maker, but at the end of the day I'm very happy with what I got and already have a lot to work on with what I already have. Before this day I was still in the early phases of Xenoblade X, recently got Black ops 3, and that is still after trying to balance time between the warrior games. Oh and I've got a run to do on Dishonored definitive version, and I still need to finish the mysterious GOTY game. So yeah, not really a fuss to make, but its just not as much to say on as last year. Which again, might be good so I can get the article out of the way.

Dragon's Quest Heroes

AKA, the most ridiculous full-name for a game ever. Seriously just look it up, I'm not even bothering with it here. However that aside, the game is fantastic. I've gotten into the warrior games in a big way around the late fall, but even before then felt somewhat strangely hyped to this game. Never even played Dragons Quest stuff before either. It just... looked so good. In reality, it is indeed very good. Its actually the smallest warriors game I've played in terms of scope, characters, and levels, yet it manages to do enough right to totally make that a worthy (or maybe even beneficial) sacrifice. The combat system is so well made with magic attacks specially crafted into it, each character feels unique enough and fun with their own skill set to work on, and replayability comes in the form of endless mode reworkings of previous maps which somehow manages to be way more awesome than it sounds. Ultimately I love this game. However the last boss battle I faced was cheap, and the XP system doesn't make a lot of sense to the effort I put in. Still a great game, and one I'll definitely be working on. The campaign is also way more focused and engaging, so it'll actually probably be the first warriors game I can see myself "completing" as weird as that may sound. On that note its also probably the core game I'll be working on out of this list.

Yoshi's Woolly World

Was one of the first games to go on my wish list, both because of fear that the amiibo bundle would fly off into a black hole, and because its a freakin' Yoshi game and those make for some of the best 2D platformers in my eyes. This one so far seems to match that just fine. Its charming, relaxed, fun, imaginative, and its just... so joyful. It charm isn't so much as trying to play it as much as it is to feel like your on a ride through the most whimsical level craftsmanship you'll see all year. Though I do hear world 9 gets stupidly hard compared to the rest, but I suppose that may be expected. We'll see. Definitely a good game, and the Amiibo looks great displayed below the TV alongside a couple pop figures and the plush fox I have sitting alongside it. Oh and speaking of which, I got a starfox amiibo I got to open early on Christmas eve, and its the only amiibo I have that doesn't translate to an unnatural looking yarn Yoshi in the game. He just sort of dons a tan-ish orange color and the uniform for the most part.

Transformers Devastation

Okay I'd be lying if I acted like I have a fresh take on this one. Beat it multiple times through a rental, but while I feel all messed up from sinus problems right now I really don't feel like its worth the trip again when my own head can't keep up with the fast paced action. I loaded it up just to make sure it installed and remembered my data, played a challenge, loved it but sucked at it, listened to some music from the model gallery, and turned it back off. Still looks good, feels good, and has a ridiculously good soundtrack, but aside from that just go see the article I made on it to hear me preach about my old thoughts. This game should still be just as fun as when I rented it.

King's Quest: Chapter 2

Okay so as you could probably guess, I'm kind of cheating here and I didn't find a digital download episodic game under the Christmas tree this year. However I did get a $20 PSN card, got an extra $5 chipped in, and bought the season pass while it was on the Christmas flash sale. Not something I'd regularly do, but the first episode was such a spectacular game, and the 2nd reviewed in... okay enough status that I decided I would take the risk on what could easily be the best adventure series ever to me. However I was warned this would be darker, and... well, sadly it is. I really loved the first for hitting the perfect heart-warming fairy tale tone. It left me overwhelmingly happy, but still knew how to throw a heavy sad punch along its tale. However I also get this shift. Its not just some fancy tale being told, its a life story of a king, and so this king doesn't live a full life of luxury all the time. What they did to weave a heavy and hard tale where he's forced to take on tough responsibilities was a neat little thing to do with such a story. Its just that... well, I made it a bit darker than I wanted it to be. I messed up bad, and I think I got one of my favorite characters axed off. However I will try to work on solving some more puzzling matters and make it out of the dark goblin caves. I will see this adventure through unless it does something to really piss me off. So far I can tolerate this tone shift, and maybe I'll have to take its lessons harder with somebody dying under these pressured times, but I really do hope they don't stay on this track. I really do hope that at some point things back up a little bit to that princess bride vibe, even if things are expected to get tough in life. Chapter 1 is likely to stay on top at this point, but we've got 3-4 more chapters left, and I'm still not calling the 2nd a bad game at all from what I've played so far.

...and that concludes this small list here. Looking forward, I can see a lot of good games on the horizon, but there's also some games worth going back for (like again, Fallout 4, GTAV, etc). I may also end up saving some money towards a new laptop, which I really need (and it would make this a lot easier as well). Anyways I hope everyone got got what they wanted, spent time with family, and had a merry Christmas!

Battlefront 3 is still in a galaxy far, far away...

Well now its out, and for whatever reason I kind of made it almost like my duty to discuss the game's falls and triumphs from the perspective of both a fan of the original two, and... well that just creates a great situation to poke at its many holes and show you just how far some aspects of gaming have fallen (but of course, others have risen). This isn't just about a sequel being made by a new team; this is Star Wars on the whole getting a near reboot in modern day after it has been about maybe a decade since the last games and movies were a big deal. In that time so many different things have changed around our games, and unfortunately... I believe Battlefront EA (its actually in the title) has taken on some of the worst. The true successor to the games we originally got, is still in a galaxy far, far away.

For starters its worth it to point to something surrounding the game rather than the game itself: The licensing deal. Back when Battlefront was started, it was done also by EA at the marketing, and Pandemic as the development team (same guys that did Mercenaries and Saboteur) with what I can only assume was some assistance under LucasArts gaming department. They were simply focused on Battlefront when it came to star wars games, nothing really different at first sight. However when someone else was called up to task, well Free Radical took it up and was working on Battlefront 3 before some problems arose. Fast-forward to current day where EA has an exclusive deal with Disney (who now owns Star Wars) and you've got a nice little analogy for the way things drastically changed across 7-8th gen, and its odd almost nobody else seems to talk about it: Owning companies and games. In the PS2 era and prior, most teams could walk around and find a publisher for their games. There were plenty of kind opportunities out there where developers would check your ideas out, and fund your game based on if they liked it or could make a couple changes. That was it. Now I'm sure we're all aware these developers aren't walking anywhere. Dice makes stuff under EA, Free Radical (or what's left) is owned by Deep Silver, Arkane under Bethesda (a pairing that actually fits great), and its hard to say just what exactly Ubisoft owns between their oversized studios umbrella that pumps out their games. That's not to say pre-8th gen was perfect in this regard, there are plenty of troubled stories with Naughty Dog and Insomniac's days with Universal, and Activision was bullying their teams since the original Call of Duty by telling them they had to keep it in WW2 or else no console devkits would be given. Still its gotten much worse since then, with the only free team outside of indies I can think of being Insomniac, and they only found a publishing deal that let them keep their own IP through Microsoft which obviously limited their console reach.

Just stop and think about it all for a second. Think about all these annual releases, reoccurring series, and developers that have been cut down or re-used outside of what they were known for. Its all in part due to the fact that they, and their very games, are owned not by the artists but by the same people whose main job is to set up deals like this and market the game. No wonder indies are such a big deal now. Well in addition to all of that, lets close this in circle formation by reminding you that EA pretty much owns Star Wars on the gaming field for the foreseeable future, because that's very true to the nature of current publishers right now.

