Craigjs91
2022
Fromsoft seemingly never disappoints and remains one of the few companies that I blindly give money to on every new release. I imagine going from their typical interconnected yet somewhat linear world design of the souls series, bloodborne, and sekiro to a massive open world would be a difficult transition but Elden Ring pulls it off delivering a masterclass in world design. You never have to be told where to go, the world subtly pushes you in the right direction by drawing your attention to the important places with clever world design. Really can't say enough about the world, genuinely amazing.
This game isn't without it's faults though, I found some of the dungeon bosses to be a little recycled. For example some later game dungeon bosses will be just two of an earlier game dungeon boss or throw in some dogs or skeletons with an already used boss. This is forgivable due to the sheer number of these dungeons in the world but it is worth noting. The combat is largely the same as dark souls 3, but I am fine with that, if it ain't broke don't fix it right?
Honestly my biggest complaint about the game is that some of the bosses attack patterns seem to almost try to trick you by using everything you've learned from previous Fromsoft games against you. For example in most soulsborne games, when an enemy lifts their weapon in the air it typically means they are going to swing it at you so you should dodge. However in this game a number bosses have this almost comedically long wind up in their attack animation that is almost certainly programmed purposely to counter people who reflexively dodge. I found this cheap and annoying, almost like the game was punishing me for having good reflexes. instead I had to turn to pattern recognition and essentially become a video game playing robot who reacts to inputs like "he raised his left arm at a 30 degree angle with his right knee pointed outward, this means I have to wait 2.4 seconds then dodge". And I know that all the soulsborne games do this to some extent, but I personally prefer the fast paced reactionary combat of bloodborne to this where you are rewarded for aggression and good reflexes.
With those complaints out of the way, I will summarize by saying that this game is easily game of the year in my opinion and is one of the best open worlds of all time. The game is not quite a masterpiece, but is a damned good game worth every penny and was a joy to play... Except the Horah Loux fight... F that guy.
This game isn't without it's faults though, I found some of the dungeon bosses to be a little recycled. For example some later game dungeon bosses will be just two of an earlier game dungeon boss or throw in some dogs or skeletons with an already used boss. This is forgivable due to the sheer number of these dungeons in the world but it is worth noting. The combat is largely the same as dark souls 3, but I am fine with that, if it ain't broke don't fix it right?
Honestly my biggest complaint about the game is that some of the bosses attack patterns seem to almost try to trick you by using everything you've learned from previous Fromsoft games against you. For example in most soulsborne games, when an enemy lifts their weapon in the air it typically means they are going to swing it at you so you should dodge. However in this game a number bosses have this almost comedically long wind up in their attack animation that is almost certainly programmed purposely to counter people who reflexively dodge. I found this cheap and annoying, almost like the game was punishing me for having good reflexes. instead I had to turn to pattern recognition and essentially become a video game playing robot who reacts to inputs like "he raised his left arm at a 30 degree angle with his right knee pointed outward, this means I have to wait 2.4 seconds then dodge". And I know that all the soulsborne games do this to some extent, but I personally prefer the fast paced reactionary combat of bloodborne to this where you are rewarded for aggression and good reflexes.
With those complaints out of the way, I will summarize by saying that this game is easily game of the year in my opinion and is one of the best open worlds of all time. The game is not quite a masterpiece, but is a damned good game worth every penny and was a joy to play... Except the Horah Loux fight... F that guy.
one of my favorite games of all time. Simply put this game is a masterpiece. No game or movie has been able to pull off cosmic horror close to how well bloodborne masterfully explores the genre. Gameplay is spectacularly designed to promote aggression which plays perfectly into the themes of the game. The way the world evolves as you gain insight and progress through the game is amazing. I could keep singing this games praises all day, if you haven't played this game yet a.) I'm jealous, wish I could play it for the first time again. and b.) what are you waiting for?
2019
Probably the most unique game I have ever played. Saw it randomly during a steam sale and thought it looked fun. Little did I know the cheap little indy game would become one of my favorite games of all time. What a beautiful experience this was to play. Go in blind and enjoy the ride. My only recommendation is to turn on the "pause time when reading" option so you don't feel rushed when reading stuff.
2022
This review contains spoilers
I don't want to come across as too critical of this game because I did enjoy my time with it, but I was majorly disappointed in a lot of elements of the story and pacing for this game. The combat was mostly the same as the previous installment with some additions/improvements, overall solid gameplay. There are lots of areas to explore, bosses to fight, and loot to collect which is perfectly fine, but some of the places just felt like extra content with no real purpose other than a time sink. Some people will look at that as a positive but for me a narrative driven game having multiple areas that are literally about 3-5 hours of pure filler content throws off the pacing of the story. And the berserkers just weren't nearly as interesting as the Valkyries from the first game.
