Now Playing: Valkyria Chronicles Remastered

I was looking around for this, slightly baffled. It wasn't anywhere in your typical stores (at least locally) right now as I speak, well over at least a week past launch. I know its more of a cult hit from japan that doesn't hold a lot of ground in America, but still I'd imagine it'd at least get freakin' stocked somewhere. I wasn't in a major rush to run and grab it, but it was still on my list among Overwatch and Starfox Zero (and kind of Uncharted 4, but I think I'd be happy just renting and playing it some more like that). Then I finally got to run by and check gamestop, and surprisingly, I found it on the bottom shelf in a funky looking case.... the limited edition tin case.

Worth waiting for

I've got to say, over the years I've come to strangely become more attached to the idea of collectibles. Its not going to get to that point where I'm dashing on ebay to buy that rare awful SNES game, but you damn well better believe that if I see a limited editions bundle with actual tangible goods like a soundtrack, special artwork, etc then that definitely holds merit over my opinion of a game's value. I mean I don't entirely get it, since its just a dang case, not even a paper slip on the inside and even a little unexplainable dent, but still I found myself just proud of finding this thing and looking back at it to study it as the game went along.

Oh right, about the game... its pretty great! For about as long as I had a PS3 and was searching away and playing demos, this was among those I put on my buy list. I loved the mix of strategy, and 3rd person shooter angles, as well as the awesome art style with a sort of fantasy steampunk vibe. The cinematic piece told me there was something epic behind this game, the art style told me I'd love the world that epic stuff was set in, and the gameplay told me that I still wanted something like Future Tactics (look it up if you've never heard of it, its awesome) in my life. However... the stingy money side of me told me there was always something better for my money, and I'd get around to this when it fell into the $15 or lower area. It always hung around $20-27. So as next gen rolled in, this was a casualty that I never bought and felt I no longer actually needed... until a remaster rolled around and told me, heck yeah I still did, and with a half-there job in hand I had the money to not be so stingy about this gem. Still don't dismiss the demo as doing anything wrong, because despite how late I was I would have simply never been here if it weren't for playing the demo. ...and I still haven't gotten to my true first impressions, but you came here where I spew my opinions, so you'll darn well hear my distracted rambling stories too. This is better than being angry at something, so consider it a blessing.

The simple fun times of demoing PS3 stuff, and putting it a "buy later" black hole

Well this game is simply, probably everything it lives up to be. There's something special there and in place, but... at the end of the day, its nothing super duper fantastic. It fits that hole of being in a position of cult fan fame. Its a lot of fun to experiment, learn the units, figure out everything, has a light Xcom aspect of selecting individual troops, and then some light risk management through accuracy. In between missions there are sessions of scenes mixed with your typical Japanese game text boxes, both of which form to tell an anime soap opera story set in the backdrop of a great empire taking on an underdog region mostly made up of villages. Here you are, a rookie general that gets to unite a ragtag team under the name of Squad 7, and become a mighty force against the Imperial war machine.

There's something about all of this that doesn't consciously resonate well with me, but subconsciously is just incredible. I think its all about that risk. I don't feel like its fun to be sitting there managing through a full team of 20 people, only to then get a mission that only allows me 8 or 9, stressing over who makes it and if my class balance is right, suddenly being blind to all their shortcomings when you need to know them the most, not knowing what the enemy has, and then only to find that when I think I have a plan it all goes wrong when my anti-tank unit has a deceiving accuracy deficiency and misses his limited ammo shots at the worst times just because the tank's body doesn't fill up the entire aim circle. There's a lot of work, a lot of stress, and no promise of a good enough pay off with you just beating a linear level structure, and yet what really happens is I'm watching my time go into a vortex. I'm actually smiling and cheering as I pull of that amazing victory on the very last turn I had, I'm wondering what will happen next, I'm constantly working to consider all the awesome possibilities I have at any given time, and just how strangely serene the game manages to be through its music, visuals, and placing a commitment to your team.

Oh and about that team, its awesome that they somehow designed a game system in place where you've got over 20 characters right as the game is warming up, and yet each have a name, voice, problems, advantages, distinct faces, and most even have friends. That's some dedications from the developers end, and that channels right into the player's dedication to keeping his team well and alive. Not only that, but because of their distincitve trais, I'm almost role-playing half of these characters and actually making actions not just on their rolls and stats, but also the impression they give off. I think there's two shocktroopers named Jane and Hannes who both have this black hair, semi-goth look going on and constantly mutter about how much they despise the imperials, so I always have them race around the front lines and pulling off the most shots. Meanwhile old man Coby holds back as a protected senior, and engineer Karl timidly turtles around the tanks and sandbags to maintain them, only taking shots when he's pushed to his limits to do so. Meanwhile when it comes to upgrading troops, all the hassle out of individuals is taken completely off your back. In a rather humorous way, the drill instructor basically informs you that the entire troop style undergoes simultaneous training... which boils down to your upgrades coming in by type. Basically you don't have to grind people for skills, or do something out of place like force Coby to score 10 headshots for an accuracy upgrade while breaking his back at cover. You just buy the gear you need, and train the type you need to do better, and its done for that entire type. Oh and speaking of characters, story-wise I got to say its kind of cool to have an almost relatable protagonist. He's almost like a more mellowed out and anime version of myself (including that at the current time of writing, he's even the same age).  Loves nature and adopts his philosophy around it, isn't so experienced but is expected to do great things anyways, and even has the last name my middle name is based off of. I'm not exactly pretending he's my virtual twin, but he's got a simple personality that strangely reflects me in a few ways, and its interesting to see that.

So I'm definitely enjoying my time, and I'm probably going to continue to keep playing this. Also probably still going to be playing some Doom as well, because that game is still incredible to no end, Even right when I feel like I'm winding down on it, I just need to go and have a quick check on the latest best rated snapmap levels, and then I'm all good and ready to remember why its the best shooter to come out in years. But this game will also be a great diversion, and return to something I haven't had in a while. I grew up around strategy as practically my 3rd central pillar in gaming alongside Shooters and 3D platformers, but unlike them I lacked the urgency to keep up with it. Hours upon hours spent within RTS, worms, and Future tactics, but over the years I kind of looked to the mechanical depth in other genres as a sort of strategy instead. Meanwhile whenever I got a taste of something new in pure strategy, it was sometimes a bit... ugh. Like Dawn of war 2's repetitive squad tactic style, or Xcom just being so bland and slow. But this... this is kind of what I remember. No its not replicating anything specific or nostalgic, but its just damn good strategy mixed in with options and experimentation alongside a great art style. All of that is kind of what made stuff like Worms, and Future Tactics so good to begin with, but this is still very much its own thing, and its good fun. Well... okay, so it still feels a bit like Future Tactics done japan style, but that still brings enough new things to the table. I'm sorry I was so late to the show VC, but everything is all good now on the PS4 side of things.

Take a step back, and appreciate this time...

Every game an adventure

So Homefront: Revolution came out recently. I really didn't know that until it just kind of happened. I remember hearing about it off in the distance with curious interest, but there were better things to be hyped about. Then some footage came out of a lengthy session being played by, I think by Eurogamer, and you could see how unoptimized the game was in just his play. It was jittery, wouldn't hold right, and as I dissected some of the mechanics I quickly noticed a weird old-school open world system in place in which the guy was running from his own radar highlight rather than playing the game. It didn't look very appealing, and the first review I was exposed to berated the game as complete garbage. Others were more generous, but they were also the kind of review sites where 7/10 is a "bad" thing (and it didn't even achieve that much). It really baffled me that the game was so broken though. Usually if you're trying to sneak out a bad game, its got to have something to hook people in. A game that is simply bad isn't going to sell unless you get somebody that is just buying on the impulse of box art. This game had no hype, little recognition, a troubled history, and was a failed IP from the last people that touched it. However with some interesting weapon crafting, a neat plot, and elevating the game into an open world, you would think some of the very same people that made timesplitters would be able to make it at least cult-hit worthy, right? Well the quality just doesn't lie; this game was just plain sent to die, and I feel sorry for those that may have cared.