While on topic of publishers, this feels appropriate

So now that's out of the way, lets talk about the game itself since that's also kind of important. The main point of concern is... well, actually lets talk about the originals first. They weren't all too amazing by its own mechanics in today's market as we've had multiple multiplayer titles now with big battlefield. The only real difference that makes it special in mechanics is that it had better stock mechanics with a real health system, and a reason to carry support people or visit munition depots. No casual hide and restore crap, or reflex based gunfights. Though there was no sprinting in the original, which sucks for that side of things. Aside from that it was nothing special save for the star wars theme. However that's just the thing: It was massive star wars fan service. Massive scale battles across 16+ levels battling over flags or territory in a wide array of vehicles, a strategy mode allowing you to build up and take over the universe with any of the major army factions while paying off favors and abilities, and of course the fact that you could play as a famous big name hero like Han Solo, Darth Vader, Yoda, etc. All the while you could do this offline or online, split-screen as well, and across both timelines and many planets (even ones that didn't make much sense, like a rebel vs empire war on Kamino clone facility). Then of course the sequel refined most of the process better expanded mode functions, customization, better award system, and the most popular addition of space battles where you could blow apart capital ships or board them and blast them from the inside. These were all within $50 PS2 games straight on the disc. Now how has the game improved after over a decade? 8 maps (not planets, maps), prequel content and wars totally omitted, online only with a couple arcadey co-op modes you could play on your own, and oh yeah classes and normal vehicular use is completely scrapped. So a massive step backwards in every way at surface-value. To be fair now, there's way more multiplayer modes, but they're already hurting with low player count which wouldn't be a problem if they had bots to fall back on (but they don't). If that doesn't grab you, then you'll just hate it when I also tell you they're asking you to pay extra for the deluxe edition and have been pushing for their season pass at a hefty $50 range with promise that they'll split the community more with map packs. Oh but relax, you're also paying for early two week access to DLC so you can be more lonely in them while everyone else has to wait on an intentional delay.

This is why I never intended to buy the game on launch. Even with both of my copies of Battlefront on the PS2 being unable to work, I simply don't see the value here. I'd be better off getting a brand new computer and purchasing Battlefront 2 off of steam/GOG, or Ebay shopping for the PS2 originals. They have way more content in the box, are cheaper, and are far more accessible, and I'd even say have a more consistent fun factor to the gameplay. The sad thing to is that I don't exactly hate the new battlefront. The beta was pretty fun despite plenty to complain about. I kind of side with the portion of players and critics out there that talk about how fun it is as a casual shooter. Its great to just hop on there, melt some people with laser blasters, call down wild power-ups, and see what the end results are. I'll even say that some of the changes are great. I've never had as much fun in an AT-AT as I did when I had a range of cool-down super powers including an orbital strike. Its also the most well realized star wars presentation ever... period. I don't even think the movies are this good as pulling you into the world, because this one actually lets you walk on areas that were photographically digitized into the games, and then unleashed in a big sci-fi battle with amazing sound design pulled right from the SW universe. The graphics, sound design, and "feeling" of being there is just absolutely perfect for a star wars game. ...and then we get back to just what this is doing so wrong as a modern game, with its 8 maps and online only ability shoved down your throat. I've really got to wonder in a time like this if it truly is a case of graphics and big budget fancy stuff taking priority over gameplay. If it wasn't that, something else is seriously wrong here. Was it held back for DLC? Were their maps too big to make more of? Is their AI programming really that terrible that they can't be bothered to code bots? Were they drunk when they paved the groundwork for a matchmaking only online point? No really, I want answers or some kind of excuse, because at every corner outside of presentation it feels like this was set up to be a sub-par backpedal from a game made back in freakin' 2004 and the sequel that followed in '05. Heck even some of the PSP games have done things like space battles and fun bots to fight against!

Its not just nitpicks or purist complaints either (heck if it were, Battlefront 2 would be thrown under a bus as well for messing some stuff up), its the fact that I literally cannot play 90% of this game during a lot of Comcast's awful low speed connection where as everything I came to love the series for before came from an offline experience I played on my own time. This is lazy design that assumes everyone just wants to play online, and is totally fine with all of your short comings, and fixed modes. As a matter of fact offline play is such a big deal to me, my entire perspective of Rainbow 6 siege has changed from "ignore it" to "Definitely curious, renting it" based on the mixed reception of solo play, and hints of AI bot design. So I'm literally trying and potentially buying an online focused game because I hear it may have a solid offline mode with AI, and nothing else has contributed to me changing my previous thoughts before. But this is the era where Destiny, and Assassins Creed Unity are big sellers, and reviewers don't actually analyze the games they review before passing a 7+/10 score to. Its nothing new that something like Battlefront is made and money begging before its even released, and somehow gets away with poor quality. I predicted it all ahead of time, and that's why I'm not supportive of EA owning all the Star Wars gaming space, and why I was never truly excited about a new Battlefront made by Dice. It just wasn't going to come even close to doing what I like in the series, and competitive wise it doesn't sound like a good buy in itself either. I think in the long run, this really is about graphics taking a bigger priority, but not just in a simple way of one over the other. This is 2015 where such high end graphics cost a massive budget, and then they're rushing it to the market to cash in their game multiple times before they have to risk another big budget dip. The PS2 game did the best they could do before they shipped it with a moderate team on a plain budget, in a time where you actually had to make a good game (or do something spectacular for marketing) that people talked about to get it to sell. Now there's just too many other factors, chokes, and expenses racking up for quality content to take the biggest priority. They can just patch or sell it to you later, and sweep anything else under the rug. Or they'll "make up for it" with an online only sequel that adds maybe space battles to quite people down, and heavily ride on that criticism being fixed.

But at least it looks nice

However I don't want to be all doom and gloom here, because there's actually some hilarious twist here where I'll tell you of a terrific new FPS that releases with more content than even the original Battlefronts had. I mean I'm not the biggest fan of this series at all, and would usually bash on it for several reasons. However if you want what Battlefront offers on the up side (a fun little casual romp around sci-fi battlefields), and would be okay with offering up graphics for content, then I have just the remedy to tell you about: Call of Duty Black Ops 3. Yes, COD. If there is one thing COD gets undeniably right every damn time its lets something out into the world, its just how crazy accessible, and content stuffed it is. Okay so its not always perfect, Black ops 3 has some stupid stuff locked behind online mode like the emblem maker, but in general they even managed to outdo themselves on quality content. They have the normal horde mode, multiplayer, and campaign parts, but they also have a brand new hidden campaign which completely changes things, a return of arcade game dead ops (which I absolutely love), a bot mode full of custom options, full blown local co-op support in everything, a theater mode, and heck you can even spend hours just fooling with the painter. Oh, and there's also a $50 seasons pass promising you more content, so suck it EA, they've got that to and don't need a famous movie license to sell it.

Okay so I'm not trying to intentionally market to you about COD's game, I'm sure you get that enough from Mountain Dew bottles by this point, but what I'm saying is there still is an example of... well, doing the opposite of Battlefront EA. It is still possible to find quality AND quantity in gaming. There still are people out there making sure you not only have a lot of content in addition to passable graphics, but also go out of the way to surprise you with it and give you more than what you thought you paid for. This is why nobody except maybe GTAV has beaten COD. Despite all the copy-cats, gimmicks, and dumbing down that has been done to match COD, they always skimp on the content or formula in some way that prevents it from going big. However this is one of the big secrets to COD, its that content and accessibility. Its the empowerment they give to each and every player in reward for their $60 purchase. Meanwhile you may have to fight with servers just to even get into the game in Battlefront. Its not easy saying COD wins. I should be thrilled about an FPS that doesn't use ADS, has some of the best laser rifle aesthetics in the history of gaming, and re-introduces intentionally overpowered elements that make you panic or powerful. It should make me cheer for an anti-COD mentality and say "This was when shooters were better"! Instead its a reminder of how far south some parts of the industry go.