Now on to my main complaint. The story was riddled with problems in my opinion. Here is a list of a few of them:
some decisions from Atreus and Odin just didn't make any sense if you give it some thought. Why would Atreus go to Odin knowing he is a master manipulator thinking he can be some kind of spy? Odin knows why Atreus is there, he even tells Atreus, so why would Atreus think any information Odin gives him is not just an elaborate trick or manipulation? Also knowing how the story unfolds, why would Odin bring in Atreus to asgard and recruit him knowing he's trying to spy on him and actually give him all the information he needs? somehow both Odin and Atreus come off as gullible and not that smart. They also spend so much time having Mimir and Freya tell us how bad Odin was to them, countless lines about him being an abusive husband, or a ruthless tyrant only to try and make us feel some kind of empathy towards him by humanizing him and making him seem somewhat decent in the middle section of the game.
The Ironwood section was a slog. The writers seemingly couldn't figure out a way to weave the Agrboda part of the story into the game in an interesting way so they just dump a couple of hours worth of dialogue at you while you pick up apples on a yak or something. Just seemed lazy to me.
The part where you go to Helheim to find the mask was essentially pointless and made no sense. Why is the mask guiding you towards the dog if it doesn't have the other mask piece? It is never explained, was the mask drunk or something? And the big climax is that you did all that for nothing and you screwed up by releasing a big ass dog that can open rifts to other worlds. fast forward like 30 minutes and Atreus and Kratos go and fix the problem. The whole series of events served no purpose except to get Atreus to go back to Kratos, and to show that we saved a doggo instead of killing it.
This type of stuff seems to happen all throughout the story honestly. Some big event happens only for everything to be wrapped up neatly a few scenes later. For example Freya wants to kill Kratos for killing her son, then a few lines of dialogue later she doesn't. Ragnarok starts, then you kill like 50 people then it's over. The only real lasting impacts of the whole game are that Brok died. Besides that everything is as it was before the game started.
I also feel like they are pulling a Last of Us 2 by trying to replace the namesake of the game (The God of War Kratos) with Atreus and Agrboda. This somewhat makes sense because part of the father/son story is the son leaving the nest and becoming his own man, but I'm not really interested in the God of Mischief and don't think Atreus can carry a game by himself. Kratos was the character that people bought the game for, I honestly found Atreus to be quite annoying in both games.
I also feel like the last act of the story was extremely rushed. It gave me game of thrones season 8 vibes. I assumed that Ragnarok starting would be the big climax of the game, and then there would be a third game where Kratos and Atreus try to resolve Ragnarok. But instead they crammed what probably could have been a whole game into about an hour or two of gameplay. There was a lot of meat left on the bone here and I honestly don't know why they decided not to make it a trilogy.
Also, the decision to have your sidekick constantly blurting out how to solve a puzzle so obvious an autistic monkey could figure it out was absurd. Maybe average out how long the puzzle takes to solve and after that amount of time squawk out commands. Most puzzles I approach, immediately see what needs to be done, and before I can even start the procedure to complete "brutha, maybe you should freeze that thing" or some crap. Simply infuriating, and somehow when Atreus partakes in this action it makes it all the more annoying because he is a child and it just comes off condescending to me... Kept waiting for a "shut up boy" that sadly never came.
With all these critiques of the story I would still like to say again, I enjoyed the game quite a bit. It is one of the better triple A games to come out this year for sure, but I am just disappointed as I don't think it lived up to what it potentially could have been.
Now on to my main complaint. The story was riddled with problems in my opinion. Here is a list of a few of them:
some decisions from Atreus and Odin just didn't make any sense if you give it some thought. Why would Atreus go to Odin knowing he is a master manipulator thinking he can be some kind of spy? Odin knows why Atreus is there, he even tells Atreus, so why would Atreus think any information Odin gives him is not just an elaborate trick or manipulation? Also knowing how the story unfolds, why would Odin bring in Atreus to asgard and recruit him knowing he's trying to spy on him and actually give him all the information he needs? somehow both Odin and Atreus come off as gullible and not that smart. They also spend so much time having Mimir and Freya tell us how bad Odin was to them, countless lines about him being an abusive husband, or a ruthless tyrant only to try and make us feel some kind of empathy towards him by humanizing him and making him seem somewhat decent in the middle section of the game.
The Ironwood section was a slog. The writers seemingly couldn't figure out a way to weave the Agrboda part of the story into the game in an interesting way so they just dump a couple of hours worth of dialogue at you while you pick up apples on a yak or something. Just seemed lazy to me.
