Seeing double: A problem in perception

Hey guys, here's a trip down memory lane for all you awesome gamers out there! Remember when Nathan Drake of Uncharted got stuck on an island, had to gather supplies and put together crude WW2 weapons sturdy enough to last him a whole trip, cried and complained about his newfound hardships as this was his first (unwanted) adventure, and had his friend nearly sacrificed to a crazy occult and an angry island spirit? Me neither! That was 2013's Tomb Raider. But I'm sure I just made that mistake because its very simple to confuse them. I mean Uncharted is really similar in that you play a wise-cracking hero, banter with a rag-tag team of misfits, and dash across the globe entering constant exciting set pieces with an entire mercenary army hunting down the same treasures that usually seem mystical, but turn out to be more toxic than anything else. Oh wait no those are two totally different things. But there's got to be some connections here, right? Well they both are done in a 3rd person shooter angle, and have a single player focused affair with characters who specialize in archaeology. That's... about it. They don't even both play like the same 3rd person shooter, one is melded with metroid style exploration across a connected island that has some reoccuring spots and openings, and the other is more traditional with common shooter gameplay and linear level progression. That's be like calling two multiplayer shooters the same because they have quirky colorful heroes, and that'd be ridiculous. I mean nobody has ever confused Overwatch with Battleborn, or oh wait did I mean Team Fortress 2? Oh wait a minute....

Yeah this has been on my mind for a while, and I keep putting it on hold or talking myself down from it. But the issue keeps coming back up, so I'm just going to say it: If you're one of those people to sew together any of the above games as the "same thing"; Stop being shallow, blind, idiots. Oh, did my tone seem a little insulting? Good, because I'm fed up with all the mechanics, fun, and inner-lying strategy that separates two very different games as being melded together with "derp, its the same because they both have a pony." That makes your statement a very absurd and short sighted one, as if you can't tell your right hand from the left because "they both have thumbs, no difference.". So you've earned it. Its not just an issue about comparing games either. Anyone can easily compare Team Fortress 2 with Garden Warfare, but only in a light manor of describing how they work. They both depend on classes, a nice colorful tone, and run with crazy abilities and powers that defy logic to deliver a crazy fun multipayer experience. They have that in common, and to compare the two makes life easier for everyone in conversation. They are not taken to be the same kind of game though, and that's good.

A cartoony character with a bow just like TF2 sniper!? Sue the bastards, they stole the whole game.

Meanwhile Overwatch does have that problem, as the comparison at some point jumped the shark from "its kind of like this game" to "Oh yeah it totally stole its soul and became the same thing. Its an awesome/awful rip-off!". This is a problem because it takes all the finer differences in hero quality, ability differences, the unlock system, the interface and community the game is centered around, and throws it all out the window by falsely saying "imagine its exactly like this game, because it is!" No its not. It has a different name, different mechanical priorities, may have even released among a new market space, and is going to likely be supported differently. They all have their unique odds and ends, and its not just skin deep unless it truly is a clone/knock-off. That does happen. At one time FPS really was just Doom clones, where games all worked the same with only a couple balancing alterations. However at some point we jumped that ship, and that point is something like Strife coming along that takes that same Doom frame and adds stealth, NPCs, dialogue options, etc. If you released it in today's market though your average internet comment would probably call them the same if they saw as much evidence as maybe one demon. Because apparently Doom had NPCs, and stealth much like how Uncharted had you exploring for parts to upgrade your bow to last you the entire game. The answer to that analogy is that they don't, and that makes a huge difference as to how the games unfold regardless of what occupation or camera angle the character share in common. That's all it takes to set people off now.

That's why Overwatch was so fiercely compared to Battleborn even though they were miles apart. But colorful characters + multiplayer theme = twins apparently. Don't pay any attention to the character ability differences, any mode variations that define the way you're supposed to play, or important interface utilities like changing your entire damn character in the middle of a match, nope they're both the same game and you MUST choose one over the other because why would you buy the same game twice? These games were practically in a community war with each other, and it couldn't have been more ridiculous. Some people have blamed the marketing, but you can't seriously sit there with a straight face and tell me that with multiple free betas for each as well as constant and various sources pushing videos with clear evidence in your faces at no extra charge. You had to go out of your way to somehow be ignorant of this and yet also be involved in the community enough to call them the same, and yet that's what tons of people did. Only once both were out and things sorted themselves out, but sadly Battleborn kind of lost because out of this nonsensical comparison of "colorful heroes, its the same" Overwatch already held itself out as the popular kid with Blizzard's barrage of promotion and high reputation. ...and yeah, I think this ignorant, stupid, and short-sighted nonsense that comes from this awful mentality helped create a condition in which an ambitious and unique game was sent out to die for being told it had no identity of its own. The people that contributed to that should be ashamed of themselves.

That TF2-wannabe Hanzo is in here somewhere, I just know it!

Not only is this an attitude that has, in rare cases, hurt games, but its also an attitude that indicates something of another problem: gamers don't understand their own games. Just look at WatchDog's hype where all the generic details were right in front of our faces, but people still got shocked when they found hacking was a prompt gimmick. Then there's the upcoming No Man's Sky where I've already discussed the net has this problem of being super hyped over sheer scope in space. Then there's cases like Far Cry Primal where even with all the differences, people will still fuss about it being a "reskin" over a few reoccuring mechanics. They don't accept, talk, or critic the newer features, its just all about how much its the same because you can craft stuff. Apparently that rules out over all the hard work put into the new game. This is basically why I wound up doing reviews the way I do, dissecting mechanics and how they play out. I don't get where some of the reviewers out there come from with this mentality that they can just give you an opinionated press release, and slap a score on the game and call it a review. A review of a product meant to inform the consumer of its quality should do exactly that. With a movie you'd discuss actors, casting, performances, and plot strength. With music you discuss composition, mood, and vocals. With games you're lucky if you get a review of the plot beyond just hearing the snyopsis (or my favorite, "it just doesn't exist" in games that do in fact have one). I know I'm digressing from the topic, but just think about it... if we're in a culture that has gotten so relaxed and lazy with comparisons that Tomb Raider is considered the same as Uncharted, how the hell are we going to review them properly? This is why no reviews gave us a good heads up on the awful ME3 ending. How are we going to critic, learn, grow, and develop the mediums rights and wrongs without being able to tell the difference between a metroid-shooter hybrid and a... well in the words of ignorance "a gears of war clone". Funny how that rip-off accusation died, I wonder why? Maybe because it didn't hold much merit, and once the game got well recognized enough it had to stand on its own? Either way, if you play one game like the other, you're going to probably walk away disappointed. Its up to the reviewer to not send you in on a false mindset (or have a sloppy one themselves) so that the game can stand on its own, for better or worse. But instead we've got a world in which there's a 10/10 for ACU describing it exactly like a press release, and Battleborn was constantly compared (mostly unfavorably) to Overwatch for no constructive reason.