Some games are focused on fine tuning, improving, and content creating, and others have just let it all go down the drain as they shove you into a multiplayer cycle and expect you to pay $60-$100 and beyond for less. It actually works to, and sales so far are positive. On one side of things I do hope people still have fun, as that's what matters most at the end of the day. At the same time though, I can't help but look on in disbelief that this was actually sold as Battlefront. This just isn't the real sequel. It doesn't use the same core mechanics, doesn't have the same features, doesn't have the right kind of balance, and they didn't even put in an effort to make it feel like a successor as there's barely anything it does better outside of technical perspective. Heck, it even shows in the marketing art. We're talking about this and this being epic war scenes turning into this emptiness, or this guy's helmet with a reflection of slight action. Its a good sign of what you're in for, because one let you experience consistent and interesting battles from the star wars universe in many ways, and the other bottle necks you into another online shooter with a pretty picture. Its a shame it had to be this way. Its another case where content was removed and dumbed down, in a series that could have truly meant something by returning to the big console scene after a decade. Oh well. Hopefully this wraps up my Battlefield coverage. I'm sorry if I've spent too much time nagging about it, or talking about how sad it is, but it really is a great study piece in the dark side of modern gaming and how something can go from one of the best games of my youth, to the ideal game to make a stand against. Well... no, I'm not really sorry. I mean look at what we're talking about here! Would it have really killed them to add some damn bots or get more creative than 4 planets at launch?



At least we still have this in our history

Path of the warrior

I can't remember the last time I had such a sudden burst of enthusiasm, interest, and a will to hunt down a series like this. Maybe its in part because I've got some small system of income to my own now, but its also got a lot to do with just the games showing up again and again in the right time and places. No more beating around the bush though, this whole article is about how freakin' awesome the Warriors franchise is. Actually is it even fair to call it a franchise? It kind of goes beyond that. Its like if Shadows of Mordor, batman, and mad max were all attached to the same team and relative formula as Asssassins Creed, and each new release earned the association of it being a "Creed game". That's kind of what the warrior franchise is. There's various spin-offs involving other franchises like one-piece and Zelda, Samuri warriors, Dynasty Warriors, and then a cross over for the publisher themselves by the way of Warriors Orochi. On top of that each series or game seems to have its own Capcom-esque hyper ultra semi-sequel revised edition going on for it. Crazy stuff. Needless to say its intimidating to find a good place to step in and hope for a quality experience and without being cheated of content. However I ended up indulging on it through three games, just to make sure I hit my mark: Warriors Orochi 3 Ultimate, Dynasty Warriors 8 Empires, and Samuri Warriors 4 (not to be confused with 4-2). So far I'm holding Orochi on the backburner as SW4 and DW8E suck up my time and make me wonder how 9am became so dark all of a sudden with the clock saying 6. These games are way better than you'd think they have any right to be.

Basically they all work off the base idea that you go around some unusual jagged map with spots of territory, dealing mostly melee + magic based attacks, mowing down literally a thousand or more brain-dead army minions while cutting down the occasional high ranked official. The basic shared combat trait is that you mash in the square buttons for light hits, triangle for strong, and you make chains with them that eventually transition into energy that helps you pull off specials. That's it as far as shared traits go, and it usually stays relatively that simple for the most part, but each series has its own liberties and interesting tweaks. For example SW4 has two characters you can switch between and command around, as well as a Hyper attack system that begins with strong attacks and has a unique sweeping motion. There's also an inventory system and each character gets better over time by traditional RPG methods of experience points. DW8E allows two weapons (which come from a long list, whereas SW4 just gives each character their own thing), has more double the special types per character, and also some weird elemental system I don't quite grasp yet. Ultimately though its not just about the combat. What hooked me initially as I played a demo for it long ago was the novelty of commanding an army on a massive field, and claiming territories. That natural conquest tug-of-war is a feeling I always love in war themed games, and this just felt like nothing but that at first. Of course the combat seemed really lame at first, and the AI way too stupid to make this fun, but over time (especially thanks to Hyrule warrior's kiosk demo) I came to really appreciate the combat and seek out the depth under its shallow surface. Combined with the strategy, meta game of leveling up, and the personalization of a few features and this game series has me fully hooked.

In a couple of cases I found myself feeling kind of like a kid again with these games, and I wasn't fully sure what it was at first. I'm a nostalgic person, but use that term somewhat differently as a way of celebrating good things of the past rather than being clouded by it or intentionally trying to force a kid-like view out of it. So this feeling is actually quite rare. At first I found myself just thinking "I bet I would love this way more if I were 8" because of how awesome the novelty was, and some replay features. I then changed that to actually feeling as if I were 8, upon seeing the ridiculous piles of customization on Empires. That was it! I had found a surprisingly good gem of a series with a brand new list of things to learn, some solid strategy elements to it, and so much customization (especially empires) that if I wanted to I could get sucked into this game for days just playing out my own stories. All of that exactly like how I saw the worms 3D trilogy back in my childhood days; those games were fun strategy games with some edge to beating them, and a lot of creative ways to goof off after that work. There wasn't a lot of legit powerful strategy to them, and mechanically you could probably get whatever you wanted out of it in two weeks. Meanwhile due to my creative mind they would eat up over a month of my time, making armies, stories, and special rule sets catered to my role-playing mind. This game is like a modern day form of that, coming in with heavier surface mechanics of distributing live attacks in various and evolving combos, while being able to adjust and adapt to an evolving battlefield. It feels more relevant to me now than it might have in the past (besides, no way little me would grasp Empire mode), and delivers things under a style I kind of appreciate more at the moment than I would have before... but the draw is a whole line of creativity and an entirely unfamiliar formula to learn that throws me right back into an old mentality I've missed.

So now I'm just really hooked on this. I don't know how long it'll last, but so far I've got a lot to still do, and I'm still playing it with barely any incentive to leave the TV never-the-less give up on any game. This thing made me put down and forget about just getting Dishonored Definitive Edition as well, and I've honestly got no intentions on returning until I'm satisfied with this new little discovery... and that includes the still wrapped Orochi game. I still also kind of want to say something on battlefront, or maybe the recent dead or alive situation, but I just don't want to because I'd rather be playing these awesome games. ...and so with that being said, its time to get back to it. Time to continue the path of the warriors.

Now Playing (special): Thanksgiving with Singularity

Thanksgiving day is something that probably is owed a bit more than it gets. Its basically a holiday all about being grateful and loving your family that is beaten between two holidays, out-merchandised, has their celebrations overlapping its own despite that one's past and one is a month+ ahead, and then on top of all that its being squeezed out by stupid black Friday schedules that aren't even on Friday anymore. Thankfully (no pun intended) its one of the easiest holidays to do a blog special on, and I've got the perfect thing in mind from the "thankful" part, its not exactly family related. Lets talk about Singularity.

Yes, that one.