However I was sitting there thinking about another thing this one recent morning... how amazing are games right now? Three of my favorite games this year practically charged out around one time: Ratchet & Clank, Dark Souls 3, and the best yet: Doom. That's not even close to capturing the scope of everything awesome happening now though. There's Uncharted 4, Overwatch, Battleborn, Hard Reset Redux, Shadow Warrior 2, Battlefield might be one of the first AAA games to go to WW1, and then there's an upcoming Witcher 3 expansion. Oh and No Man's Sky, Yooka-laylee, Gungeon, and plenty more are reminding us that Indies are still great for those looking around for those. ...and heck I should go back and play some more of Stories as well. Not all of those mentioned are out, but there's pretty darn close, and with what is out you've got plenty to play while waiting. This is an amazing time right now for gaming, and I'm not sure how often we'll see a time this great just like it. Unlike the acclaimed point of 2013 that merely gave us cinematic and typical AAA to pretend we all loved unconditionally, or the moans coming out of 2014, or the just plain great year of 2015, 2016 has already even if it stopped right after this month gave us some fantastic hits that an open-minded gamer could sink the rest of the year's time into enjoying. When the worst two things to happen in recent releases is Homefront's game that nobody showed interest for, or Star Fox Zero disappointing because its controls were just funky (and quite a few less vocal people have been content with it), then I'd say we have a phenomenal time on our hands.

Doom 4 is ridiculously good

So I just want to put it out there, that right now things are just fantastic. No matter what kind of gamer you are, no matter what you're looking for, I'm sure there's a fantastic game out there somewhere coming out soon for you or already in your hands. No matter what stupid controversies pop up, or what practice some random studio is doing, there's a game to turn to and just play and enjoy to shun that bad stuff out. Get a good online session in, or go try something new, or just run to your favorite genre and they'll probably have something amazing and recent in store for you. Heck, some people are even standing up for Homefront with quite a few people even saying that game has a bit of magic to it, and just took a big fall and lost its way. Personally I'm stuck between deciding on Uncharted 4, Star Fox Zero, Hard Reset Redux (when its out), Overwatch, and valkyria chronicles remastered, or maybe just holding the money and waiting for something else. Oh and then there's the upcoming summer sales, so brace yourselves for that. If anything the complaint is there's too much, but that's not even a legit complaint since that just means you can get around to some games later at a cheaper price. Its all pretty good in the end.

Proof that gaming is awesome right now. Nothing more needed.

Might number of dislikes

Again, we're diving into ridiculous controversies to figure out whats going on. I mean a part of the reason I like having this blog is so that I can vent my opinions, but at the same time I can't help but wonder if we've reached that point in time and internet use where there's always going to be stupid outcries worth complaining over, dulling that "worth" and making it just easier to turn yourself off to it all. I wont say desensitized since I'll never actually fall into the trap of thinking normal people act this way, but still this is just getting ridiculous. When we can't all agree that a critic has to know what he's damn well reviewing without raising an argument, I have to wonder how we got here. Oh and then this happens literally as I was starting this article. Wonderful. There's some awesome people still on the net, but its a shame you have to hear about the nuts first.

Anyway this topic is over the latest commercial for Mighty no.9. This commercial has gotten infamy not for just being cheesy, but mostly for one single line in the trailer: "Make the bad guys cry like an anime fan on prom night." See for yourself.

Okay so the trailer itself is... not the best. I'll actually stand up for the narration. I like that they pitch it with a certain campy "awesome" voice, who is trying hard to sell you on a game because its just darn fun. Some people hate that, but I don't get what ill it does unless you want your super serious dramatic voices covering a freakin' mega-man successor. However I think the real problem comes in from just the game side. I mean just look at that thumbnail, that alone is telling of the problems. People have actually thought those explosions were some sort of badly mangled pizza. Heck, even the pizza and sonic company guys got together with a pic poking fun at that fact. The painted on character expressions that hold in close-up shots, the awful fake effects, and the weird character blurbs all interrupt the energetic action of the rest of the trailer. Its the game and editing itself that make things look bad instead of anything a single line of bad dialogue can do. Oh and lets discuss that, and how it "alienates" people... or not.

Alienate. This is not what a shoddy trailer does

Again the line deemed to be offensive was, "Make an enemy cry like an anime fan on prom night". I wont lie, I chuckled a bit, but I didn't entirely know why. That summarizes the whole joke really. Its a cheap laugh, delivered with the energy and buzz to make someone giggle, but then you actually think about it and it just makes no sense. Why does an anime fan cry on prom night? They aren't exactly known for going or not going to proms, and they don't exactly do anything special unless they choose to treat it like a convention. Do they cry because they're not going? Because that... just doesn't resonate well with my knowledge of them. Heck most anime fans I know are more sociable than your typical niche group types. It just doesn't make sense. It also doesn't make much sense to include this in a game with an anime-tilted art style, and obvious japanese origins. That's like saying guns are for cowards on an FPS game. I mean I wont say this is "alienating" anybody, but its almost like its talking about a different topic than itself, when its instead in the same exact field. I haven't seen something that dumb and unaware since Duke Nukem Forever where Duke mocks power armor while having a broken regenerating health mechanic set in place. That tells me the game is confused, conflicted, and uninteresting, which its development history and disappointed fans seem to reassure me might be true. However its hardly offensive.

To offend means to deeply hurt somebody. I know the internet doesn't use it like that often anymore, and anybody with access to a keyboard and an agenda can say they're "offended", but that's wrong and I'm going to tear that idea apart the same way as if this were some SJW idiocy. I'm not the kind to go wearing double standards just because this is more from the gamer side rather than SJW. This is still stupid to sit there and say "this offends me". Its a commercial, its a cheap joke that doesn't even try to make sense of itself, and its not for some massive profile game that is unearthing some old bigotry. If you're a capable, and healthy human being who isn't so insecure that this commercial wrecks your day, you shouldn't have anyway to be hurt by this internet advertisement. The only people out there that should be in that kind of position, are those that dedicated over a year of their life into designing it, staffing, set up the business deals, only to see it amount to this. They really are hurt by the idea that this trailer exists, which is understandable, since this is supposed to represent his passion project as well as a source of income. Some unrelated guy on the internet though? Its a trailer. If you're hurt by something as simple as "cry like an anime fan on prom night", you need to use that pain as a clue that something is very wrong, and re-prioritize your life (then again maybe I do as well, with such stupid stuff as this taking up my time). Its a desperate attempt at humor, or maybe even a cynical ploy to gain notoriety, and you just told them that works. You gave them big press over this. You made a mountain out of a jab that wasn't even 6 seconds of that minute and a half commercial, and you smothered the news that this game was releasing all over the place, giving it more attention because it apparently hurt your feelings. Then you turn around and wonder how someone could get so emotional that they send death threats over a delay. Well I'm willing to bet it comes from the same idea of being so attached that a mere poorly worded phrase can shift you to feelings of hate.

Are any of you just happy that the game is releasing?

Look, don't get me wrong here, the trailer is fairly mediocre. I wont even say bad, but its really not the best, and I'm sure the developers are all good and well to be calling it "awful". I'm also not saying you aren't allowed to find marketing campaigns offensive, or that you can't be passionate and angry abut some choice in art or media. However I am asking you to choose your battles carefully, and I think you fucked up big time here, and are using such a mentality with it that has caused me to cringe more than the trailer did. This is not worth putting it to the megaphone, and screaming over how awful it is. You've got people running up and watching this just to hear that cringy line that "offends" you. Its not worth that kind of attention. And I know the game doesn't have the hype it once did, but is anybody out there even the least bit excited for the game itself releasing? Are we so angry with this commercial, that we hate the game alongside it now? Is it so bad, that it erases all feelings of happiness that it is actually releasing, and you can go and get ready to pick it up on the store shelves or digital stores? Has it actually overrode your sense of fun? This is the same issue I took with people who were on the Doom hate bandwagon, and making such a fuss over a non-issue like the cover art. Now that its out, thankfully the marketing and reception of its genuine quality has vastly outshined its pre-launch skepticism, but still the fact that people were that "surprised" because they were busy crying over a cover makes me wonder if people truly have lost the sense of fun in looking towards games. This... just reassures me that might be the case. So overtaken by outrage culture, and raising a fuss, things seem to be shifting to where we can cry about things the most, rather than what the game is actually like.