Is this why it took us years to have a game like Doom 4, and why we still don't have serve browsers in our average online games? Only a minority talk about them, and others just gloss over or turn a blind eye entirely to game function like that, because that would require them to look beyond the plot description. Now there are smart writers, and smart reviewers doing games justice and still keeping things quick and clear, but there's a lot of shortsightedness coming out of both the press and just vocal gamers. These things don't get looked at, taken apart, dissected, and admired, so developers have no reason to go through the effort unless they themselves are smart enough to say they love it. This is exactly what happened with Insomniac dropped their framerate, noting that at the time 60fps never got noted on reviews, but graphics always did. So they sacrificed something on gameplay because there was no respect, appreciation, or even a nod from the critical side about this. Now our latest Ratchet & Clank game runs objectively worse than the majority of the franchise, dating back to PS2 hardware. Thanks journalism! I don't personally mind 30fps, but this is just a small example of the potential mess. I do think if there was an outcry on the current matchmaking style from every format, we'd see browser servers. Heck just look to PC as proof, with its open platform methods and a more aware community, its more common there even if plenty have still resorted to matchmaking.

Happy to say this stands on its own

I'm aware I come off this angry, ranty, and potentially even a bit mean. Its not exactly a fun topic to talk about, and I've put it off for that reason. But there's a good reason I also feel this upset about it. I feel its one of the biggest threats to gaming from its own culture outside of the bullshit progressive politics. Its degrading to games and their artists, its damaged sales and spiked fanboy type competitive aggression, its limited our vocabulary and discussions, and it creates an atmosphere in which both the gamer and developer don't know what makes a game mechanically awesome. It takes a miracle like Dark Souls, or Doom 4 to bring out the discussions on how great mechanics work (at least after release. Before Doom was being compared to freakin' halo of all things), but as soon as you slide a WatchDogs in front of our faces it goes back to "ooh! I can hack a city?" without any questions. Do you choose Tomb Raider or Uncharted? Well the sad dumb truth is a lot of people will answer that with whether or not you want a male or female lead, rather than if you're into exploration vs great linear set pieces. ...and instead of merely talking about the games at all, instead of engaging in a fun community discussion with fans, the first thing I get to see when a new Tomb Raider article comes up about its PS4 port is "who cares, Uncharted 4 is the same thing miles better" from some idiot. Only that supposed idiot is the most upvoted comment among a mix of spiteful fanboys, and those ignorant and naive on what they may or may not have played. It frustrates me to see that kind of thing. I'm not saying you have to drop all comparisons. Uncharted and Tomb Raider still appeal very much to the same kind of player base, as almost anybody into action adventures will appreciate them. Similarly Okami will appeal to and make sense to compare with Zelda related things. TF2 really can be compared to overwatch as a quirky competitive objective-driven FPS. But these aren't the same games, and you can buy, play, and experience them all in their own unique and individual ways.

There isn't a single game out there at this time that can give you the same experience as playing Genji in Overwatch, or Pyro in TF2, nor is there an easy equivalent to Super Brains from Garden Warfare 2. These are all unique classes made and balanced within their own games, with different loadout settings and abilities, and from the imaginations of awesome artists who had unique combinations of ideas to create such playable characters. Likewise there's only one 3rd person shooter I know of hanging as close to metroid level design and roots as much as Tomb Raider does, and a fan of both Uncharted and Super Metroid will be absolutely thrilled with this kind of detail. Its unique and an awesome experience only 2013's Tomb Raider can give you. Not Uncharted, not Gears of war, and not even older Tomb Raider. I think that sort of thing deserves a good bit of recognition and respect, don't you? Can we discuss mechanics a little more instead of just style, or premise? Alright I think that's enough for now. Thanks for sticking with me on this angry lengthy post.

Obviously Uncharted... right?

E3 reminder: Graphics don't matter

Well this is great, an article where I can truly dig into a rant and still get out fairly quickly. Its related to E3, and why graphics just don't matter there regardless of whatever you've fooled yourself into thinking. Its not even a matter of the general concept of graphics, as sure they do matter, but just the area in which we hype on it. Its actually something I've covered before here and in a piece of this monsterous post. Here I'll help you out and quote the key segment of that last article:

Actually I have to say that I also naturally kind of have some doubt or distrust in the back of my head for visual hype. You can't just tell me it looks good and have me invested. I can't get invested in youtube quality, I can't tell you how breathetaking everything is in some still screenshot, and just about anything else (even uncompressed videos) you can do wont prepare me for what I will see on the TV screen when it gets here. So.... yeah its the sort of thing where I wont believe it until I see it, because you are talking about a sight thing afterall and your trying to get the info through a bunch of middleman sources. You can't earn my trust that way that the game will look fantastic based on whatever twitch, youtube, or the CEO says, it just doesn't work that way. I can't see it until I'm playing it, and then I'll not only appreciate it but I'll be immersed into it as the thing I'm actually a part of.

This isn't even about being cynical either. I could talk like that and pretend I know for sure companies are doing this out of corrupt intentions, but the fact is even if they were the most honest, kind, and humble dudes out there giving you previews, the fact is that this isn't representing the final product or how you'll get it. In addition to the fact that the game simply isn't done yet, and has months at the very least before such a thing happens, we're also talking about an industry mostly talking through what we see off the internet. We're linked here, brought by countless different services. Every semi-big journalist website, a decent chunk of big name youtubers, twitch, the game companies themselves, youtube itself, and even freakin' movie theaters might all be potential routes to go and see this event. I emphasize the word "event" for a good reason. That event itself, even in live spectical, is mostly about watching trailers. So... you're essentially watching a youtube video of somebody watching an enhanced video. Maybe that video at the event is uncompressed, raw, or even being played, but even if that was all true 90% of us are watching it compressed, and the rest are still watching it on a specialized screen in an overglamorized party meant to really just please investors. In whatever situation you find yourself in, you're not your typical self, and/or you're not observing the game in the same kind of setting you'll find yourself playing games in.

Of course there's then the components outside of straight-forward graphics. You want the PC version? Hope its optimized. Hope your PC can run it the way you see it on screen. Want the console version? Are you sure they really promised the resolution, or will it be one of those dynamic scaling things that create occasional pop-ins and mess? Will it perform at a locked framerate? Will any of the versions run smoothly? Day 1 patches are a standard at this point, and even companies that have a near spotless record have had their moments of let downs in the performance department. You simply can't expect everything to run the way its given to you on a vertical slice. These things are edited, cut, and displayed by trained people who want you to run out and buy the game. Why the hell did you expect the graphics at E3 to mirror your living room or bed room gaming experience again!?