So what's a game about time warping, zombie shooting, evil Russians, and a magical hand zapper that turns people into skeletal dust got to do with Turkey day? Well basically, its got about 70% of everything I love in a shooter, mostly on the campy B movie side of things. Actually that just might be the best way to describe it, because it really does pan out a lot like a nice looking B movie with about as equal reception as one. Its got almost zero attention in general, but sometimes a corner on the internet whispers out "That game was amazing!" before a few other people ask that guy "was that supposed to be Raven's Bioshock game or something?". I never really understood that comparison for the record, but oh well lets move on. The game puts you in the role of an American soldier sent to investigate an old secret abandoned Russian island where dark experiments took place. Weird readings are going on in the area, and its up to you and a small team to figure it out. Suddenly you find yourself warping into ghostly realities before a full time rift sucks you into the island's past. From there you rescue a man who was about to burn up in a flaming building. Really that wasn't ever supposed to happen, and that little incident ruins the entire operation and gets the island to its present ghostly condition, but your change alters so very much... for you rescued the leader. You find yourself thrown back into present (or, er... 2010) and things are... wrong. Subtle changes at first, but then you find yourself overwhelmed by monsters, only to then be pulled aside by the Russian army and get told one horrifying truth: Russia won the cold war because of this man you saved, and from then on he took the thrown as world dictator.

So by the 3 hour mark the game has basically turned into a B movie plot full of time travel, evil Russians, and evil zombie mutant monsters caused by those Russians and their evil sci-fi energy experiments, and you're the American hero who's got to stop it all with the help of a female british agent, and a convenient good guy Russian scientist. Again, B movie describes this all so very well. However its not a movie, so what's the gameplay like. Well its basically like a weird combination between Half-life 2's format, and... well something else. Its got the health packs, monsters, pick-ups to explore for, and evil science plots, but then there's the bioshock/farcry-like med pack holders, a two weapon limit, weapon lockers with upgrades, and then the TDM device which contextually alters the environment. So... its pretty solid. More shockingly, its a really solid FPS for its time period. Not necessarily a perfect "throw-back" title, but it really holds up well on a few older traits I love in shooters from the early 2000's. The narrative and world exploration is especially nailed down for that kind of game. Its just great that its also so littered full of lore pick-ups, and yet so many horrific scenery that its not horrific at all but rather just "oh, hey another room full of impaled soliders hanging on the walls." Its just good campy crazy sci-fi FPS fun.

Lets do the time warp again!

Are there flaws? Well yeah. The worst is nearly one of the very basics: two weapon limit. the game has some unusual weapons mixed in with decent military style weapons, and then you can upgrade them all, but ultimately you're told "two weapons only, pal!". This feels very limiting in a game like this, and just doesn't fit very well. However what's even worse is the layout of the game itself, in that there's no way to properly replay the game. You start a new game, and from then on you're following that path as linear as can be until the ending checkpoint. From then on, all of that work cannot be re-visited, and you've just got to start a new game. On top of all that, you can't change the difficulty without starting the game on the one you want (and now I'm playing a regretted choice of Easy, and I'm nearly invincible so far). If I were to also nitpick, the bulk of this game's monsters are visually dull as they're basically just zombies with warts and glowy bits instead of decay. The variety is still nice with phasing enemies, ones that throw items, and just generic ones that charge but can have their limbs shot off.  Plus if you were trying to find an amazing critically acclaimed story, you're in the wrong game. Its a bit silly, and the plot is very obviously tailored to convenient writing + player interaction, with things like a conveniently working little model with perfect audio recording (and oddly in English) telling you what each part of the island does. Its a silly set-up in the end, and if you want to enjoy it, you've got to be like me and embrace this sort of crazy sci-fi energy monster stuff with face-melting time blasters going on your wrist that came out of an alternative time line from the 50's.

Giving thanks...

So I still didn't exactly justify how this possibly ties in with Thanksgiving day. Its a weird game to pick at first glance not only because of its just not a seasonal game, but also because its just not a very well regarded game. Its got some harsh flaws to that keep it away from being replayed and getting the attention, BulletStorm, Mtro, Killzone, or Resistance might be getting. So why this game? Well in kind of a way, that's the whole point. Thanksgiving is all about overcoming the faults of something to see something amazing, and to be thankful that it has enhanced your life in some way... as well as just appreciating the simple things, like having the ability to eat food and live.

Singularity is a game that doesn't get a lot of attention. Some who know it, know its cool, but its as if so few do, and even those that do know of it feel like their time is spent discussing better things. Singularity also flopped on the market, not selling many copies, and helping to cement Raven Software's company behind assisting COD. Oh and speaking of it, lets not forget Activision published this... yup, my personal least favorite publisher put out this amazing game full of FPS tropes I adore. The best part though, is that this isn't the end of their story. Recently announced, Raven is allowed to make a sequel. How often does that kind of 180 turn around happen from a stingy and mean publisher? Ultimately I'm grateful for this game. I'm able to overcome my hate for this publisher to say they made a great game outside their normal triad of big hits, I'm grateful its managed to get a sequel that'll happen sometime, I'm thankful for all of its campy FPS tropes and how well its handled all of it, and I'm grateful for the good gameplay of it all. Playing this game just makes me feel great about a genre that honestly isn't quite what it used to be, but still makes me think of that time, and how good it is. All the fun monsters to shoot at, the fun and conveniently placed notes to snoop through, the crazy science contraptions, the silly supervillains, and of course gaming as a whole for just being there and being this great. So thank you Activision, Raven, Sony (played on the PS3) for allowing such a fun game exist... even if it may be an obscured one.

Thank you spooky virtual world

Have a happy Thanksgiving everyone.

Microtransactions done... right?

I'm late to this party with the example I want to speak on, but its fairly relevant in my own findings so... Trials Fusion has microtransactions. It looks eerily close to what I see in some F2P games as well, with colorful and silly cosmetics chiming in on top of gimmicky golden acorn currency, which you buy from the store. Yeah, I know the typical response to this kind of thing...

However I actually can't say I mind... much. I mean don't get me wrong, there's still something unnerving about seeing a great game suddenly showing up with one of the most despicable and growing practices of the current gaming scene. Plus on top of that, its kind of weird to see gimmicky currency (the normal grind currency was normal $ to) allotted to costumes rather than the costumes themselves being sold at $1-4 a piece on the store. Kind of overcomplicated guys. That aside though, I can't find much of a problem, and even the currency gimmick could be considered a good thing when you see that it counts for tourney wins which means you can technically grab the best costume you see without paying a dime.

Look, Trials came out spring of last year (2014), has been under big support since with updates adding more content to the game like female riders and enhanced online features, and on top of that there's been a steady string of normal DLC as well. In the end you basically have a really well supported and enjoyable small downloadable title (with physical release supported as well, thanks Ubi), and the team has proven time and time again that they're all about having fun with creative and interesting designs and a sense of humor to their game. If a year or so later they decided to add in a bulk of costumes, and charge you for them with mobile game type currency, then that's just as normal as any other DLC for all that I care. They didn't owe me these costumes, they didn't build a game around it, and they didn't really take away anything there. Heck if anything I'd rather complain that they replaced the menu with the Awesome edition stuff, when I haven't even bought that expansion, and prefer the old sci-fi tone that fits with the actual game I own more so than the Awesome edition that looks like internet meme vomit.

Still riding off into the sunset just fine

Now that being said, I do worry that there's potential for this to go wrong in the future. I worry that this will be done ahead of the next game, and for both reasons of lacking interest and principle I still wont support its implementation here just to be on the safe side. Lets hope that doesn't happen though, and hope that we can continue to look at Trials Fusion as a good example of microtransactions.