...but maybe I'm also not helping. By relaying a venting of what's wrong, I'm avoiding discussions on what's right. I think that's in large part because I'd rather be playing a great game that making a "top 10 list on everything awesome", but then again maybe this blog spot needs some more positive stuff posted on it. I thankfully have some stuff in the works, but again... its been going unposted or unfinished because I've been just doing more productive fun stuff elsewhere. No promises, but I'll try and post at least 3 or more positive articles before the next vent-worthy piece has to be written... unless something really big comes up. Lets try to bring things back to happy note though. This is gaming, and this is my blog, and I plan to let it be a reminder about how fun and great games can be whenever people aren't "offended" by them. Lets go have some fun now.

Laugh a little more

"Git gud" has relevance

So because every game apparently needs controversy, even when we are up to our knees in awesome games (coming up with an article on that soon), that infamous Polygon Doom gameplay video has blown up into other media defending Polygon's first time using a controller footage. However I specifically found a good double discussion topic going on the way this article discussed it like it was some "git gud" syndrome at play. That's kind of good, because I want to discuss that "git gud" mentality as well sometime eventually. I do think there's a really dumb part of where that mentality comes from, but its all context sensitive. However when you're use for it involves the following quote...

"That “Git Gud” mentality is one part of a larger effort by “gamers” to keep games as their own private sanctuary from the wider world, open only to those who are as passionate about games as they are, and only if they’re passionate about the same games as they are."

Yeah it looks like you have some problems. Oh and sorry about the black background highlights, but something is broken with the text quoting, be it something in the blogger system, or maybe even some weird clipboard protection in the web's page. This is my only way of fixing it. I'll try to keep things short going forward, but lets actually start off with the above quote.

Have you ever thought maybe the "git gud" mentality came from a defensive state of mind rather than some unusual make-believe fantasy of creating a world for gamers? That's just not normal, and is only held to the extremists, so why would an entire hobby's dominant group be like that? I'll tell you why, because they're not. You're building a silly strawman with an outdated image of gamers that was used over two decades ago to exclude them from other hobbies or from certain social lives. There's a good reason why you hear this phrase of "git gud" mostly from the Souls side of the gaming community: only a few games are still challenging enough to fall into that category. Usually when I hear those words used seriously (very rarely. Usually people more formally point to the "learning curve" instead. The fact this very article is even using the goofy "git gud" might be its own strawman approach, since I see nobody actually saying that related to this Doom issue.), its been from the perspective that they're trying to tell you this game asks for more of your effort. When instead you challenge the game from that fundamental standpoint that its somehow bad for that, they aren't reinforcing their position for the sake of some castle party you weren't invited to; they're simply asking that you let things be, and have some fun with them, instead of in your own little corner crying over what you can't change. However the entire defense of the game is a little shifted when we talk about something related to game journalism, because this is less about how you design a game, and more about doing your damn job.

"Set aside the fact that an outlet like Polygon isn’t only writing for the most serious and dedicated videogame players. Their audience includes anybody interested in games, from the most hardcore who spend hours a day on the hobby, to the less passionate fans who only play a handful of games a year. Their writers shouldn’t be expected to reflect the tastes or share the abilities of players who devote most of their leisure time to gaming. The site maybe should’ve uploaded a less tortured DOOM video, but that half-hour clip does nothing to damage Polygon’s credibility or undermine any of the writing they’ve published. There’s nothing interesting or noteworthy about one random, unnamed employee of a videogame site being bad at one specific game. Even if Polygon was solely courting the most dedicated of self-described “gamers,” there’d be no reason to make any special notice of this particular video."

Well I can't make this stuff up, he's actually saying it doesn't matter if you're any good at your job because... reasons? Tell you what I'll give him more credit than he gives himself, and pretend he thinks like this because we're discussing a subjective or artistic field. That being said.... Chefs don't have to necessarily be good at making your food, taste is an opinion after-all. Surely that wont damage a restaurants credibility, and if you hate that, it must be because you're some disrespectful exclusionary man-child that can't accept other people might have a difference in taste, and that chef may or may not be catering to those people rather than you. Oh whats that, you got food poisoning from poorly cooked meat? Well, ya know, maybe they don't have to be as dedicated to their food as you'd like them to be. Okay I'll drop the analogy, people are always going to try and find holes with them, but the point remains.

You need someone to do their job, and yes that means actually understanding the art form at hand if we're talking about critiquing. They don't have to necessarily be for the "most serious and dedicated" fans, but they do have to do their job competently. The video in question wasn't just poor skills, or a player trying to learn, it was somebody who actually played so poorly that it made the game actually look broken. If not for the overwhelming reception and videos from other sources, that's what would have been taken from this video from the expectations of a professional source of game coverage. Instead because we knew better (and this site's credibility was already in the toilet), most of us just laughed about it and said we'd check our reviews somewhere else. When a review site uploads this video as representative footage of a video game, no we don't trust their opinion even if it they rated it good in the end. Heck after this big laughing joke, they knew they'd be shredded if they didn't post a positive review, so this just makes it as equally sketchy if not for all the other surrounding praise. I'm not asking for how "serious" they are, and if they're as "dedicated" to Doom or even FPS as me, I'm asking they do their damn job competently. ...and if you do decide to make a site more catered to the an audience that had less will-power to play, there are far, far, far better ways than uploading a video of bad gameplay and just passing it off like any other game preview.

"To these critics [gamers] it doesn’t matter if the person playing DOOM in that Polygon video is having a good time, or will be able to make smart observations about how the game or its maps and mechanics are designed."

Except that's exactly what everyone is complaining about and saying. Well more about the observations bit. The point of sources putting out videos like that to begin with is for us to ask ourselves if we'd have any fun with the game ourselves rather than the reviewer, since this is the kind of stuff we'd like to say we base our purchasing opinions off of. When they're this awful as compared to everything else, we laugh and question their credibility. We question their ability to make good reviews, which would in turn be where we do ask if they had fun and liked it. These are video game journalist writers who are supposed to be writing informative material, and this informs of as nothing more than that they cannot be taken seriously for passing the game and taking in all the details that count to players who need to spend $60. To think we're worried about anything else is silly, and the fact that you had to wait all this time to post such a defense is just as evident. Here's the reality here: this isn't the first time someone has posted a video of them playing badly at a game. In a world full of lets plays there are thousands of potential videos, and various different gamers making video content around video games at different skill levels. Some people are absolutely terrible while others are incredible. If all anybody wanted to do (and some people do want this) is to watch someone else play badly, they'll Youtube search some puzzle game lets plays and sit on the edge of their seat feeling smarter by watching someone else miss this obvious piece for 8 minutes. Instead here we are discussing a professional site, and the massive outcry is here because of that fact. This isn't some small lets play channel people watch and comment on for fun, this was an informative site's representative highlight footage of a brand new $60 video game, and they were playing it as if discovering 3D movement controls for the very first time.

"This kind of attitude limits the growth and potential of videogames. Instead of viewing games as an emerging medium that can be entertaining, informative and emotionally fulfilling, the larger world too often dismisses videogames as a childish pursuit for kids or immature adults with too much free time on their hands. Mainstream audiences see the kind of games that get the most media attention, see the kinds of people who play them and how they treat anybody who doesn’t fit into their clique, and become convinced that the kind of games you need consoles or a gaming PC to play have nothing to offer them. The market for videogames stays stagnant, with designers making the same kinds of games for the same homogeneous audience, afraid to take risks because the people who might embrace them are driven away by this arbitrary “gamer” litmus test."