Reality. NOT E3

However this isn't necessarily bad news (well if the game performs badly, that sucks, but I'm talking strictly about graphics again). I'm just stating the facts of why I myself have never been truly excited over a game's graphics based on some E3 showing. I'll still try and take into account details like what all is happening at once on the screen and I can loosely predict maybe it'll look great, but I even try and keep those expectations tame (this is a highlight reel, remember). The fact is though that often games impress me visually once they're in my hands. Even WatchDogs on a rented PS3 copy impressed me during moments, because I never held expectations over it based on earlier footage. So even after watching videos of both E3 and the real thing on higher systems, neither captured the way the city shone in a sunset after rainfall. That was just beautiful, and the textures and lighting effects on display are simply what gets lost in transition between all that other formats like youtube. Its when its right in front of you on set-ups like this, this, or even this that will determine your true experience in the game. Then there's the most obvious thing of all: gameplay and immersion. No matter what the game looks like, its immersion that counts for whether or not the game has the capability to work whatever magic it seeks to accomplish. However immersion, like the reality of graphics, depends entirely on what is going on when the game is in your hands. Immersion is something that can only be experienced, not seen. So is it a bad thing that your not seeing what you're getting? No, because what you get is the real thing, and it often comes with some things that transferred over better. Maybe the rendering is dumbed down, or the weather system has taken a hit from the E3 footage, but ultimately you'll see all the textures, shadows, lighting, and the true motion and form of the game for the first time once its on your TV or computer monitor and you're in control. That to me has surpassed nearly anything I've seen at E3... unless the game itself sucks.

So... look, guys... can we please not get all worked up over the graphics? Can we please have an E3 where we enjoy the games for being games, and not for what the buffering youtube video displays? ...and don't sit there and pretend to me that you're all doing this for the sake of holding developers accountable, because Last of Us begs to differ (the one game that was dumbed down almost entirely via gameplay, and yet very few batted an eye because it wasn't Ubisoft). Even with WatchDogs, few people actually talk about the difference in physics and interaction versus just "Ew, look at the graphics!" For some odd reason you guys just have a knack for ragging on games that have undergone a different render process, or find that upon optimizing across various systems it was easier to lose certain visual effects than to properly optimize each individual entry. You get worked up over that, rather than how the darn thing plays, or even if the gameplay stays true to the original form shown. Can I ask that this time, at least this one time, we try and accept the fact that these aren't complete games, may change, and even if they release tomorrow would look different on our own systems? I'd rather not have another Witcher 3 case where a great game, by a caring and supportive company, gets bogged down in the last minute by "OMG, It might look somewhat different! Get the pitchforks!" ...and then the game released and looked just fine the way it was, and remains one of the best open world games to ever release. I think we're going to do fine in this E3 if we keep our heads on right. In the end, my point is exactly that of the title: E3 graphics don't matter. Stop caring about them, stop raising a fuss over them, and learn to look past all the snarky "this is downgraded" and try to find something you enjoy from the event instead.

Quitting the zero tolerance quitter policy

So blizzard recently laid out the details on their plan to punish quitters. Its a common thing to do now, as per one of the responses to the increase of team based games, and progression systems. However much like other issues regarding the progression system, I always took a problem with their implementation. Blizzard is certainly among those devs that have screwed up their progression system, but I've already discussed that and here I'm actually going to talk about what they did so right. They went above and beyond the typical route of quitter penalty, and instead of just sloppily lumping every guy that ever quits or drops by other means from the game into the "bad kid" corner and steals their stuff, these guys actually did something around their stat system to single out the truly problematic individuals. Not only that, but in kindness they also addressed specifically where and when their system even bothers to track that information. It seems like common sense that this stuff counts when a match says "go" and stops at the leaderboard screen, but honestly its hard to know for sure in most games. Plus most quit screens threaten you with the automatic loss of XP as just a stock response of pressing the quit screen, so even if you decided that this was your last match in something like COD, you're encouraged to wait for the next match to start just to quit and make sure everything you did the last 10+ minutes had some effect in the game's established system. Here everything feels... fixed and completely established. Its a great change of pace.

Here's the thing the previous trend has failed to realize: we have lives! Its the same problem I have with the souls games still going pause-less (including offline mode, and then there's the fact that even online stuff has things to alter and throw you off the grid). However I suppose that'd be digressing on another subject, but still its the same basic idea. As much as we'd like to be immersed in our games, life happens. There are pets, family members, friends, visitors, sudden phone calls, internet drops, even power outages, and more to consider. Whether its sudden things that come up demanding your attention more, or things that happen entirely right in the moment without any warning, things happen to separate you from the game. Now since we can't exactly pause direct online play for good reasons, we should be allowed to quit. Its honestly punishing enough in that moment, when you realize you might let your team down, or you have to leave your friends, or just the mere fact that you're separated from what was entertaining you. Then you want to tell us we're also smacked around by the artificial reward system? You choose to force us to grind out chores in our games, and then also tell us we're not worthy because real life happens? Meanwhile the fact is, people out there are still salty and have emotional problems that they'll still quit the game even in the face of these system penalties. To them, the team or match is already lost enough that the points they lose were never significant to them anyway. So... honestly you're just slapping normal people on the wrist because they were smart enough to see that other lives matter more than some virtual combat arena. Why is that penalized?

Crazy things in life don't just pause while you play your games

So what Blizzard did here is genius. They tapped into their stat-tracking and basically set a special system up that takes all the games you've played, and tells you that once you quit a certain amount within the latest matches, you become at risk of losing big on your XP. Admittedly the penalty is also greater (lasting multiple matches), but at least this essentially stamps out the risk of you losing out just because of that one time someone tripped over the router cord. Meanwhile if someone has such issues with just playing the damn game that they quit every single match they're in, well.. they'll get caught.

For those people who have this on hand...

I really hope more people adopt this system, or at the very least have their equivalent system explained with such care and detail. For all the idiotic reasons progressives get on their high horse and talk down about gaming and how it "alienates" mature audiences, they rarely cover legit problems like this. No matter who you are, be it an adult with a busy family life, or a kid who is simply being called from another room by their parents who don't understand he can't pause, you deserve a game that respects your time. I truly believe in the common sense business act in which the product you're buying is made for the consumer, and that means respecting their time and life to the best extent possible. That means being allowed to walk away when life calls, even if you cannot pause, and not being punished for it. That shouldn't be a radical idea, or something new, that should be the standard of the industry. However, I'm glad someone at least gets it, and has made an accessible experience while still satisfying those people who think the rage quitting needs some penalty. Personally I think rage quitters are just hurting themselves enough that I really don't care if they get a game-given punishment or not. But in general, just don't do it please. However because that's not going to happen on a universal level, I'm glad Blizzard at least set a good system in place to fix things up. I hope it catches on.

Don't rage quit

2016 so far...