Reminder: 7th Gen had HD, and was pretty great

Yup, not a lot more you can do here

There's a few arguments going around that consistently annoy me whenever it comes to talking consoles, technical ability, and similar things. One of them I'm late to discussing, but not at all deterred to stay silent on. Black Ops 3 brought it out quite a bit. Its probably the last COD game we'll see on PS3 and 360, stripped down lots of things to the point of removing its entire campaign, doing 30fps for what may be a first for COD, and has graphics that disappoint. In an article they discussed why the campaign just couldn't be done, and that Activision made the right move to cut out a whole mode than to simplify it down. It wasn't within their allowed memory to allow Co-op to function where you could see other player's weapons, and attachments... because suddenly being able to see a tiny muzzle on your friend's gun in an entirely optional style of play is more important than the entire single player drive of the campaign. Um... also, its not like 7th generation COD games have ever used player models with customized guns before. I mean what, you think they actually had a multiplayer mode full of customized weapons and player character models? No way man, the PS3 is too busy trying to process Nathan Drake's blocky robotically animated PS1 face for that kind of stuff, and it might fry if it dares to try and run Battlefield's tiny 4 player arena matches. Okay enough of the sarcasm, lets tackle this for real...

I'm tired of ungrateful gamers trashing the systems that gave us years worth of entertainment, and contained the foundation to many advances (although some bad, like misused DLC) we enjoy today. Then there are some people who just get upset over the very existence of them or new games for them, as if it somehow hurts them that the market gets a choice to have a 7th or 8th gen version of the same game. I know its the human mind to rate off of comparisons, but at some point its got to stop and you got to call out the BS and stop whining over something that was really fine in all of our lives. I'll fairly admit the systems are outdated (though technically, so are our current consoles if you're really looking for the best of the best), we stretched them out across a long cycle, and that we are moving forward in a great way with the newer systems. I also understand the idea that our older systems don't need the support anymore, and anybody buying a game like Black Ops 3 for the PS3/xbox 360 doesn't exactly have the best priorities in mind. However my frustration comes in from the people that insist that those old gen buyers "deserve" shoddy ports for some reason. It comes in mind when they pretend the systems were complete garbage, or are so outdated that they couldn't accomplish anything of value to us anymore. It stems from the imagination bankrupt developers who insisted they couldn't do anything inventive without new hardware, despite bottlenecking themselves harder than they've ever been in terms of variety. It comes from the gullible people who actually believe the developers in articles like the above. My frustration on this topic is inspired by those who forgot this came out just a year before our new hardware and how they sung to the high heavens that it was the best thing since sliced bread. That happened on the PS3, just as Killzone 2 and 3, Uncharted, the mass effect trilogy, Assassins Creed, the Metro and Crysis franchises that high end PC users benchmark their stuff with, LittleBigPlanet 1-3, and a little thing called Metal Gear Solid Phantom Pain. Oh but sure the tech is old and we can do better now, so kill it with fire and everyone who sticks with it, right? It just comes off as silly.



The funny thing to, is that you really don't hear this elsewhere right? Why isn't anybody on PlayStation 2's case anymore, bitching and moaning that its got so little CPU power that character models could only exist in like 8 varieties in the same area? Well because not only would they look a bit silly, but because they'd be torn apart by the fact that people got over that phase and have moved on to actually appreciating it for what it is: an era of games. Its the same reason why you can market the heck out of retro style visuals, and why something like Shovel Knight is amazing to people. Likewise why is it that the Last Guardian carries so much hype? Its because of games that were accomplished before. Its because of the fun, the memories, the values that were brought in by that area. Its due to nostalgia formed out of love and fun of a different era. Meanwhile at the transitional state, and among the first few years of a newer cycle, its somehow normal to see hatred over it instead. You see people shooting down others who haven't upgraded yet, hypocrisy as they mock those who point out poor quality in ports while doing so for PC gets the red flag and forum rage (rightfully so, but it should work the same both ways. PS3 users shouldn't have to pay $50 for Black ops 3 like it is), and somehow their words are taken at face value when developers dismiss these systems by insisting that we're finally able to do something like Co-op shooters for the first time (unless your Halo 5, in which case for the first time its goodbye to that feature). This is the same AAA industry that has used advances in systems to somehow screw up Tetris on the PS4, and tried to sell us on fish AI that isn't even up to standards with Mario 64 (enjoy this little video), and the idea that they'd to be trusted when talking about tech powers at this point is just insane.

Accomplished thanks to PS2, and HD-ified thanks to PS3 (A.K.A outdated consoles)

Then there's the header image and the subject it inspires, where we're not even at a point of taking major leaps. All that "we're being held back" crap coming out of PC elitists theoretical dream charts ended up at nothing, as our near decade of waiting paid off with mostly some resolution bumps and lighting adjustments. Sadly the team talking about how the future was in Atom tech instead of polygonal, has also not been heard from in a while. That's not because we didn't go with the impractically expensive $2000 bleeding edge stuff, its because that everywhere you look there isn't a ton of improvement beyond talk that maybe some day 4K will be standard (do you guys even have a TV for that?). Technology simply isn't advancing as fast anymore, period. Consoles didn't magically cause that, or else we'd never have the jumps to begin with, its just that tech is really strong and at a big peak now. So the difference in generational improvements is more slim than ever (we're well beyond seeing CPU improvements that reduce clones like the old PS2 days), and there really just isn't that much to improve anyways. All this bringing me to restate that this hatred over 7th gen just looks so silly. We're not even improving over 7th gen in all respects, there are still developers out there using their "vision" as an excuse to carve back a piece of gameplay that was just recently there. Again, Halo 5 isn't getting its traditional split-screen gameplay, and Tetris was hurried out in a mess, meanwhile the indie scene still needs to pick up where companies like Konami have failed to deliver on good games, and developers all over the place are still using old engines that are barely even working anymore after the recent advances and are in need of a total overhaul (see AC and Fallout 4 for the best examples). You also probably thought PC ports would improve now that consoles have easier hardware, but nope, check Black Ops 3's team that was greenlit to cheat 7th gen players, they didn't do PC users much better. Meanwhile Arkham knight was so broken they had to pull it, and Unity still doesn't work right for some users LOOOOOONG after several GBs worth of patching. Feeling better about hating the PS3 and 360 yet?

On the other hand Shovel Knight is being held high as one of the best games to come out in recent years, in its pseudo-8-bit style visuals. I think people are missing a massive point here, and that's part of why its frustrating to hear these developers talk and rip-off people like this, or hear gamers cannibalize each other over the matter of console leaps. The entire argument forgets the fun that's actually in these games. You know, the games that are made to put in the boxes we're fighting about? The games that make those $300+ investments worth something? Yeah, those are what counts. They happen with or without advanced tech, and if they can run on old tech, I don't see any reason why that one should be treated like dirt for any particular reason. Likewise, I don't see why those gamers are treated poorly. Well I'm not waiting for the period where PS3 becomes Nostalgic to appreciate what it did for us. I don't need to wait on that period to go back and enjoy it, to call some of its great games classics, or to even continue to buy games for it (I still have a few I'd like to catch up on). Sure most of those games run at 30FPS, 720P, and had worse textures, shadows, lighting, and character models, but that didn't stop me or you from playing it years ago. Neither did sub-HD pixel graphics stop millions from loving Super Mario Bros. You can and should embrace the improvements of course, but you can do so without spitting on the foundation that got you there. Actually that's exactly what a game like Shovel Knight does, using new features like trophies and new technology to technically skirt around NES limitations, while still simulating the NES style of games in a respectful manner... and people just love it. So why taking that into consideration before getting upset over the next 7th gen port? There's just no reason to get mad over that stuff. The last PS2 game actually happened last year, and you know it actually didn't cause the end of gaming as we know it.