Except the larger world is actually buying and spending money on games to rival even cinema at various points. A new Halo game (which is an Xbox exclusive for the record) had better release numbers than a new James Bond film. The only people actually sitting back and clinging onto these outdated views of prejudices against the notion of "gamer" are the career-endangered journalists writing about gaming. I hate to kind of say that myself being a guy that loves writing and finds recording to be an expensive and convoluted process, but its clear by both myself and this writer here that they'll let anybody into this stuff, rather than those that know what they're doing. That's the reason why this video evidence of Polygon being terrible is bad to begin with. Instead you sit here pretending this outdated stereotype exists to derail the narrative. You perform mental gymnastics in your mind to recreate this old image to tear apart despite the numbers, the public speech, the open market, that show otherwise.  Among the big mainstream games you think people shun are things like Call of Duty, and League of Legends that have proven time and time again to move massive numbers to a wide variety of players and audiences. Oh and that industry problem you mention is the same crap that we see in Hollywood, down to the point of reboots and lazy naming schemes, but yet I guess that's because there's some secret film club they're homogenizing it for that I haven't heard of until you make that up in your head? I think we can accept that high cost development creates creatively bankrupt companies who don't want to part with their heavy investment, heavy return type schemes, and that its easier to follow trends than raise the bar on standards. But I suppose that's not as entertaining since that's looking at facts, and logical reasons instead of.... whatever you're making up. Okay final quote...

If the people complaining about Polygon’s DOOM video actually cared about games as an art form or an entertainment medium, and not just their own little imaginary clubhouse, they’d want to see the videogame outgrow its current confines and become more accepted by the wider world. Instead they continually go off on tantrums like this “Git Gud” business, reinforcing why games aren’t as respected within pop culture as movies or television.

Oh, you mean the "'git gud' business" you started? Because, again, few I noticed were actually using that phrase. It usually comes out of a joke, something you even mentioned (if you see in the full article). The polygon player in question needs to be better at games not because of some fantasy club you've deluded yourself into discussing, but rather because of a real club he or she is in called a JOB! Its they're job to play, write, review, and inform on video games. Video games he or she is shown to be so terrible at that the product looks like complete misery. Its deceiving to post that as a highlight, but also irresponsible and lazy on the part of their work ethic, and that is what has been called out. As for video game as an art form, here's a news flash: It is currently in place as such without any solid confines. The closest confines that are in place, are related to the economy and artistic capability, just like any other art form. If there's any other confines, you've failed to name any within reason. However guess what comes out of considering something as a high form of art? Expectations, respect, and integrity! The art is expected to do good things. It is to be respected and treated well as such. Things related to it, are to be taken at least somewhat seriously with integrity and honesty. That's why most gamers, and respectable sites, have moved on beyond discussing games as art and more onto why our press needs an overhaul, and things like Gamer Gate are the result of such. Meanwhile you guys still bring up "games need to be taken seriously" argument, because much like the narrative you drive, its full of hypocrisies and exclusionary, snobbery attitudes.

As I touched on before, the only thing this guy isn't completely making up is that there are some instances of players excluding others with a "git gud" attitude, but those are entirely the extremists. They're the same people in films boasting such things as "Well you're not a movie fan until you've watched and appreciated Citizen Kane" or "Only dudebros like Transformers". Those people exists, because wherever there are enthusiasts, there is a tier above that, and then maybe even a tier above that next tier. There's always going to be those people who let a certain side of wanting to belong, and yet to feel on top, that take that stuff to the extreme. It could be sports, movies, books, music, etc. That's why entire cliques have formed out of names like Hipsters, Emos, Goths, etc. They wear a certain culture, design, and higher-than-normal affinity and if you don't meet up to their level they wont look at you the same way. Gamers have those elitist jerks as well, and its especially prominent among those areas where games are challenging for a good cause (only they'll twist that good cause).

However I do say it has relevance, because those cultures, and these challenging games still have something good come out of them. I love games like Doom and Dark Souls because of their depth. They're challenging for a good cause because they offer diversity among the easier turns game have taken over time, and suit the opposite end of games that have taken challenge out completely. I love those games to though. I also love some games that I can just hop into and laugh at, or goof around, or just experience something. I think Gone Home was a great game to play once. I think Glitch Hikers is an amazing, and eye-lifting experience that helped me romanticize the very notion of "experiencing". However I also think sometimes a person just needs to "git gud" and challenge themselves to something a little tricky. That's part of what games are, where they came from, and part of understanding them as an art. Or even if you don't want to see them as an art, its still part of appreciating something that exists and lives within out culture on this earth as human beings. It has the ability to capture and fill in that notion of challenge from our lives and our nature, and turns it into a romanticized form. And you know what, I believe that deserves the respect to have a decent work ethic among its critics, and if they can't give me that... well, there's a reason I never go to Polygon anyways.

Now playing: Doom (4)

Oh this game. This game is just beautiful. Its absolutely, completely, and superbly, amazing. I don't even know how to completely describe it. I can run down a long list of awesome games it reminds me of, or these weird deja vu moments where it feels like I've done something like this before, and yet all I can think of is that this is simply Doom and it is one of the best FPS games made... especially in recent memory, but lets see how it holds up in the long run before I declare it to be one of my new favorites. Still it really feels that way right now as I'm blasting through it, already about half way or more through the campaign because its hard to put down. Though it does have its share of issues, and I'll get to those soon enough.

So... where do I begin to describe this game? The basics you'd want of Doom is here. You're fighting off a variety of monster types on a dark gory industrial sci-fi station, with occasional bits of hellish atmosphere, you're swapping between a full arsenal of weapons, you're on the edge of your seat at tough combat scenarios, thrashing metal in the background, power-ups, you're combing the map looking for secrets, occasional puzzling bits or platforming, and... its just Doom. Except its got changes. The new Doom has far more enemies and enemy arena type scenarios taking a slight step towards Serious Sam, then there's the glory kills where hurting the enemy enough brings them into a state where they can be contextually grappled for a stylish kill like something out of bulletstorm, oh but that's also a big portion of how you'll get some health back if you're on your last leg bringing in a feeling like out of Space Marines or Bloodborne. Of course without a massive emphasis on health kits, what's the deal with secrets? Well you've got secrets like art collectibles, suit upgrades, weapon mods which can be acquired with points in a weird way that feels a touch like R&C, and rune challenges that put you inside an arcadey time trial mini-game to unlock a special power, and then build your character around potentially 3 of them... which can further be upgraded by completing challenges. None of these changes should really bother anyone though, because they're all still catering to the Doom mindset. You're still looking for secrets, still grasping for resources in tough fights, and the melee kills leave far more of an impact to the nature of Doom rather than being a gimmick. You've got to understand that just watching the animations is boring, compared to running around in a room swarmed with pinkies, hell knights, imps, and mancubuses firing at you at the same time and suddenly you flip the tables on one by ripping its eyes out, get a chunk of your health back, chainsaw another for added ammo, and use what you got back to tear down everything else that dares to challenge you. Its an insane adrenaline rush that just comes off as nothing less than amazing.

Despite all the games that were running through my head, and name dropped above, none of them describe Doom itself. This isn't even best described with the old Doom, but rather this is evolved well and beyond that ancient game. Its its very own thing, Its more impactful, bloodier, smarter, more high-tech, and I'm even just going to flat out say its better than the old Doom. Its merely attached by name and influence, and I'm so glad they went back to that well instead of thinking to follow COD like the majority of others have. All I can think about lately is this recent game called Doom, not the old, not looking too much into what it compares to, but its just by itself a fantastic, phenomenal, and master-crafted funhouse of fast shooter action. Yes I know some people will hate me for saying it actually beats old Doom with mods, but I really think it does. I respected Doom as a good shooter that holds strong at its fundamental level, and Brutal Doom + other extras as... well really fun quick FPS action. It was great just to boot up and play a level or two when I didn't know what else to do, or just wanted raw power-fantasy style FPS entertainment. This new Doom has me the most excited I've been this whole year to turn on a game. Even more than R&C which I sort of took it easy with (still haven't technically completed challenge mode).