In somewhat of the same spirit as last year, I'd like to discuss some games that I've been playing so far and sort of review over how the year has been for gaming (Hint: its fantastic). As per last year I wont be covering every single game I've truly played since I don't have a photographic memory, nor is everything worth praise, but I'll also avoid restricting this to perfect 2016 releases since this isn't any GOTY type list. Though for reference, you can check out the opinions I have here with whatever relevance it has on my hype list for the year. Oh and there's no order to this system. That said, lets move on, and prepare for another monstrous list that took either multiple days or ridiculous stretches of a couple wasted sittings to complete...

EDF: 2025

Extra discussion here: Now playing article

So this is a game about mindlessly shooting giant bugs with mindlessly awesome guns in PS2 era tech while promising yourself that the amount on screen somehow justifies the poor conditions. It really doesn't, but things still work well enough to get the job done if that job is "stupid fun". Basically its so mindless that Serious Sam would be kicked out for trying to instigate a philosophical revolution. However its fun given the right attitude, and just the right moment for escapism. I had a good time with this, and I have no doubt I'll return or even buy a new game in the franchise at the right price. However its not really something worth getting all loyal about, or sticking around to. I dropped it and moved on when the time was right, but don't regret any time spent squashing insects with super weapons.

Cabela's African Adventures

Yeah we're not really progressing any better on this list yet are we? From budget cult-hit cheesy japanese shooters, to just plain crappy low budget shooters shoveled out with the promise that it might kinda have something to do with hunter brand stuff (and no, it doesn't, you've been duped hunting fans). It also wont help much if I told you this is pretty much what I expected when putting down the $10 I did for this. Still here me out if you think I just might be able to redeem my credibility: At some point I just need a stupid, silly, cheesy game to play. I dare myself to play some summer-ish looking (I went over this recently) cheap game with a silly yet oddly relatable premise somewhere in mind. I love animals, I love adventures, I love shooters, and so this budget african hunter shooter thing felt right. I've had my eye on it for a while, but because I was fully aware I didn't touch it until the price fell below $15.

Now that its been played and in my possession... well its just what it says on the tin. Crappy story attempt though, way worse than I originally imagined. Likewise some of the limitations and weird inner workings of the game logic are a bit shattering. This isn't exactly Alpha Prime levels of awesome cheese, because at least I could be immersed there. Here... no, just no. Still I'd be lying if I said I didn't enjoy some stuff. I turned on the game at least 4 or 5 times, and I played away at each sitting for more than 30 minutes, so I guess it was doing something right. It was kind of fun to see what happened next, as well as just challenging myself to look for more out of a game with so little. I'll probably go back to it eventually, but for now its been off my PS4 to keep space for way better games.... because, believe it or not I do in fact still have good taste in some gaming.

Firewatch

Oh goody, now we're going from dumb fun to pretentious maybe not fun. Nah, in all seriousness this was a good game, I just wish I paid less for it. I decided to gamble on it at launch, and it was kind of fun. I liked the adventure it held, even if the ending was sort of "meh". I liked the dialogue, the choices, the tension in the mystery, the different events and the way you saw the same place evolve with it, and I love the art style. Again I didn't care for the ending, and then there was all the PS4 related bugs including 2 freeze crashes. Still it was fun, and my sister loved the game as well.

Thief

Not a new game to be playing, but this is one I just officially bought as of this year. I played the PS3 version back on rent long ago, and it was fun enough. However I didn't quite get where it fit in the grand scheme of things. I chalked it up to mediocre and mainstream design vs something created out of heart like Dishonored and MGS, but I wasn't entirely satisfied with that answer. Well upon playing the PS4 side some this year, I accidentally stumbled into a conclusion: this game is about its title, and that alone determines if its for you. This is Thief, about thieving, and if you have the mood to escape into a world encouraging and rewarding some kleptomania, then this is the best. Its not as good with mechanical observations, perfecting your sneaking, or world building like a nice stealth game, but it is good at every little detail of snatching stuff up. Every careful crafted animation of pulling drawers open bit by bit for loose coin, reaching in and snagging something, dodging eye contact from dim lights as you work a safe code open, and seeing the little glimmer of something off to the side from the corner of your eye. This game glorifies theft, and that's kind of cool in my book since I feel at home with tricksters in thieves as far as fiction goes. Its not as awesome or memorable of a game as Dishonored, but its a good fix for the right niche and weird craving of a thief's fantasy. ...yet ironically this is the first real game I probably have on this list.

Broforce

Ugh, talk about a throw-away game. Broforce is a special and unique case of awesome, but then it shows up short handed in a way that makes itself practically useless for a person like me. Maybe if you're into co-op or multiplayer its fun for a little longer, but as an adventure you take one insane trip through. Its full of complete chaos, explosions, blood, humorous jabs at stereotypical masculine awesomeness, and things take an awesome twist with aliens and satan taking over the world. However you can only play it level by level, and then once it ends that's it. It ends. You can't play any level, there's no map maker on console, and the game is even slightly broken (at least at the time of playing). Glad it was free as a + title, but still it kind of sucks that it couldn't amount to its full potential because of poor and intentional outdated design choices. ...oh who am I kidding, Ubisoft has been bringing it back into style with one slot campaigns. Either way broforce was a fantastic game to play that ended in an experience I'll never play again in the near future, nor one that has a lot of incentive to go back to a game where I'll have to repeat everything.

Enter The Gungeon

Enter The Gungeon is definitely this year's indie surprise as far as I'm concerned. Told by nobody about this before-hand, I just kind of saw it sitting there in the "launch party" and was fascinated by it. The satiracle beholder monster, the art aesthetic that just had a charm about it, and the quirky concept of a dungeon full of guns. Oh and the "gun that can kill the past" also helped to sell me on something I didn't know I wanted. As it released, people then began to flock over it and whisper about how it could even be an Isaac killer. But I didn't like Isaac. Still, I pondered it, and... bought it. Then I played it and loved it so much, that to a certainly degree it even overshadowed R&C at points. I really loved it. Something about the art style, the energy, the challenge, and the tiny little innovations like teleporters, all combined to make a game that was pretty awesome as far as rogue-lites go. Nothing ground-breaking or eternally amazing, but such great fun regardless. I really enjoyed my time with this game way more than I should have.

Crimsonland

Probably the game I played longest ago on a new list, but with good reason. This game practically taught me what a "perk" in game terms was, far before people learned it the Call of Duty way. Crimsonland was a game I downloaded on PC as a trial demo back when I was at least in middle school, possibly sooner. It was at a time where Steam wasn't super everywhere, and you still had game downloads running within their own clients, and entire ones dedicated to shoving more trials and demos in your face while timing you on 60 minutes of play or whatever. It let me play a survival mode of an isometric shooter that, at the time, just blew my mind. You painted this massive wasteland red with staying blood and corpses, you got new random and wicked items spawning in or power-ups constantly, and it was just fantastic.