The best 8th gen NES game to come out

Watching Overwatch, and its pricing

Overwatch has gathered a quick and swift controversy over its announced model. Everyone left and right assumed this would be a Free to play MOBA/FPS hybrid to compete in both departments, rivaling DOTA2 and TF2 at once. Then pre-order info leaked on a console version, and suddenly questions stirred, and then the announcement: $40 per bare entry, $60 for a deluxe or console starter entry. Quite short of free isn't it? Blizzard has recently issued out a statement on their decision, saying they're rather not compromise the gameplay quality by doing something like selling you the character, when switching characters is a big part of the game experience. Well, here are my thoughts...

Water without a container...

So first off, I want to debunk their logic because... its just in my nature. Sorry. No hard feelings against their logic on the whole, but it just doesn't completely float, and it bugs me to leave something like that unaddressed. This is also a good area to discuss other issues around the subject. Blizzard is competing against things such as Dota2, TF2, and that one game Gearbox is making (battleborn?) at the front. There's obviously more than that in the field, but when 2 out of 3 of the most biggest compared games run exactly under a F2P business model that doesn't compromise or charge for gameplay aspects, its a mockery to sit there and pretend like Blizzard would have to charge you for characters by doing F2P. Furthermore, they've got pre-planned cosmetic DLC for characters, which is exactly the kind of thing that Dota 2 (which also has WAAAAAAY more characters, all free) and TF2 run off of. At this angle, Blizzard are having their cake and eating it.



What are they up to?

That being said, I think this is more of Blizzard's problem than ours. Of course, it becomes our via community, but we know the risks when we put down money for an online game. That's exactly why most don't, and what I'm prodding at. Blizzard may just lose out on some consumers. I doubt it'll hurt a big amount, I mean they still pull off WOW subs and have a massive name, as well as having extra back-up in the form of Activision who somehow tricked the world into helping Destiny print money. In the end I think these guys can still sell us on a big pay to enter MOBA/FPS. I just still think they may need to work a little harder to convince people to enter at first. They have some really good competition that's free, and then will be head-butting up against Battleborn for buyers as well.


What I am worried about though is the obvious follow-up rumors that come with this report. Some people are naturally skeptical on DLC, and when Blizzard keeps dangling on that 21 character count, you have to wonder if there's a special reason. Like, oh say, DLC characters at $3-$10 a person. That'll not only invalidate their entire logic here, but it'll be because its also balance up-setting. To have a team which suddenly has more players with DLC character #3, is an obvious disadvantage for the other team. Even if that character were to be entirely balanced, they'll have new abilities, new options, and new tactics that have to be at least somewhat unique to that character. You've just created a haves and have-not uncomfortable situation among your community, have opened room for imbalances, and have gone in the F2P direction (League/Strife style) with an upfront fee like a full retail game. For the potential for this to happen on its own, I say stay back from this game for a bit and see what happens beyond the first two months. Especially if you're looking at it on consoles.

Don't spill the salt yet

Don't draw that yet!

I do not want to be confused with the many running around whining and making up their own issues already. I've strictly said that the character concern is a rumor, and I'm also addressing the competition because of Blizzard's response. I am not sitting here and telling you this game is all wrong, or that Blizzard is the evil overlord of money draining. Most of the deal here is still well within range of fair capitalism: You want this well crafted, loved, and enjoyable unique game? You pay for it. That's a very simple and normal proposal, and even if it may not be the best competitive option at first glance, it just might still pay off more for the company or even us as the players if Blizzard takes this move.

The only issues I have so far is the fact that 1) DLC has already been pre-planned and bundled. Its a mundane thing at this point, but I'm still of the old fashion idea that you do NOT cut content from the game to sell it off. They're doing this already half a year away from launch. 2) Consoles are forced to buy that deluxe edition. Kind of contradicts the last point to whine that they included the DLC in the base game, but it really is a bit unfair to force it on one market, while also giving the other market the better deluxe edition (tie-ins to their other games) for the exact same price. However if they can stay away from the rumored character DLC (or worse, map packs), this game is probably good enough in my book. Even cosmetic DLC is fine if its actually made and charged after the game. I'd be fine paying for some premium character decoration if they've spent extra time working on it, its just I'm bitter about paying for the ones they could have easily slipped in the main game for no extra charge.

At the end of the day though I see a lot of frustration running off of this game that I don't quite understand. I can see the fine point that some don't want to pay for an online only game, and can relate a bit myself. Still for those who would want that experience, its not an inhumane task to go against your predictions and ask for some money for their product. They didn't owe you this for free, and they didn't have to go on a cosmetic DLC model just to follow Valve's tail. This isn't exactly another The Order 1886 situation either where their so off that they're just wrecking the game by ignoring competitive pricing. There really does look to be a lot of worthwhile content for the price you pay, and the game wants to be unique enough that maybe you really can't find a competitor good enough. Maybe you should take a risk on its asking price instead of settling for your free Dota 2 game, which is still your same basic MOBA from an overhead view, with mundane characters, and that same old map again and again. Overwatch looks amazing to me personally, and I really hope they do make it worth the asking price. I think they can pull it off.

Keep an eye on this one

Ziggurat (Mini-review)

Under various circumstances, I am not able to do a proper review of the kind you may be used to seeing from me. However I can and will do a mini-review for this Halloween related to a recent title with a slightly spooky (but not really scary) atmosphere. This mini-review will be simple, lack a review card, present few and borrowed images, and wont likely contain as many words as normal. Perhaps some day this will be revisited for a proper full review once I have the time and capability. Without further intro, this is a mini-review for the PS4 port of the rogue-like FPS game, Ziggurat.

At first, Ziggurat looks like a strange fantasy RPG taking place from the first person perspective. Its dripping all with the atmosphere of a dungeon crawler, the type you'd expect to normally be seen from a top-down view. You've got dark stony architecture, tons of monsters of various sizes and elements, and the walls are all alight with mysterious and magical things. Magical spirit orbs dance along walls, crystals grow out of walls, and the next door you open may host either a dungeon room filled with spinning blade traps, or it might be an abandoned library with a scroll to read you of your dire situation in this cursed series of arenas. Then with a zap of your wand, you'll notice its firing off to the beat and sound of a machine gun and realize you're in a horde-stomping FPS where waves of enemies come at you to see who can have their face blasted off first by purple wizard bullets. Make no mistake, all the conventional old-school FPS logic is there to greet you. You can carry up to four weapons, each hold an ammo type, run at fast speeds in circle-strafe fashion, you've got a health bar to hold onto, enemies bleed pick-ups, and I was not exaggerating when I mentioned that you'll most likely be firing your fantasy weapons like a machine gun. You'll also find things that could be equated to shotguns, rockets, flame-throwers, and grenades.

Of course if the game was just that, it'd be just a straight off Heretic successor (which wouldn't exactly be a bad thing either) or another case of Serious Sam accidentally falling outside of his time period. This is still far more unique and much of its own thing, because there is the Rogue-like and RPG pieces that fit into place as well. The dungeon arenas you encounter are all randomly aligned and contain a different kind of experience. You may start each ordinary game with 5 floors in mind for your end-goal, but every room on all of those 5 floors is never the exact same as it was the last time you played. The enemies in them will be different, there might be a modifier in place to enhance or tilt the combat balance, you might take a gamble with asking the gods for help, or there might simply be a new treasure you have to reach with the unpredictable tension of whether or not its what you need. Meanwhile along the way you've got random weapons placed before you, selected from a large arsenal of equipment that falls into three categories: Spells (blue mana), Staffs (green mana), and Alchemical (orange mana). Then you've got your trusty wand, which varies by the character you've chosen at the start (alongside some perks and base statistics). The goal is to get from room to room, and uncover the map until you at least find two key points: The key room, and the portal room. The key opens the portal to the next floor/level, however a boss guards each portal and commands their own flock of minions and powers to try and stop you. Defeat, means death, and you're out of the picture for the whole run if the minion of the Ziggurat are able to stop you. However its always recommended not to rush things and run to the top, as you've also got some RPG influence running in the background to help you out. Every enemy or room accomplishment leads to an increase in experience, and every level up lends its to more endurance in health and mana, as well as a choice between two random perks. The perks might be merely small incremental stat boosts that you can slowly build on with time, or they could be grand gifts that save your life in the short or long term. Its all about what your luck in the Ziggurat can do for you, and how well you adapt it to your FPS skills in combat.