Oh and lets talk about story. Story is definitely here, and very rarely will it stop and spout exposition. I know some are going to moan about the little times it does, but its so infrequent and harmless that I have to question your patience and will power if this is the thing that really upsets you after over an hour of amazing gameplay without any. You had to skip text bits in the old Doom, so you'll live with this. I personally love its inclusion, because contrary to what some say, I'd actually like to think FPS can craft a damn entertaining world and plot to be a part of. Doom does just enough to qualify for that. Its not quite as cheesy and amusing as Doom 3, yet it surprisingly makes a lot more sense and impact in the time it does spend, and I strangely admire that even though Doom 3 will always have a special place in my mind for its tone. However Doom uses even less time to strike up a better narrative, and its actually a little hilarious about it as well. You'll be hearing all about the UAC's decent into demonic studies, and madness, while the one friendly (who's the "dead" founder with a brain transplanted to a massive robot) tries to direct your path, and you smash up and treat him with disregard along the way through the madness. Weapons, monsters, places, and characters all have stories and backgrounds you can read up on, and Doom guy himself is basically explained as this supernatural beyond-reality character that was actually dug up alongside hell's artifacts as a long great warrior that fights with relentless rage. The game has just enough story to be cool, while still prioritizing the gameplay to the point where it comically gives itself the middle-finger by making the Doom marine such a rage-fueled jerk as far as silent protagonists go in the face of more serious characters. Its win-win. You get cool monster lore, get to understand the place and the way things worked, you know your character, but you're almost constantly experiencing it through the gameplay with minimal interruptions. Oh yeah and even the multiplayer announcer is a character explained as the sentient UAC computer Vega, that Mr.Robot-man built.

In general though, Doom keeps its gameplay first, and that really shows through the whole experience. There's even some really clever and well thought out things to the system. The chainsaw (which was overrated, lets face it. It was an extension of melee where you drained health, and got shot at waiting for the enemy to die instead of using a real gun. Kind of dumb) has been redirected to a unique special ability with a limited special ammo pool. Pulling it out with its own button, you put it to an enemy, and it automatically kills them if you've got the ammo. Bigger enemies use up more, but its best to get the pesky types out with it. Slicing someone with this gives you a pinata worth of ammunition for generally all weapons. What this perfectly translates to in actual combat terms is a strategic use of resource management, or a drastic life saver in combat. You come down bursting your weapons out, unloading a massive payload on the waves of hell knights, and mancubuses, and then suddenly a damn annoying summoner comes out and you're favorite weapon is on its last bit of ammo. Pull out the chainsaw for the summoner, reap the benefit of a load of ammo, fire 3 rockets into a hellknight and rip him apart for health, and you're fresh to go in the battle. Its an amazing turn-around element that's just ripe to balance out the odds in combat, or as just an excuse to use your favorite gun beyond its boundaries.

Basically Doom is taking the Dark Souls route of being about the damn game. We've got a shooter that isn't trying to force you into contrived stealth, isn't trying to be the jack of trades with cheaply implemented mechanics that don't make a lot of sense like useless activity clutter, and its actually refreshing that the game isn't boasting a developed character. The character is just as developed as it needs to be. The gameplay is far more developed, because that's what needs to be. That's what will hold up in time. That's what made Doom 1 great and still enjoyable today. Now they've passed that torch onto Doom 2016, which is made even better with its combination of innovations and throw-back gameplay choices. Doom 3 put more attention into the tone and atmosphere, and that's why you don't hear much of it today. Its slow gameplay, wonky hitboxes, dated influences, and even decisions that the team couldn't agree on were all present and made the game release to a mixed fanfare that hasn't lasted with time. Its not an awful game, but its not as fun as the game that came way before that with a full force of gameplay. Now Doom is back again, and its re-assumed that focus.

However... the problems come in when you look a little to the right and left side of things. I'm talking about the extras, Snapmap, and Multiplayer. Now the MP beta was a lot of fun and I stand by that, but upon loading it up and playing it now with everything in the game, I definately see that complaint about overpowered weapons contradicting the loadout arena mixture. I've been insta-killed far more than in the beta by weapons I've never even heard of, never the less do I have any chance of accessing them because of the lame grind. Furthermore its baffling that not only did they remove (as in actually take out, not just forget to code) bots that players have seen and heard about before, and there's also no private system for your buddies. Oh and the custom maps are in an entirely different gated piece of the game, where you have to load up each of the 3 chunks. So you can't just smoothly transition MP into a custom new map, nor do we get anything to browse our matches by like you may be keeping your fingers crossed for. You just have matchmaking, and customization. The multiplayer is still okay enough, but after playing the campaign its just hard to get yourself to take the MP as serious

On the snapmap end, all of your 4 player MP stuff can be accessed after that lengthy boot-up process, and then you get to choose whether you create, or play. But... not sure how well you'll create now. Its currently broken under multiple ways. I had two message-less crashes losing my map progress, and doing a weird thing where it doesn't let the game load anything else up until I reset it. Then when I finally started saving after every single test phase of a map, eventually the spawners all broke. The very logic and rule set that allows triggered monster events universally just stopped working, even ones I didn't touch. After having made some cuts, logic re-routing, and just redoing it all manually, I cannot get the spawners to operate again as if the entire map file is just broke with it. A fundamental part of creating a good campaign-like map is gone, and over an hour's of work and testing is shot. Oh and lets not forget that while its gated away from the stock online, the multiplayer sure loves to intrude on Snapmap where it shouldn't. Two weapon limit is forced on you regardless of your intentions, the pacing of your movement is just a bit... off, the graphics are slightly duller, and you can't pause the game. There's also a lack of certain props, where things like gore and corpses that exist all over the campaign can't be found. I know that's a bit of a nitpick, but it feels stupid making a map full of demons where every single room is just so perfectly pristine, clean, and hollow. There's just this heavy disconnect from the campaign, and it truly is a cheaply done map maker in the end. If this is really what is supposed to replace modding, they fucked up big time here, and I'm sorry for the PC community about this brain-dead move. This could at least be fun on the console side if it actually worked like it was supposed to, but it currently does not, and I'm a little upset about that.

So... yeah, Doom is fantastic if you were looking at it from the campaign perspective. Don't let the disappointing extras get you down, the core reason you should be picking this up in the first place does far more than merely delivering a fun game. Its absolutely phenominal, and is exactly where FPS would have been long ago if not for other distractions from those that looked to detract from the genre instead. However Doom is here now, so lets not worry about that. Load up the double barrel super shotgun, and go test it out on that cacodemon's big green eye. Its time for me to go back and redeem mars... with bullets.

Dilemma of Doom (and why you should still be excited)

Running, or shooting?

Oh this is very relevant on the heels off my last article (though I meant to get this out sooner). Way more than I'd like it to be. So Doom is out, and is looking great in my opinion. I don't think the internet has treated it fair, giving it tons of heat based on very trivial things, and just plain stupidity. Heck I've even recently found out the beta complaints (which are relatively legit, though I disagree with them as I loved the beta) are even fixable via mode tweaks and snapmap editor. Like the fact that you can make traditional weapon pick-ups for an old-school deathmatch. I'm not sure how well custom modes will be implemented, be it the Killzone ShadowFall route, private matches, or like a decent server broswer (Hint: the server broswer is the best, the freakin' 90's were doing online better than most modern games), but its there and I've even heard someone say there's a form of bots in the game. That's just fantastic, and I'm running out of things I can ask for from this game. So the plan was to just ignore the internet for a while, and as the game hits launch, maybe check metacritic to make sure its not falling behind the 70 area, and then its probably all good. Oh, but metacritic may not show much to us until like sunday, because critics will see the retail game for the first time as we do.

Of course, their excuse is that multiplayer should be tested out the right way. However when your multiplayer reception bombed (not my opinion, but it did), the game doesn't depend on its multiplayer in the slightest, and you're holding the game away from critics, this all looks pretty bad. Lets also not forget we live in an age with proven review alteration methods, be it from the critic's end, or the publishers. Bethesda could easily tell you not to discuss the multiplayer until X time, or simply not put up the servers, and so critics could make "in progress" or campaign exclusive reviews on the game. That'd be the most logical and consumer-happy approach, but no Doom wants to be a good little moth that flies right into the flame. This just has people even more hateful about it, and now even as a supportive and hyped up FPS fan, I can't say squat against them. I'm even a bit skeptical myself now. They have every darn right to be a little uneasy about a game that refuses to show itself before a judge, especially if they were already trashing it. So I've just got to sit in a corner and figure out if Bethesda really is hiding something, or if the game might just be making a stupid move and turn out as exceptional as I pictured it and this is all just their silly move.