Fast-forward to now, and its pretty much a barebones isometric shooter with a nifty gambling system in place of its survival, and it reminds me of just how it kind of sucks to be older. I still think there's a weird balance at play here that makes the game more fun than it should be technically, but its still nothing super fancy like my younger self thought. I'm not creatively looking to paint the battlefield, nor is the perk system anything extraordinary, but hey at the end of the day this is just the perfect game to chill out and shoot stuff with. I also love its touch pad integration on PS4, and its portability on the Vita. Glad a timed trial demo from like 7 years ago finally paid off to a $3 HD remaster version on consoles.

Plants vs Zombies: Garden Warfare 2

With a bit of risk, I caved in at the idea of this crappy internet DRM, and gave this game a shot. I really still do hate the DRM and will even point to it as a factor as to why I haven't played it since the few weeks after I bought it, but I will give the game credit for still being fantastic 3rd person shooter fun. Everything felt fairly balanced enough, the new classes were a blast, the unlock system is actually pretty fun while still intelligently tying into non-intrusive microtransactions, the bots are flexible and good enough to be fun, and then there's the improved wave defense and hub world elements which are far better than you'd expect of a game like this. Its a true sequel in the best of ways, and a very unconventional EA type of game to come out under that publisher. It really is pretty fantastic, and I hope it continues to have a strong community as all the bigger multiplayers like Overwatch, Battlefield 1, and others take their footing. I really do hope to pick the game back up soon and enjoy it some more.

Galak-Z

Now this is a weird case, I suppose almost the opposite of Gungeon. While Gungeon was an amazingly fun game where it shouldn't have been because of its rogue-lite-ness, Galak-Z was an insanely fun game for the gameplay sake, but had the idiotic idea to build it all behind rogue-lite elements because... its trendy? No really, I can't figure out why the hell this game was a rogue-lite, its far too good of a game at just its core for that garbage. They even went and fixed in a new mode that removes perma-death, but that's not even the full problem. Its still designed in a way that your upgrades, earnings, and whatnot all mean squat in the grand scheme of things, and that you start out weak and fragile in a level structure that resets itself every 5 sessions, and level design that can't figure out if its too simplistic or complciated. It feels like all the bad design choices were out of the rogue area, and all the good ones are from it just being a fun game to play. Its sad to say it, but in the end the presentation got the better of me and I just don't deal with this game much because of its poor set-up. I'd rather be playing games that actually mean something a little more, or games that at least have a better standing as a casual fix. This has niether. It has amazing top-down combat, fantastic physics, fun voice acting and story presentation, and a great mech idea, but... everything else is weighing it down because "derp, indies are supposed to be rogue-lite I guess".

Ratchet & Clank (remake)

Heck yeah, this game was.... fun. Yeah admittedly I don't have a lot else to say on that front. Its a great game, really. The R&C original adventure was well remade in the places where it mattered, Most levels were carefully recreated, the newer mechanics made the game way better than the original, and then there was some crazy amount of particle effects, enemy count, and graphics on a scale that can only be described as PS4 powered chaos. It was all pretty great, but it failed on one major front: the story. When you're retelling the story, and are trying to open a new audience to the awesome franchise, and even take the extra care to give some nods over to long time fans, the last thing you want to do is to skip out on the story so badly that it requires the movie, and sits as the worst portrayal of the duo being a duo since... well, ever. No really, this is the least convincing friendship I've ever seen out of these two, and that even includes Deadlock/gladiator and Crack in time where they weren't both even on the screen together most of the time. The story was sloppy, rushed, and poorly put together with the movie, and on top of that it does absolutely nothing to address future plots or the countless potentials that open up with starting their adventures over again. As for gameplay its all great for the most part, but it doesn't do anything to blow my mind on the series and even feels about an hour shorter, and is missing the arena mode that makes for some awesome parts of any R&C adventure. Nothing ground heart breaking, but it does definitely explain why I haven't bothered to complete challenge mode yet. 

Back on my hype list I said this game could easily be the best thing of the whole year, and I did mean that, but I was talking about the "if" it hit every box with precision and awesomeness. Here it flopped on the story to the adventure, and stuck to the old classic's lack of an arena, and I guess in the grand scheme of things I can already say for sure its not GOTY material. Its awesome, its fun, and I recomend its purchase at $40 or under without any question, but its not GOTY. Its just another awesome R&C game, with a less than awesome story and the wasted potential that comes with that down fall. Oh but the movie was pretty great as well in my opinion, so go see that as well... even if not a whole lot of people agree with me due to some weird double standards (it has the same style of the game, but apparently it doesn't work for a movie without being "childish").

Stories: The path of Destinies

Played honestly about the same time as R&C. I kind of wanted to talk about it in its own, but I didn't find the time... which is kind of good, because that means I was playing more than writing about it. Still this was a fairly different kind of game. It started out slow and boring, but the combat quickly built up, the stories were great, and it was just a fun and witty adventure to go on. I loved the story choices, enjoyed finding my way to the "right" ending. Though in the end I also found it to be incredibly repetitive. The one downfall, and it is quite a big one, is definitely how many times you'll be redoing the levels (especially on the right path). Great game, cast, plot, general idea, and even a fairly fun combat system that catches on, but the gameplay doesn't carry the absurd amount of repetition the level set-up has in store. That being said I'll happily play it some more later down the line, and probably come back yet again after I tire of the 2nd run. There's so many potential endings and stories left still unturned, and its probably all worth getting to at some point.

Turok (Remaster)

Oh yes! Expect an upcoming article on this game sometime in the future, because Turok is a weird franchise that somehow has so little to do with my active gaming, yet is a big influence on it regardless. Furthermore its just quite unique and yet sadly forgotten, and I feel like an article aught to come out on what it does right and unique, or how I think it should influence the genre. For now though I'll note how awesome it was that this remaster was actually on sale at the same time I got my access to PC's gaming market back, and I did not hesitate to grab this.

Anyway getting to play this was a fun experience back onto the PC market. The various options to enhance this old game were pretty great, though I volunteered to keep the fog high for atmosphere. 

Then coming to the gameplay, it works in a weird way where collect-o-thon style tactics are secretly taking place over shooting. Shooting is certainly still important here, and you'll need to carefully manage ammo, deal with a variety of enemies, and even shoot them down more than once if you hang around their spawn points for another round, but ultimately the weird catch with this game is just how good you are at getting secrets, pick-ups, and keys. An entire weapon revolves around your ability to pick up the parts to building it, and this predates R&C by years. However this is also sort of its curse, because sometimes its just damn annoying to be stuck on a huge semi-maze type level looking for some slightly obscure key just to progress the game. Meanwhile enemies never stay down for good, but sometimes the ammo you used doesn't respawn as fast as you like, so it almost becomes survival horror with the aesthetics of some wonky rail shooter. Its a weird game, but pretty fun still. I'm really glad they brought it back into the spotlight, and I look forward to Turok 2 and the console ports that are coming up eventually.