The part where you go to Helheim to find the mask was essentially pointless and made no sense. Why is the mask guiding you towards the dog if it doesn't have the other mask piece? It is never explained, was the mask drunk or something? And the big climax is that you did all that for nothing and you screwed up by releasing a big ass dog that can open rifts to other worlds. fast forward like 30 minutes and Atreus and Kratos go and fix the problem. The whole series of events served no purpose except to get Atreus to go back to Kratos, and to show that we saved a doggo instead of killing it.
This type of stuff seems to happen all throughout the story honestly. Some big event happens only for everything to be wrapped up neatly a few scenes later. For example Freya wants to kill Kratos for killing her son, then a few lines of dialogue later she doesn't. Ragnarok starts, then you kill like 50 people then it's over. The only real lasting impacts of the whole game are that Brok died. Besides that everything is as it was before the game started.
I also feel like they are pulling a Last of Us 2 by trying to replace the namesake of the game (The God of War Kratos) with Atreus and Agrboda. This somewhat makes sense because part of the father/son story is the son leaving the nest and becoming his own man, but I'm not really interested in the God of Mischief and don't think Atreus can carry a game by himself. Kratos was the character that people bought the game for, I honestly found Atreus to be quite annoying in both games.
I also feel like the last act of the story was extremely rushed. It gave me game of thrones season 8 vibes. I assumed that Ragnarok starting would be the big climax of the game, and then there would be a third game where Kratos and Atreus try to resolve Ragnarok. But instead they crammed what probably could have been a whole game into about an hour or two of gameplay. There was a lot of meat left on the bone here and I honestly don't know why they decided not to make it a trilogy.
Also, the decision to have your sidekick constantly blurting out how to solve a puzzle so obvious an autistic monkey could figure it out was absurd. Maybe average out how long the puzzle takes to solve and after that amount of time squawk out commands. Most puzzles I approach, immediately see what needs to be done, and before I can even start the procedure to complete "brutha, maybe you should freeze that thing" or some crap. Simply infuriating, and somehow when Atreus partakes in this action it makes it all the more annoying because he is a child and it just comes off condescending to me... Kept waiting for a "shut up boy" that sadly never came.
With all these critiques of the story I would still like to say again, I enjoyed the game quite a bit. It is one of the better triple A games to come out this year for sure, but I am just disappointed as I don't think it lived up to what it potentially could have been.
2013
One of the best stories ever told in a video game. The relationship that forms between Ellie and Joel is simply magical and is made great by expert writing and top notch voice acting. People in this world are just fighting to survive, jaded and broken by the brutal unforgiving environment that they now inhabit. This bleak backdrop sets the stage for some genuine human moments that will warm your heart or make you ugly cry. Some people might be turned off by the gameplay that you could argue didn't age that well, but in my opinion it is perfectly fine, and ultimately that gameplay is just a vehicle to drive the plot and develop the characters. To this day the opening sequence still breaks me every time I play it even though I've played it a number of times and just might be the best prologue to a video game ever.
This review contains spoilers
This game is a tough one for me. I'll start with the positives because I don't want to sound like I hated everything about this game because I definitely didn't but I do have a few serious issues that really irked me. The gameplay is so brutal and intense and much improved from the previous game. The voice acting is amazing as usual with naughty dog games. I respect what they were going for, they took a chance on something they knew would be controversial to tell the story they wanted and it worked... Maybe a little too well.
I'm just going to write out my issues in a numbered list for formatting purposes because I'm sure this will meander a little bit.
1. The first problem for me was that I felt the decision to kill Joel like 30 minutes into the game was pretty dirty considering Joel was all over the advertising material. At this point in the game I imagine a large chunk of the fanbase checked out immediately, however, I kept chugging along to see where it went. This action did exactly what they wanted it to do... It made me hate Abby with a burning intensity that no game has come close to before. In the next 10-15 hours of gameplay we play as Ellie going on an understandable but reckless quest of revenge that gets increasingly more violent and dark as it goes. Following the climax of Ellies portion we then get to "enjoy" the next 10-15 hours of the game playing as the person we hate, to see the story from her perspective. Again I get what they are trying to do here, everyone has a reason for the decisions they make and violence begets violence and all that jazz. However a number of issues spring from this decision to split the game into two separate halves, I will elaborate in the next few numbered items.
2. This split is totally jarring and occurs right at the climax of the main story and gives a serious kick in the balls to the pacing of the game.