However here's the thing: what am I worried about? Lets go over it again, I love the looks of this game because of everything I've seen at its core. I love the pacing, the weapons & gunplay, the mixing of gothic + dark sci-fi aesthetics meeting, and the fact that we'll be managing our resources and replaying the game with new configurations. Oh and the campaign is 12 hours long, and you've got a timesplitter-like map editor, so that's all great as well. They've shown off about an hour or more in footage, and let us play the multiplayer at potentially 3 different sittings, and everything has checked out alright since the very announcement of the game with its description full of bulletin points like "No regenerating health". Its not exactly trying to tell a story either, so its not like we're all going to cry over the way the game ends. If Bethesda is hiding something, what the hell can it be?

Occasional Serious Sam type wave battles? We saw that, its ok Bethesda

Though I do have a slight counter-argument to my own self on that note: Brink. I've told this story before, but its worth repeating. Brink launched from a hyped up successor to Killzone for hardcore shooter fans, to landing with all the grace of a thud. It hit every note I was buying it for though. It had strong gunplayer, fun customization, great battles, fun dynamic objectives and rooms, and the environment was at least slightly more flexible than most shooters. However it failed at a level so fundemental that nobody in their right mind was looking for it: Maps & modes to play. Its supposedly blurred campaign was a hoax way of saying "well we have bots in this pre-fixed map order that coincides with a loose story". It was just multiplayer with bots, which was really your only source of multiplayer because the netcode was either broke, or once it was fixed the playerbase was bleeding rapidly. The multiplayer itself was also just the campaign... basically just those 8 maps and objectives, and basically a typical attack or defend position. No team deathmatch, no conquest/domination mode, no huge variety, and not even a lot of DLC with just two maps being launched. I fell for it because you just don't predict your problem being running out of staple FPS content. That's like being excited for the next Mario platformer, only to find he can't jump on enemies, and then feeling awkward because you never looked for that but you shouldn't have to.

Not pictured: He crashes and burns himself

Now that being said, I can't think of that going wrong here. Doom has mode variety in its beta, never the less its full game. Its going to have multiplayer, a real campaign that's estimated to be 12 hours long, and a map maker because why not design your own mode and levels if the game doesn't have enough for you as is. Then what is the big deal? I can't help but speculate either Bethesda is nervous enough to hurt itself here, or they think someone is going to hate some simple minor change like the animated melee, or the Serious Sam-esque wave moments where you need to shut off a portal. Maybe the online doesn't work on launch? Or maybe they're telling the truth, and are just idiots about how reviews/multiplayer work? I don't know, but in every case I can't find a reason to be deterred by Doom. The only core mechanic I can imagine is in danger, is the fact that health seems to pop out of enemies rather than traditional placement, so worst case scenario is the game actually has a weird almost regenerating health that works like Bloodborne/Space Marines in that you get it automatically back for killing enemies. That's not exactly that bad, and it could certainly be worse with real regenerating health. Everything else checks out. There are big guns, wild enemies, various modes and multiple ways to play each piece of them, and some solid looking mechanics. I'm excited.

...and finally there have been streamers. I quickly found a stream late last night showing Doom by a critic with similar FPS tastes as me, and yet he was on the skeptical side of Doom. He was having an absolute blast, and I literally walked right into his stream hearing him say "This is great! Far better than I expected it to be. The movement is snappy, encourages all this jumping, shooting things is fun..." and he just went on and on about it. It looked good. It was working, functional, and he was enjoying things. I think everything here checks out for me. I'm going in blind from here, but I mean that in a good way. Lately I've been a little tired of over-doing the game news stuff. I'm tired of the negativity, all the whining, all the cynicism, and all the doubts people will fill your head with. The internet can be a glorious place in the right areas, but it can also be a draining one in other scenarios. Sometimes I wish I had never combined it with video gaming, and still had that innocent thought process of "this looks fun. OH, it is fun!". I don't really mean that entirely since I know I've dodged some bullets and got some cool stuff from the internet, heck just recently a mere E3 rumor lead me to remembering a System Shock 1 remaster was on steam and now I'll grab it when it goes on a sale. However I can't say the thought crosses my mind to free my mind of it. So Doom is going to be that game. Its going to be that game where I do my best from launch to just see the fun in it. The negatives of the internet have only been so awful as to just laugh most off, but once its released there will be more legit moaning about, and I don't want any part of that until I've got only my own thoughts and happiness on it. If something really bugs me, I can share it and discuss it with others who may agree. However these thoughts, this fun, and this excitement... I'm not going to let them be robbed because of skepticism or because the internet doesn't approve.

As for this sticky situation with reviews, well depending on how excited you were vs on the fence I'd tell you there are three options: If you loved everything about the game, just grab it. From what we all can tell, there's plenty of working and believable gameplay footage out there, and things are looking to match what we see. If this has you too nervous and you might not be all that excited, just wait. Wait for next tuesday if you were willing to depend on reviews. Besides, that's when most games release anyway. Finally, if you're in America, well there's something called Redbox that Bethesda almost always caters to. I saw a Doom ad plastered over it just yesterday as opposed to Uncharted 4 surprisingly, and they'll have it. You can rent the game, and all of its "awful" or "glory" will just cost you $3 per day to test this and be your own reviewer without sinking a ton of dollars on this. In general, Doom has you covered, and I'm thinking the excitement is real and releasing today. I'll try and have a first impressions up soon, but don't count on it if its too fun to pull myself away from.

Doom & the internet may not be the best of friends

Halo? No, idiot.

Sorry, this is actually long overdue, but I think its still a desirable rant. I've made my opinion on Doom known so far, and I guess this is just a personal piece discussing it and perception of it. I loved the multiplayer beta, think the game looks like it could be the perfect FPS for me, and I like even a ton of side stuff like map making and the lore sounds like its going in a great direction. Heck I wont shy away from saying this is the FPS that feels like where FPS should have already been a few years back, instead of... well, a QTE script to mourn a friend's grave. Wolfenstein was a step back in the direction I like, but merely just a really wonderful game in that direction. Doom seems shaping up to be something kind of special and yet on that same path, so I don't know for sure if I should be full on hype train, but I'm really close to it. Unfortunately whenever I look at 2nd opinions, they're not so great. Funny thing is the same could be said for Wolfenstein before its was released (after, everyone gave it the respect it deserved, but it was painful to see the shallow presumptions before that), except this time its a little weirder. With Wolfenstein it was a matter of people just not caring. D-toid tried to constantly cast it as generic, a popular YouTube Critic was given an awful vertical slice and trashed it for how scripted it was, and even the people happy about it just pretended their enthusiasm went as far as killing Nazis. Only a cult following actually anticipated the story, gunplay, and campaign effort. With Doom though its not a lack of anticipation, its absolute juvenile hate mixed in with "the real doom is more perfect than this" snobbery. 

Well originally at least that was the case, and I was going to discuss how awful the internet was for supporting such a thing, but as I complained on a more public outlet and got really positive feedback, I'm a little happier now. Then I check out a youtube video and it all goes back, but there were a few nice things within there. One guy complained about how enemies glow to reflect the melee kill, and I kind of sympathize with that dislike, then someone said "you can customize the interface to fix that". Awesome, and everyone was happy. I love that there's some good comments, help, and of course a lot of things seem to help uncover an even better game than what you'd initially expect. Its sad that's buried under all the crap though. Meanwhile other comments were stuff like... "Oh wow, weakest enemies ever" to a level with the lowest end zombie enemies as played by the developers. Duh, of course its going to look easy. Then there's purists complaining its too slow, even though its faster than practically any other campaign shooter on the market right now. Supposedly there were even a couple complaints saying it was too fast and "cartoony", but I think they accidentally clicked on the wrong video because nobody in their right mind would tell Doom to take it slow. Heck there was even a guy complaining that the perk/mod system gives older levels more replay value, but was bad because to recapture the original experience he'd have to respec the character. THAT WAS AN ACTUAL COMPLAINT! What the hell guys!? Heck the old Doom didn't even have a damn replayable level system in place unless you made it out of save files, so this is a double step-up. What's next, do you hate hotkeys for weapons because its too convenient?