Dark Souls 3

What can be said about this franchise that hasn't already been said? It certainly applies to this game, and maybe then some. Okay know what, just have this GIF

 Dark Souls 3 is a fantastic. It sadly feels somewhat more linear than past games, but it isn't bad enough that it gets in the way. I've had such a crazy adventure that I just love this game, even as incomplete (as usual) as my trip is. I've been lost in a way that actually helped me progress big time, and lead to such an ironic twist that it paid off in a big cartoony sort of way, I battled awesome looking creatures and mutation, came to wonder once again about this mystical world, and I just love all the new balancing systems in place.... well, except the lack of armor upgrades, but I can live with that. The game is just great, and so far is one of the best I've played this year. I hope I can actually come back and beat the dancer where I'm stuck, but even if I didn't, I've had a great time so far.

Table Top Racing: World Tour

Right before I got Doom, I decided to sample one of the simpler newer PS+ games at the moment, and that was this game. ...I was disappointed to keep it simple. I thought this would be one of those fun arcadey medal chasing racers, and it was set up with that premise. Silly looking toy cars, funky weird music, and the same exact level set-up. However the actual control of the cars, the car variety, the challenge factor all sucked. So did the music, which became quickly obnoxious. Challenge races pretty much took even more freedom out of the player's hands, and then on top of that I'll state I don't actually like the level set-up of these racers, I just usually like how care-free and silly they are... and this one just doesn't hold that tone well enough among its awful gameplay. I quickly deleted this game, and I can't see myself coming back. On the other hand, I do wish to still play Tropico 5 pretty soon.

Doom 4

I loved this game, I still do, and I'm just going to say that going forward right now its currently my favorite game of this whole year. Its probably going to be that way, since I love FPS games a lot, and this is also one of the best FPS games I've ever played. The mechanical focused is tuned to the point of mastery, the gameplay holds a lot of variety and diverse extras within complex and varied levels, a good length, and the gunplay is very satisfying. Everything is fast, fluid, and packs a punch. Meanwhile the music is tuned perfectly with what's going on, there's a story to be told for those that want it, and each difficulty is worth giving a try. If that's not enough, there's a competitive multiplayer worth some casual arena-lite fun, and just when you think you might be getting somewhat bored there's a constantly updating snapmap system for building your own stuff, and trying out others. Some of what others have made is quite incredible, with everything from normal and fun FPS corridor levels, to actual arcade runners, and even a freakin' harvest moon clone. Its amazing what people can make, and it all passes through so fluidly and naturally whenever you need a small break from the phenomenal campaign. The only thing I can imagine beating it is something that breaks from the norm in such an amazing and revolutionary, and well polished way, that it just bends my mind in sheer undoubted bliss. Unless that happens, Doom sits here as something so fantastic and amazing that it is currently one of my new all time favorites in gaming, and I love it.

Uncharted 4

For starters, I'll note this was a rental, and I did not complete the campaign in a game that has all of its enthusiasm behind the story and campaign. This was a weird mixed bag of fun. I really enjoy the franchise as my personal favorite from Naughty Dog, though that doesn't mean as much to me as it does from some others. Basically the game starts off really slow, disjointed, and disorganized. It takes like 3-4 flashbacks and disjointed scene and year leaping to actually set up the basics of its own story, destroys a past story, and then the gameplay is chugging along at the same disorganized and slow snail pace. Actually I would almost want them to remove gameplay just to get the game to actually freakin' move along to the point where it got good. It wasn't until chapter 7, scottland, that the game got to where Chapter 3 in Uncharted 2 was in both terms of story and gameplay set-up, and that is a lot of wasted time to set up a potentially great game. Along the way I've also got to confess I wasn't dropping my jaw over their hyped graphics. It just wasn't anything so impressive, and that was coming off of 60FPS Doom. That's not to say it looked bad, it was more than serviceable, but we're just beyond that point of jaw-dropping stuff, and that's kind of why I'm so disappointed with shit like the PS4.5 where they think edging the graphics up a tad bit is worth all the risks, costs, and hassles associated with it.

That being said, once things got going and finally caught up to Uncharted 2's standards, they were really good. I really enjoyed the combat, the stealth system that is actually legit stealth for once, the sliding and grappling to diversify the platforming a bit more, and then there's just some really fantastic moments like the jeep journey, or simply playing Crash Bandicoot with Drake talking over it. The story still has a lot of character driven charm, and fun things in store, and when things finally get into the gameplay loop you expect of the series, it delivers on them well enough to be fun. Its not a game worth fighting review scores over like some idiots are doing, but it still is a fun game, and I wouldn't be surprised if it deserves the praise its getting as a good finale to the franchise.

Stanley Parable

This is a weird little game about being a weird little game. Stanely Parable is something I've been wanting to play since its release, but I waited on a sale because I rarely just burn money on these narrative driven adventures (See: wish firewatch was cheaper). Suddenly it showed up for $3, which is definitely within my interest, and any cheaper would make me feel wrong. Now here I am, and... I'm not sure if this is everything I expected, or if its more or less. On one hand it feels like I'm finding some endings, and story pieces that are just really underwhelming. Then the level of interactivity is just kind of... well, minimal, leaving me feeling like the game was even more shallow than I expected it. On the other hand some endings, and some of the satisfying ways in which the game is set to break itself, are so awesome that it makes up for the lamer bits. The game almost winds up becoming about finding all the endings, and seeing how far you can push the game's minimalistic abilities. Its pretty crazy. I think my favorite ending has got to be the one in which the narrator himself becomes lost with you, and attempts to use all sorts of scatter-brained sillyness to try and put the game back together (like that adventure line in the screenshot).

Valkria Chronicles (Remaster)

What I'm currently playing for the most part right now. Valkria Chronicles is an excellant strategy game, if not perhaps the best one I've played in years. Its a bit taxing to sit through and set up, requiring some commitment and dedication to your work, but once things are at a "go" its just awesome. This is finally a good strategy game that finds a good place between difficult tactics, and experimenting and finding your way through the warzone. Meanwhile in-between episodes of story go along a soap-opera anime style, and then you've got RPG systems in HQ to help boost your abilities for the increasing challenges. I'll definitely try and stay on this game for a bit more, and see what all it has in store as the fun continues.