Normally I'm a skeptic on Rogue-likes being fun. They just seem like their built in a mean-spirited and shallow way of killing you and having you repeat everything again. They try to entice you with "a new adventure every time", but once you know the core mechanics and see how mean the game is, its worn off that refreshing sense of adventure and becomes just a matter of how long you can find value in repeating the same beginning. Thankfully I stand by my purchase of Ziggurat with the confidence that I entrusted the right Rogue-like to open my views up for the genre. Its hard to recommend to other skeptics since it still depends on how much you can get invested into the basic mechanics, and if you think they're good enough to play from the ground-up more than 10 or so times. Still everything just felt well accomplished with this one. The RPG aspect balances your character to be on par with the chosen difficulty, and to reward you for exploring. No dead-end is truly a dead-end, as you'll always get XP for monster rooms or even lore scrolls you may have already read. Every level up feels exciting, as I press the upgrade button and keep my fingers crossed for just what I need, or some surprise that'll suddenly have me building my character up in one core aspect. One lucky game I had a Cleric who was cursed to lose his health bonus, but then at the very last floor, I started getting constant offers to boost my maximu health dramtically, and then a bonus that even let me go invincible upon taking a hit. Combined with my pre-destined luck of health drops, I suddenly became unstoppable by choosing the right series of perks.

 Meanwhile the core combat is just great. If I were to nitpick, the jumping doesn't feel natural at first, but by my 4th playthrough I almost forgot I ever had that complaint. Everything else from the shooting, to the enemy diversity and weapons, feels as great and should be right at home to FPS fans. It also helps in this game's favor that there isn't a lot of competition for a shooter with such mechanics, so seeing someone take the old-school pick-ups, exploration, and circle-strafing gunplay elements and put them in a tense Rogue-like situation is very interesting. However a big theme in Rogue-likes and keeping them alive is the "meta-game", which basically means what you can unlock that can be used in future playthroughs. Well every time you win a game, or die, you get a handful of armory items. These are things that may or may not randomly appear as items or perks to assist you. Basically your chance of discovery and options at luck are opening after even 30 play-throughs. However for the actual challenges and milestones there is the character unlocks, and then unlocking higher levels for those characters by beating medium on each. There are 17 total, with nearly each one redefining some pillar of the basics or coming in with a much different type of luck than another character. As an example, one of my favorites is Leto the Cleric who specializes in health drops, has sturdy base stats, and yet lacks wand power and has to deal with more frequent "champion" (stronger) enemies. So he's fairly ordinary aside from some good perks to start on that may or may not meet your playstyle. By contrast, there's a vampire class by the form of Corvus, who is given the unique gift of consuming XP pick-ups as health, but loses health every second, completely reshaping the way you need to play the game if you choose him as your character. Unlocking and trying out each of these characters is a real treat, and whereas some aren't of my preference, I admire each one for their strong traits and diversity, and felt each one was worth unlocking. Their diversity will add a lot to the game if you're engaged by the core mechanics that ground it. The only problem I have with it is that sometimes their description or role traits are left a bit lacking. Perk cards often help define your character and their stats, but a lot of their being is still left outside of that and may not even be in the description. Some traits hard to even figure out while playing, and you may wind up losing a match or taking the wrong risk simply because you didn't know your own character thanks to the game's lack of explanation.

As a PlayStation 4 game, it handled things in a mixed fashion. Options are pretty good, with everything from FOV + headbob choices, to being able to even turn off motion blur (which also turns off lens flare). There's even button rebindings, which is awesome. The sad bit comes when levels get intense later on. Rooms full of Imps, the last boss battle when cluttered with minions, or rooms full of acidic AoE globes are all moments where the game loses its performance. It feels like playing on a moderat or low-end PC where you can handle the game, only to then encounter a sudden effect intensive room that taxes your machine more than you'd expect... only the sad matter is, there's no settings to tweak to lower that effect. You just have to endure those hiccups, or distortedly slow moments. Otherwise, the game runs fine. Though if I were to nitpick, I do wish the lens flare option was a separate thing. I love the moon rays that come off of the open roof levels when the setting is on, yet the motion blur is distracting with the fast paced combat.

Slow-down imminent!

Summary

Ziggurat is a weird game for me to try and recommend. I stand in opposition with a lot of the genre and could not possibly explain its negative tropes away to tell those like-minded that its an exception, nor could I tell you if it has what fans seek from this kind of experience. What I can say though, is that as a guy that likes older shooters, and liked the unique setting for it, I had a great time. Risk and reward is still a heavy factor that leans on luck, but I found their balance to be rather kind than most. The core mechanics still keep a check in place to assure you that skill will usually prevail regardless of the cards you're given, and yet the same luck can of course help you. As a matter of fact the biggest luck factor that you've got to endure, is the level-up system which is almost always just going to help you. Of course serious risk gamble takers can still have fun with the riskier characters, totally blind draws of powers or punishments from god altars, or by crossing the lava pit to see if that mysterious treasure chest really had something worth the burn to get to. If I were to try and narrow down who would like this game, I'd say if you like good shooters, can enjoy a wizard theme, and want a touch of mystery with every session, then you'd probably enjoy this game.

I vote for "all of the above"

Polls for consumer bases are often a great thing. They're the company way of saying "we're listening, now help us help you" and try to construct a list that can lead to either fixes or totally new things. This is especially beneficial in a field like gaming, where updates make this happen to things like consoles that are supposed to be with you for years. Usually when a game based poll is released I'm either thinking A) Oh, yes that one thing I want is here! Please let this win! B) Okay this is a tough choice between these few things. C) Uh oh, I hope the haters don't have their way and vote this change in. Something along those lines. There's rarely a poll or product so full of holes that it needs every sinlge one of those things. Unfortunately here we are now, with shockingly the biggest selling console producing one. Its not a huge surprise considering Sony has always been behind on user interfaces, conveniences, and just general support for various things. I already discussed that a good bit long ago within an article piece centered around being critical of one of my favorite publishers. Here's a quick picture of the supposed survey on various features, and why its so telling of Sony's major flaw. Its also an extra kick that this was an "invite only" deal, of which I did not get despite being an early buyer of the system, as well as every other one except for the PSP.

Those aren't just small brand new features, or fan requests of interesting content (well some are). These are features nearly every damn thing in existence either has, the PS3 had, or something this system absolutely needs just because it was built with some dumb oversights. The fact that this system was built in a way where freakin' betas and demos stay inside of your library list permanently alongside full blown video games you own is just outright stupid design. Then they have the nerve to leave it like that for, what two years now, and then put it in a poll so it just might be dealt with in the near future. Oh but meanwhile they found time to slip in an advertisement of Destiny right on your home menu alongside your normal games. Get your act together Sony. There isn't a single thing on that list that should have been a "maybe". If you thought about these things, knew your system lacks it, and then have the time to secretly message out some "invites" to PSN users, then you're already wasting precious time that could have been spent easily making a filter list for the library or a notification that a friend is on. You know these things are wanted, needed, or just are outright missing in off of the PS4, and its embarrassing that you can't be bothered to just fix them like a normal company. Why is something like a "wishlist" so hard to nail down? Oh wait, its not because you've done it, yet it only works in the browser version apparently. Meanwhile your priority for a PS4 version, the one where people actually shop on, is just a potential maybe for consumers to vote on? Really!?