New game+ mode? What an outrage!!!

...and of course lets not forget the constant barrage of worthless complaints regarding things like the color pallet, and box art cover, because apparently Doom was full of rainbows and was an exceptional art gallery for its time and we must preserve that in our modern entry. Look as a guy who just went out of his way to buy the Dark Souls 3 cover that didn't suck with a puke-yellow hue in the background, I can still say with a clear conscience that it wouldn't ruin the game for me if I had to settle for the other. If that's your biggest concern with the game, you need to get a grip on your priorities and realize the game is going to probably be pretty good. You should be happy we're getting another entry after a decade instead of sweating over what picture its console version (that most "pure fans" aren't even going to touch) is coming with. But I'm done addressing those complaints like this.

Lets just go over what Doom is promising us so far. Feel free to keep any of those complaints in mind as you read the following...

• Classic fast paced FPS action without modern day halo mechanics
• Melee kills, likely inspired by the famous Brutal Doom mod
• Background story that doesn't get in the way of the core gameplay
• Enemy variety that comes in both forms of waves, and the more traditional format.
• weapon mods, and perks to select different playstyles.
• Recreation of both mars facility, and hell levels, both of which seem to preserve most iconic enemy types.
• Map editor on both consoles & PC with promised free updates, and the ability to make your own single player levels.
• Secrets that involve hidden weapon mods, and even entire areas that replicate original Doom levels.
• Fast paced multiplayer with a hybrid of arena & halo style competitive play across a variety of modes, some of which fairly unique to Doom.
• 1080p 60fps minimum standard.
• Special items have their own button to help the player and pace of the game.
• Reversible cover art, with a fan voted side (kind of like what Bioshock Infinite did)

Sounds good to me

Now let me ask you, where is your alternative solution? What AAA grade experience across multiple platforms are you going to point out to beat Doom here? Where is this oversaturation of this style and format of FPS in the present day, and what is it doing so well that it makes Doom look awfully slow or bad by comparison? Let me answer that for you: there is Shadow Warrior 2, and then nothing. Every other upcoming game is either a crazy spin related to MOBA multiplayer gameplay, or they're the old trend that was very far from what modern or classic Doom is. Your best bet for fast paced old-school shooter fun (with a campaign & multiplayer) made by a strong team that knows what they're doing and is widely accessible, is left to Doom and Shadow Warrior 2. Otherwise you're digging through a couple indie or free to play related stuff. Nobody else is offering you a fully rounded campaign, multiplayer, and map editor function at this moment in a fashion inspired by the major game that kick-started the whole genre. Nobody else is pushing that style forward with newer additions, and a modern engine. Its just Doom, and Shadow Warrior 2 on the big market, and so far I think they're doing a damn good job.

Flash storm controversy: Lets discuss COD's remaster issue, and Journalism

So I'd love to be playing some Dark Souls 3 right now, but a storm is in the area. Meanwhile I've been engaged in looking into some news stuff, but as usual there's always something to complain about. However they're rather small topics in themselves, so I decided why not combine them together to discuss while I wait for a hopefully passing storm that lets me keep my power on.

A new low for game journalism?

This is going to be a little weird to write because I'm going to absolutely refuse to credit any of the sources, since this was just pathetic and unworthy. Yet I still want to discuss the issue in some detail, which means giving you an idea of the example. So if you really want the sources here, go dig up the end of April, or start of May's articles on random websites and you'll find something like what I'm talking about. However you really, really shouldn't.

Journalism as we know it has always had some fairly low points. Its pretty clear now, especially in the digital age, that news will come in from an angle that exploits the human mind, looks for drama, and will scrap up anything it can to make or mis-contextualize that for more drama. That's not to say everything does that, or does it often, but its a reality of journalism. Heck what could you expect from a media where their television hosts look to be made of wax. Game Journalism on the other hand, isn't even a real thing for the most part. Sites repeat out press info they're given or read on the company website, basically being the hub of public info left scattered all over the place. Other than that they do the usual drama stirs, poke at rumors, and rate games that they're often given by publishers. Very seldom do we see actual investigations, or even interesting interviews. They don't even compete with each other, as the GG consumer revolt revealed, they've been collaborating with each other and even plan out offensive and political articles to throw their own agenda around in a wide-spread narrative. That's because they have little reason to compete with each other. They're all reporting the same thing from the same sources, and even from the same pay, and practically nobody gets up and says "lets push this forward!"

Well I can't help but have this all surge around in my brain as I stumbled onto a recent article. It was framed with the idea that ___ developer called out CD Projekt red for sexism (I can name projekt red, because they weren't desperately grasping for attention to the point of exploiting their fans). Now seeing an article on sexism in itself should be a red flag for desperate clickbait, but honestly it was coming from within the industry itself, so curiosity got a hold of me and I gave it a look. It was a fucking tweet that couldn't even write a sentence. That was it, laughably with the fluff writing of "the other side has failed to respond." Well no shit. If I were a working company in an entertainment industry I would be focused more on the upcoming project, and support of my games, than what some idiot said to me in a half-baked tweet. Shockingly enough (not really), the difference in work attitude can be seen in the products. The jab came out of a small team that makes minimalistic games received well only by a cult audience, and they have trouble even conveying how to sprint in their latest game. CD red on the other hand, I shouldn't have to explain. Point is, they shouldn't waste time with responding to such dribble, and neither should the website, and heck neither should I. However I've kind of got my excuse *looks at the storm*, and rather than naming names, I'd rather shame the fact that its actually even come to this.

Your best source for news, apparently

Seriously. If all you've got going for you as a source of gaming news is, "oh no, dude on twitter is talking poorly written smack!" then I'm going to question your site, writing, and journalism skills way more than normal. Oh but it happened yet again this week, when a certain AAA developer tweeted out insults to COD's new trailer over twitter. He had a little melt down over the matter, and apparently his outraged tweets were so interesting it was reported as news. I rarely see this stuff devolve this far. Its not quite a new low, but its touching the bottom. And the fact that I actually trusted them enough to click that link, is also sad. So I'm not going to do it again. That's why I'm not sourcing things now or naming names. I'm not bringing attention to some whiny twitter troll that just so happens to be a part of a company with a mixed record. Instead I'm going to ask to readers and writers why this is a big deal. Why have we come so far in gaming, only to put this in as a highlight for the day? What's next, youtube troll says PS4 has no games in the headline? Look, don't add to this nonsense. If a storm isn't looming in your area, you've got better things like Dark Souls 3 to do. You've got fun games to play, actual news to look into, or at the very least you can protest the existence of these articles in the comments if you find yourself feeling tricked into reading one. If you actually care more about what one dev says to another that DOES NOT directly impact your entertainment, take a step back and think about things.

Modern Warfare's tough sale's pitch

Hey guys, guess what? Your favorite modern day style COD is getting a remaster like you've been begging for! Modern Warfare's remaster is coming out just in time alongside the brand new entry, has multiplayer support with its own dedicated servers, and is being done by such a good team as Raven. The bad news? Its being held at gunpoint by the new COD.

$80

Right so that's a bit of an exaggeration, but in case you hadn't heard there's a weird catch related to the COD4 remaster, you need to buy it bundled with the new entry. That's $80 in the very least. I... actually can't say I'm surprised, and not that that outraged. However as I thought about it more I realized that was lack of care was more on my lack of emotional attachment to the series. Really this just sucks in general, for both parties involved. Its really one of those situations in which only the super fan or publisher wins. The super fan wins because they were going to buy the new game no matter what, and at $20 the addition of a resurrected favorite is pretty great. Certainly beats the $50 attitude Activision took with Deadpool. And Activision wins this because they know they can push a couple people to get the series, and can show their investors that "look, this entry has boosted sales. Gee, I wonder why..." and then they can pull the strings to cash in on a $30-40 stand alone sale several months to a year later.