[sort of off-topic] Summer time

Well I can't speak for the general world and its weird time and weather differences, but its certainly summer here. Temperature is around 80 degrees on average, finally going out of that wild time of constant cool dips, and unfortunately the AC at my house doesn't work. I've been chilled out by time spent at the apartment, but here I'm feeling the heat and needing 4 fans for my room alone. To simply play a video game, I need to blast my volume up to triple the usual sound just to hear over the constant buzz of fans. However that's not what summer is completely about, and I'm listening to a Atlas light synth electronic album in another tab (here, listen with me while you read), thinking of enjoying a fruit sorbet later, and still can't keep away from the coffee despite my better judgement telling me its hot enough as it already is. I'm still going to attempt to enjoy myself, and I decided why not talk about the usual things that come to mind during summer. At first I was going to do this based on video games, but screw it, its far more interesting to just chill and talk about the general summer condition (though I am personally more of a fall person).

So unlike most people, the first things to come to mind aren't necessarily beaches and mixed drinks. I mean don't get me wrong, that's genuine and true summer fun and I'm totally for that sort of thing, but I think the common thing I associate with summer is child hood, nostalgia, cheap fun, and... well then of course maybe some of the more broad stuff like tropical islands, fruit & smoothies, and just chilling. Of course the weirdest bit is nostalgia and cheap fun. Its a weird thing, and I'm not entirely sure why summer just brings it out for me. I think I can place a good guess though. You think childhood because its the time kids are let out of school for summer break. Its a relaxing time before they face the next big chronicle in their life of education. However during that time, its all about having fun and enjoying yourself. Meanwhile cheap fun comes from the way marketing now is done. Artificial sodas, dollar store floats and beach balls, and catchy bubble gum pop or dance music fills the air of most speakers, and you can get up and treat every day like it was Saturday with free access to TV. Then there's just the simple fact that my own view of early childhood cartoons had a decent number of cheap stuff that still somehow remains fun even if it might not be "good" on a technical level. Like the Donkey Kong Country show, which is practically a poster child of my idea of summer content.

Tropical setting, and terrible Saturday morning show. Just grab a smoothie, and its a perfect summer combo

For some reason, gaming has a similar fate even though I actually grew up with some decent taste depending on what games you're looking at. Spyro, Banjo & Kazooie, Timesplitters, and Medal of Honor aren't exactly bad games. Still for some silly reason, summer puts me in that mood of not only reliving a few nostalgic classics, but actually to seek out sillier or more badly made stuff. Things like Alpha Prime, and Jurassic the hunted feel like great examples. I swear I want the game vivisector for much of the same reason. Its a silly campy FPS with a warm setting, and there's just something about it that resonates as "summer" in my mind. ...and on the other hand I also enjoy seeking out AA grade arcadey stuff. Plenty of it litters the PSN ground unheard of. Again don't know why, it doesn't add up with much true nostalgia in gaming, but it feels so right and "summer".

However I also feel just the mood creeping in to just enjoy animation, and cartoons in general. As an art form, it never feels more at home than in summer... and that's saying a lot considering you can never go wrong with cartoons, animation, and art at any point in the season. However summer just brings out more of that attitude to appreciate what's around in it even more. Admire the art on the web, admire the light-hearted animations waiting to be discovered, and chill out with a nice graphic novel in the end and take in the art and world built in it. Then with that in mind, gaming also starts to include a few more 2D things than I'd normally like. Among one of the best being Awesomenauts which is a perfect summer game, but then there's stuff like battleblock theater, or even just flat out retro games like... well the DKC video game on SNES or GBA. So basically my gaming habbits for summer are a weird spready across retro-ish, arcadey, cheap, and nostalgic games.... but of course I wont put down something like Doom. I'll still play new releases and games that I just want to (likewise I get summer-ish moods for this stuff outside of summer at times), but when it comes to summer I think of all the others I stated before, and I find myself just turning on the PS2 or searching PSN's obscure junk a bit more often than normal.

Hunt a dino? Why not, sounds perfectly summer to me.

So take a quick stop at Tropical Smoothie Cafe (no really, they're amazing even outside of summer), then go home and take out those season 1 Beast War DVDs, reflect back on which PS2 cult-hit game you're going to play next, and enjoy the warm air while you dream of that beach trip that's coming up soon. Summer is here, and its time to enjoy things. ...and maybe think about how you're going to put an ice pack in front of that fan to help out the room temperature. I dunno, but don't let that stand in the way of your summer fun. Its palm tree season, so make the most of it.

4 OverWatch flaws that few are addressing...

Well I did say I'd try to post 3 positive articles before another negative one, but honestly I was still mostly thinking about something that is more central to me rather than responding to outrage or rebuttles. I think this is decent enough of a "me" topic worthy of this blog's core focus and effort, and I'm not the kind of person to just fill out a number just for the sake of a quota. Heck I still haven't done my last GOTY list because I have integrity behind the logic that I wont put a game on there that I haven't beat, but Witcher 3 still was my GOTY for 2015... so I'm just not doing it for last year by this point since I haven't sat through a 40 hour game yet.

Anyways this article I apologize about bringing down a beloved game. Overwatch is awesome, don't get me wrong. Heck the only reason I didn't do a beta impressions, is because everybody was already playing it and knows how fantastic it is, and I had nothing new to add to the table save for "aim assist sucks". Oh and I'll get that out right now as well, mandatory aim assist in addition to the rip-off console pricing on that side really sucks. Still the game is fantastic in practically every other way. At least... at the heart. I mean that's why I see it as getting all the 10/10s I've seen thus far, and it really deserves that praise at a central level. However I do feel like there are some issues surrounding the game, and unfortunately most reviews as usual just continue passing on the most shallow details, and the bulk of gamers follow suit. Its kind of why "FPS sucks dude" took over, even though we all really love stuff like Doom and Counter-strike, and why people can't tell the difference between Uncharted and Tomb Raider. Well I certainly can see these things, and I'd like to bring some light to a couple things that I hope get fixed in the future.

4) The microtransactions are unnecessarily annoying for everyone

Okay so I figured and expected there to be micro-transactions, and at first this was all good and well. I heard all about the many characters, how much fans loved them, and how they'd be full of customizable stuff you could unlock and likely buy when the chance arose.  However as I've formed a motto for work ethic, it applies here in the form of "expect nothing.". Even though its common sense to assume there'd be something present like a LBP style shop for costumes, and you just know they wouldn't be stupid enough to turn down that influx of money as people put down $4 per hero costume to have all their favorite top 3 picks in the best uniforms, they didn't do that. They even had a fun interesting loot box system in place in the main game. So it'd be perfect! Meanwhile without pay you got a fun little lottery ticket per level in-game, keeping the chance for your specific preference rare, but still fun and free anyways. However they decided that when you put down the not-so-micro $50 purchase, all you're doing is asking to spin a gamble wheel 50 times. Its exactly like leveling up, only you just insert your wallet for multiple boxes of virtual loot crates. Glad to see that culture ramming right into video games... no, no I'm actually not.