Needs a lot of construction work

You know what, fine I'm just going to go through the whole list and help prove my point. I shouldn't have to, but just in case...

• Notifications when friends come on: Had this on PS3 for as long as its been around. Why on earth is this missing to begin with, and yet you KNOW about its absence? Get on this.
• Classics: Now this one I can almost understand. Its tougher to get and publish a full library of emulated games. That being said, it shouldn't be a question. If its possible, and you know people want it, go at it. At this point its loud and clear people would pay for this as well, so you're practically asking if you do or don't want extra revenue. Oh and if I may make a suggestion, fix your issues back with the PS3/Vita's version of this. This area honestly never got handled very competently.
• Folders: Do I really need to say something on this? It was on PS3... and Wii U... and Vita... and almost any other competent console that is complex enough to need a menu UI.
• Appear offline mode: Majorly requested feature, and just something nice to offer when you're going to force people to run online for much of their content. Its also another thing the PS3 did that the super powerful "next-gen" high tech PS4 couldn't contain for some reason.
• Hide/remove library: This isn't a feature so much as the library is just broke without a fix in sight. This one out of all of these is the most infuriating to see on here just out of the audacity of "maybe it'll be an added feature". This is the kind of poor design that should have been weeded out in the launch window. FIX IT!
• Filtering options for library: Very similar to the above. I want to know what genius decided to make a collective list of every game ever owned and played and then decided it never needed any organization what-so-ever in an age with so many digital clients that allow if not NEED such a function. Its common sense at this point.
• Download avatars on PS4: Okay so first let me take you a bit back in time to the past condition of avatars on PS4. Avatars had absolutely no support outside of their past existence, yet show up as though you could have just grabbed it yesterday as normal avatars. They carry over from the PS3 or vita, but cannot be obtained, changed (that's right, you could not change it), or bought by PS4 methods. I'd hate to wonder how a total newcomer feels about this. I've been told you can change it through Facebook though. Facebook! Let me try and summarize this again: YOU CAN CHANGE A PS4 ITEM THAT IDENTIFIES YOUR VERY PROFILE ON PS4, EXCLUSIVELY THROUGH OUTSIDE CLIENTS LIKE FACEBOOK AND THE PLAYSTATION 3!!! Thankfully this was fixed, but it just goes to show you how behind in these features Sony really can be. Now back to the survey: Should we actually have a complete avatar system now where you are capable of acquiring new avatars as originally intended? Is the sky blue? The answer to both is an ear-blasting "YES!"
• Backgrounds: Actually this isn't such a big deal by itself, but the fact that its been majorly requested by PS owners, and only just now gets brought up as a light question among all sorts of "duh!" options and you've got me still wondering why this wasn't just done instead of asked. If this whole survey was full of questions surrounding light custom options, I'd see it as a nice way to figure out what priority comes first, but on this list... its nearly the only damn thing that is merely a nice fan request.
• Wishlist: Congratulations Sony, you're behind on every single other online retail place out there, including yourselves (browser version apparently has it). Why is "wishlist" a question and not a reality?
• Party size increase: I actually can't speak much for this as I've never bothered with the feature. I will ask in return though what the limit is for, and if it can be lifted (as suggested by this question), then why the heck isn't it?
• Change PSN ID: Another majorly requested feature by nearly everyone, to the point where they had to come out and explain their reasoning behind it around the PS4's cycle. I... don't actually care all that much myself, and was at first actually glad names were fixed in. After a while though, and having looked through steam, I just don't see a reason to care that much on it. If other people want it, then let them have it. ...and to put it on a survey when you know this has been majorly requested, this is just dumb. Not as outrageous as others, but still dumb that something hasn't been done about it by now. If they're not standing by their old logic to the point of putting it up for vote to get in, then they should just give the fans what they want. However they arean't even ready to do that yet, because they released a system so backwards from their own products, or behind the times that they need to work on other parts first.

That concludes the list. At least what's been offered in the vote. Honestly the sad thing is there's actually more to it than that. You still need to be online to view trophies for some dumb and backwards reason. You also can't hide them on the PS4, and have to do it through vita or PS3 (a feature they finally added late in its cycle, only to then totally forget about in the PS4). Then just the other day, I was forced to go offline only to then have my controller fail, a glitch I've had happen numerous times alongside some other folks (though they didn't come to the same conclusion that its an offline issue. However it exclusively happens when I'm on such a bad connection that I need to cut the network in the options). I had to reset and ruin one of my best runs on Ziggurat yet. This hasn't been addressed after many "stability" patches. On top of that, I recently ran into some interesting space storage issues. Why on earth does trimming a video need extra space? That defeats part of the point in trimming, cutting down on a video and trying to get extra space. If you're worried I'll trim a piece and make a video that is too big, stop me there, not at the use of the entire feature. Its just bad design if you have to make more space while using that. Why do I also need extra space to even start up some games? ...and who knows what else is left in a mess in terms of online community like potential party system issues. I don't even use that stuff, so I don't know what's devolved, missing, or buggy in that area. Oh and then there's E3 promises. We had to wait for over a year for the promises rest mode that lets us save our game progress. Then there was the "try anything before you buy it!" that isn't even close to visible (even cloud gaming doesn't offer it, with its overpriced rental system). There aren't even as many demos as there used to be last-gen. ...and while I don't know everything about it, that ad showing you how you could download the part of the game you want first, doesn't seem to apply to anything I've seen. This was all stuff advertised when you they were revealing the console, and not with an "update pending" in sight for a warning.

The PS4 isn't a bad system. I don't want to come off in the wrong light, and keep you from thinking fondly of it. I'm mad about this stuff because it is something I invest my time in. Its a fun gaming system, with a strong library, and a lot of fun features. On top of that I'd be here equally as long explaining amazing improvements over past hardware, or great ideas like the accessibility piece giving us remappable keys that work across whatever games we could want (which aught to embarrass lazy developers, even Sony did what you've been too stupid to do in recent years, and they aren't even the ones making the games. Now if only they could force server browsers in multiplayer titles...). Meanwhile it would also be unfair to suggest that some updates haven't been beneficial. I remember being warned that themes wouldn't be a thing, yet here I am with about 8 or so free ones and a premium one I love available, and I love just how interesting they can be this time around. Meanwhile they've also expanded the share features of recording, and they're taking good feedback into consideration by making future consoles with a better physical interface and smaller power consumption. In the end, I just want this great system to be even greater. Its held back not by just small nitpicks, but by incompetent designs around the system. If or when those are fixed, it'll be a lot better to stand by the PS4 and proclaim it as the best system. As it is right now though, its the games themselves that hold it up, as well as the small new things like the share feature and multi-tasking capabilities. That's by far enough to say its an awesome console, but when its got so many flaws still left behind, and the company is showing signs of becoming increasingly arrogant and weird about their practices, this "invite only" survey just unleashes some pent up frustration by the gamer community. Stop wasting money on 3rd party crap Sony, and fix your own self first.

Put your money where your mouth is, and do this "for the players"