Look my initial reaction is that its kind of evil genius. Its one of those things I have to step back on and say "yeah its shitty, but its clever.". A lot of times my complaints for the games are done on merits that its just a plain stupid decision, or something with awful long-term consequences, but this is one case where I nod my head and say "okay, yeah, you got us in a good choke-hold there". However its still sad, AND its not entirely without its flaws. If this is to please investors and get some early extra sales, that's good. However you're also losing sales. You're losing sales from people like me that would have given you $20 for that entry (it would be my first time owning the original MW, so sure I'll put down the money), but now its a matter of the other game justifying a freakin' massive $80 investment. For comparison, I barely did $40 on the one recent COD I was optimistic about, and wound up regretting it to. Then there are people who are just plain done with new COD, but were ready to give you a good chunk of money for a remaster of the one they loved. Now, that money just isn't going to get to you, period.

Then I realized yet another way in which this was evil genius, but potentially bad for everybody. Hypothetically speaking, what if this is a cover up? What if they're afraid that either COD4 is so good that it would, by itself, cannabalize all the work put into the new game? What if this is finally the chance for fans to prove they want a simpler game, and a more classic take on the campaign, if it sold way better and had longer online support? What if the new game sucks entirely, or they have little confidence in it after Ghosts, and this is to help push you to buy it before you realize that? This could be a case of potentially holding quality hostage by a more expensive and lesser game, in order to maximize profits. I kind of doubt it, since I would honestly rather believe Activision is just that selfish that they simply want to maximize $80 profit potential for the sake of it. Still this hostage type conspiracy is possible, and I want people to remain cautious about the upcoming game because of it. In either case I'm left kind of agreeing with the majority on this one. Fuck you Activision. Don't support this! Wait to test them and see if there will be a stand alone in the future, and even if that's not a thing... well, the PC version on steam is just $20. Grab a good PC, buy it, and enjoy it. Its a little ironic protest, and your money on the PC platform will take your further than just dunking $80 on a game you don't even want. Of course if your a super fan you'll just buy and enjoy both anyways, and again, more power to you if you're in that winning position.

Murky future ahead on this one

Well that's all for now, and.... damnit, still can't play Dark Souls 3. Well this article did kill some time, but I guess the storm outside is just stubborn. Thanks for reading anyway.

Now playing: Dark Souls 3

So yes I've been playing Dark Souls 3 lately as I teased in a recent post. I wasn't originally planning on it. I think I even made that clear in my anticipated videos list. But damn-it, Dark Souls is one of the best games and gaming franchises ever made, and taps into the very notion of existence and human nature. Its kind of amazing that way. I can't remember anything specifically dragging me back in. I avoided all hype, knew just about nothing about its changes, and didn't even notice when the good lore/guide bits were posted. I just remember that after I successfully disguised its launch with Ratchet & Clank awesomeness, played through that, and enjoyed some other games around the time, Dark Souls crept in and hung there in the air waiting for me to buy and play it. I got a pay in, and imediately siezed upon it with the promise that it still wasn't too late to get the Day One edition with the superior box art, and physical soundtrack attached. ...and I love it! Even with a busy and hectic week from Tuesday to Sunday of playing, I've sunk around 16 hours into it, and I've got a lot left to try out and do. As usual I took my path as a Wanderer for the first run, and I've been shaping him into a mean and adaptable Dexterity focused class.

How is the struggle? Really weird with its ups and downs, and my last hour was practically spent goofing off of the main quest. At first it was worst than ever. The first boss is the hardest beginner boss in the franchise, and gets to you right when you have nothing more than the class basics. The first town was a slog, and took me quite some time without ever being slowed by traps and whatnot. However once I got past a certain point in the beginning, things started to go smoothly. I started finding myself in a loop, established that I could handle all the regulars of the undead settlement, found some tips and weaknesses (living cages are devastated by fire attacks), and the only major problem for what must have lasted me an hour or two was just where to go next. I had cheated my fight with the fire demon, looted a bunch of stuff, discovered the cursed tree boss was an optional just for souls, and found myself struggling at the infamous swamps of Farron keep. I was mostly done with it, but still had a suspicion I was doing something wrong. I looked through some tips and realized I missed a path through the crystal sage. Rammed through that boss with ease (at least as a melee character, must be a pain for ranged). Then was on my way to the correct path... only to find it lead to a dead end and redirects me back to the swap. But getting to that dead end took a lot of effort, got me some great loot, and gave me a lot of strength. By the time I was back at the swamp it was all child's stuff. I now walk with 9 estus flasks, dealt with the abyss walkers, and I'm working through the skeleton filled tombs. Things are actually going fairly smoothly for the most part.

You can't stop this!!!

My last hour was actually spent completely goofing off. I found the Wolf guardian and joined his covenant, and have been running back on errands and backtracking while waiting for signals and pulls into PVP battles. The one thing that would make me put down my sunbro badge as a tribute to Solair, would apparently be a mysterious wolf figure on an ancient keep that looks a bit like one of the starting locations in the original Dark Souls. So far it seems like players are self-aware of that system and area, because every time I'm pulled in I see phantom guarded players. However that's not all. Twice I've been pulled in with red phantoms, and the first time the guy seems to have just killed himself... or maybe that was a red phantom again. The 2nd time I came in with one I was also with a friendly watchdog, and he started just thrashing on the red phantom while I thought "WTF!? Dude he could help us!" and left to go track the host... who was with a white phantom because of course. The confused red phantom won out, and jumped in as I signaled the phantoms into the swamp, and we didn't know whether or not to attack each other, so it was just a big uncoordinated disaster.... and I loved it for that reason! Its a complete battleground, and as long as I'm not back on the main quest discovering and rationing my items, I'm standing by waiting for the signal to go fight in the woods. Its great fun. On that note of covenants, I really need to go do some work for the sunbros, but just haven't felt like getting to that point of soapstoning stuff yet.

Don't get me wrong the game is still tough. My last advancement died of a giant boulder trap while being more concerned with kiting some skeletons. Meanwhile I've also been beaten 4 times over before my first victory with the tutorial boss, I had a frustrating trip completing the cathedral, and there's a good bit of cryptic info and a good reason to stay in touch with the community. Its just that I've also got freakin' 9 flasks, a huge health bar, and I'm doing a fairly good job of adapting. So lately when I see a giant crytal lizard the online signs warn me about, or that stray demon, I'm not sweating over it so much as going "I got 7 flasks left and an easy trip to the bonfire plotted in my mind, so why not shove my sword in his face a little bit?" I'm kind of hoping that pace continues, because its the set pieces, bosses, and other surprises that still keep me guarded, but I don't want the entire game to be so hard that I just decide to play something more light-hearted instead. I like the feeling that I've now sort of earned an easier time (loosely speaking),and if I want to pick up the challenge I know quite a few ways to go find one.

and its always possible for the challenge to find you

Finally, how does it compare to the rest in the series? I'll be blunt when I simply say that its another entry. As weird as it sounds for a guy that's used to heavily analyzing the mechanics, I just don't take a big note over the differences between games. I think of them a lot for what experiences they gave me, and what they introduced me to. I remember Dark Souls 1 for solair, interesting shortcuts, the painted world, that first time I was enjoying it, etc. With Dark Souls 2 I remember it for those weird moments in Majula, all the co-op fun I had (and sort of exploited), and that day where connecting a simple shortcut in the canyons made me feel surprisingly good for that entire day even after putting the controller down. Bloodborne? The savage and awesome creatures, that blind fight with a werewolf in a pitchblack basement, and that grim reaper looking guy that takes you to a whole new world with a ridiculously eerie atmosphere. How does Dark Souls 3 compare to all that you might ask? Overcoming the tutorial boss by hugging him and hacking away at the chance to. I'll probably remember being lost in the swamp, questioning my path, finding the real path, only to find a new dead-end that said "now go to the swamp". I'll probably remember some PVP if it keeps going at the rate it is now. And who knows what else I'll fine. Mechanically its a very strong game still. I love the systems they have in place, and it feels like a good balance borrowing from all the games before it. The art style still looks awesome as well, though only a couple things grabbed my like some of the creations from Bloodborne or the original Dark Souls. Then again there's still much left to go and see. So without further hesitation, I have some lord souls to go collect.

Don't know what this is, but I'm sure I'll find and kill it soon