However you might also see a good side to this. If micro-transactions aren't worth buying, that just means you get to keep more of your money and just play the game normal, right? Most gamers claim they loath and don't support this stuff anyways, so that's just more power to them. ...Well, no, because they fucked up the simple premise of random loot drops per level as well. You don't get a loot drop per one or two matches, you get a loot drop based on classic RPG Beginners ease, to snail pace end- game. According to both players of the purchased game, as well as what I was suspicious of from the beta, levels get incrementally harder to achieve and all you're still getting is just one loot box. So for some stupid reason, you've got to turtle your way to getting even a chance to get anything worth your while from the game once you've been playing for a while. Tell me again how this isn't a F2P model where they give you just a taste of the system, and then expect you to pay up front for that next dose of cosmetics? This is exactly a system straight off of games that range from $0(F2P)-$15, and out of the first ones to come to mind most only established those in updates in addition to the base game (like CS:GO) people were content with. Here its a brand new shooter that I have to go and pay $40-$60 for with all of the skins and cosmetic extras being locked in from the start, save for the 5 you get for the premium $60.

Oh but it gets even better, because lets go over just what is inside a single box. You get like 4 or 5 items per box, and each item has a chance to be one of the many cosmetic enhancements you get. This includes each of the 21 heroe's many skins, each of their handful of highlight and pose animations, their individual sprays, taunts, and then about 20 or so voice lines for each 21 characters. So about one hero out of the twenty-one (at just launch) has at least 50 unlockables, and you only get five items of which can also be duplicates that get converted into less cash points than they're really worth or bits of cash points directly. So if I just had perhaps a simple wish to get the Okami Hanzo skin, and I've played the game a decent amount to get to that point of liking Hanzo, I'm going to be playing through 3-6 matches for one chance to get that out of a massive combinations, where I may not even get a single thing for Hanzo at all until a crate 5 boxes later gets me a spray I don't even want. So this makes me want to go buy it right? Hell no, because then I'm just putting down $10+ for a couple of crates to get the same exact damn result. In the end I will probably get that skin sooner by just unboxing 20-30, and having enough scrap cash points off of all the disappointing duplicates to buy the skin by a point system that should be in place from the very start as a normal micro-transaction. But is that skin worth the price of 20 or 30 crates? Only if you're a lunatic with money to burn. I could save that stuff up for a legit wolf fur pelt in real life rather than spending it on a chance to get it for a virtual character. 

...and yes before the "b-but, its only cosmetics guys!" argument is set, well to that I'll point you to all the games doing this a hell of a lot better. Cosmetics exist as a fun extra, and a part of the game that gamers are supposed to care about and look forward to as an exta. Its the best thing to hold hostage by a progression grind since it doesn't pester you with true content being locked, but that doesn't mean you can treat the cosmetics like complete trash. Its still a fun extra, in a game about fun. Here that part of fun and character personality is not only locked behind a gambling wheel, but it is intentionally designed in a F2P way that scales higher and higher with no increased chance of real award. Its an extra piece of the game that isn't working in a functional manor, and an obstacle that stands to detriment a fun extra factor for the sake of money-grabbing schemes (which doesn't even work in cases like mine). I don't appreciate that one bit, and I think people who are letting it slide simply because its cosmetic are missing the point by being that shallow.

3) Bots are barely there in a game all about character diversity

lonely bot.

I know, not a big deal to some people because "Derp, bots don't matter" but I tend to disagree. Its a huge part of the reason I caved into PvZ:GW2 even though it was still online only like some idiot didn't know how to remove their own DRM. Similarly I considered Battleborn, but left it under the same online only DRM logic. However Overwatch as far as I know had offline bots truly in place. So I had hope for it, but then they forgot the very thing that made the game worthy playing in bot mode: the characters. There aren't even enough characters for a standard bot match. You'll be seeing the same 6 or so people over and over again, and cloned for both teams. Bastion will be fighting Bastion, nobody supports you except the monk robot, and I hope you don't need a junkrat unless you're prepared to do it yourself. Its not the world's end, and thankfully they said they're probably going to address this and update the game with more bots. However the thing is its out now, and... yeah, well I can't enjoy bot multiplayer with that kind of roster. Its one of two problems that has me staying back and saying that I can wait for the game to be a bit more complete. My only fear is that the way this has slid off as such a non-issue for the majority of people, is that it will be put so far on the backburner that either its forgotten, or is more like something that gets put in around winter. So consider this a (sadly unread) reminder out there that this should be worked on. I don't necessarily expect all 21 characters to have a bot this month, but it'd be great if they at least had a batch of 3-6 more to throw in as a sign that they're definitely working towards it.

2) Forced matchmaking

No I'm not letting this kind of thing go with an online focused game. If you choose that path, I'm going to call you out on the bullshit that is forced matchmaking. And don't even bring up the excuse that its for competitive play, because that mode isn't even in the game yet, and even if it were I'd tell anyone putting that priority over fun and player freedom to go take a hike. Its a damn shame that we've let this matchmaking junk become so fixed over our gaming that its just normal to have our games behind the times with freedom, longevity, stability, and community engagement that we've had since the late 90's gaming scene.

1) Lets move on from web browser story telling

This is the one I really shouldn't even have to say. In an era where AAA is supposed to mean an extensive lot of detail, craft, and work from a big company, and where we've been given a grand potential story in even our multiplayer driven games, why on earth is all the heart, effort, and care not even given the small effort it would take to link the video file in with the game as something you can watch off in the main menu. Why do I actually have to go and find every video, guessing it by name and place, just to figure out some piece to the story? Why is that outside the video game? Why is there not even a tiny bio text written for a character? And here's the thing, they can't just tell me the lore is extra bits written off the side for those that want it, its actually ingrained in the game. Hanzo and Genji have unique conversations and sprays pointing to each other's existence, and the maps have a history and background somewhere lying within them. The characters have costumes and personalities driven based on ideas that something happened to them at some point, but you'll have to both wait for that story to be developed, and then go find it somewhere outside of the game. All they had to do was give you a teaser text entry, or leave video links like Recall or the Two Dragon's short within the game files, but for some unspecified reason they just don't do that. By now the idea of character driven multiplayer battles are well established enough that we can easily move forward with the idea that there will be plot developments, so please put them in the game.

Its not only making your product less than it really is, but its also hiding the effort that some good money and heart went into. Its a dis-service to your own product. Its weird as well, because I've known several instances of PS2 era games that even put their own trailers inside the game itself, and now we have vital bits of story and lore on these characters we love that can't even be put inside the game just because... reasons? I just don't get it. I hope Overwatch is the last game that decides to do this silly stunt. Have some more self-respect for yourself Blizzard. You're game and characters are far more complete and compelling than you're making it seem by having this stuff kept locked out.

Too awesome to be excluded

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.