3. This one is a negative to me, but some people might have enjoyed this part but I didn't want to play as Abby, I hated Abby, and the designers purposely made me hate Abby. Something about this just comes off manipulative to me. Ellie's section comes off uber violent and ruthless, she tortures people, she kills doggos (unavoidable on at least 2 counts), she kills a pregnant person (even though imo her hand was somewhat forced). Abby however, throws tennis balls to doggos, she saves a young outcast of the cultists, she comes off as heroic and good (for the most part). This manipulation really bothers me because they forced me to kill the dog, they forced me to kill the pregnant girl, they forced me to torture the woman for information. These weren't my decisions and I didn't want to do any of them. Again I get that the whole point is to make you see that no one is purely evil or good, and the decisions we make have downstream effects on everyone but I just found this to be a bad way to drive the point. I felt like I was being reprimanded for a decision that the game designers wrote into the game intentionally only to rub it in my face later. Almost like getting mad at your dog for peeing in the house even though you refuse to walk him or let him outside. The term Ludonarrative Dissonance describes this conflict perfectly. The games narrative wants us to feel guilty for our bloody rampage through Seattle but the game is designed in such a way where the minute to minute gameplay promotes and revels in large scale violence.
4. The decision to make you fight Ellie as Abby was insane. I've never lost a boss fight on purpose before. I don't care how much they tried to force me to care about Abby, she killed Joel, it was that simple to me. I must have let Ellie kill me purposely like 5 times.
5. After the Abby section we finally get back to the theater and get to see what is seemingly the finale of the game. Ellie has learned that revenge is a selfish desire and only causes more problems and returns home with her partner and child. But then completely out of character and without any real explanation as to logistically how this could happen Tommy has information that Abby is in Santa Barbara and essentially calls Ellies love for Joel into question because she doesn't want to travel across the country to try to kill Abby again. This is so out of character for Tommy, did we forget that he willingly went to try and handle the WLF by himself in order to stop Ellie from putting herself in danger at the beginning of the game? So what, he lost an eye so now he wants Abby dead more than when she killed his brother and beat the crap out him? It just makes no sense. So the loop essentially begins again, Ellie goes out to seek revenge one last time, and what happens? Ellie goes all that way for essentially nothing... Again. Ellie's presence actually works out pretty well for Abby because she is saved from the group of bandits, granted she has to take a beating from Ellie but still. Ultimately this again works out where Ellie is the one who comes up with the short stick, she loses her fingers and can no longer play the guitar Joel gave her. And this brings me to my next issue.
6. The punishment seems to be so one sided in this game. Both Abby and Ellie follow the cycle of violence and revenge, Abby just gets her ultimate revenge earlier on. If anything Ellie is on morally superior ground because she could have killed her main target and chose not to, whereas Abby did follow through with killing Joel. However the story seems to punish Ellie so much more than Abby, Ellie loses her friends, her significant other, her kid, her father figure, her mental health, her fingers and subsequently her most loved hobby. She is a broken husk of her former self by the end of the game... Abby on the other hand loses a couple of friends and does go through some tough events with the bandits at the end but she has gained a true friend and partner in Lev, has a purpose, and is in a pretty good place mentally. Part 2 just seems to show so much favoritism to Abby compared its main characters. Joel gets brutally murdered 30 minutes into the game and Ellie is just a broken shell of who she used to be by the end credits.
7. The attempt to retcon Joel's decision in the first game to seem like it was purely selfish and evil was unforgivable to me. The most egregious display of this is Abby's father AKA the surgeon who got in the way. In the first game the surgeon operating on Ellie has sunken in eyes with dark black rings around them. He is wearing dingy green scrubs and giving off almost mad scientist vibes. The operating room is disorganized and dirty with a nice layer of filth on pretty much every surface. The setup doesn't inspire confidence and only helps convince you that you are doing the right thing. However in part 2, the surgeon is clean, well rested, and now wearing shiny new blue scrubs. The operating room is nice and clean with none of the aforementioned filth on the walls and equipment. They also go out of their way to show that he saves Zebras and is a really nice man who is struggling with the ethical dilemma in front of him. There was a clear change in tone here and it's just so obvious that it is off-putting to me.
The thing that made the first game great was that Ellie was a beacon of light in a horrible and dark world. She had unshakeable optimism and hope even though she had been through so much and this made her worth saving. The fireflies slogan is literally "when you are lost in darkness, look for the light"... Ellie was that light!!! It doesn't get more on the nose than that, and this is why so many people understood Joel's decision at the end of the game whether they agreed with it or not. And the writers respected the audience to make up their own mind about the final decision. Not in part 2 though... part 2 tells you exactly how you should feel, and that feeling is sad and empty. This game spits in the face of that light in the darkness theme by overloading the player with nihilism and cynicism. The world was already extremely bleak and when you turn the moral center of the game into a bloodthirsty asshole it just makes the game hard to get through and ultimately that's where I stand. I don't hate the game, but I can honestly say I don't think I will ever want to play it again because there is simply nothing endearing about it... unless you are into wallowing in a pit of despair.
I'm just going to write out my issues in a numbered list for formatting purposes because I'm sure this will meander a little bit.
1. The first problem for me was that I felt the decision to kill Joel like 30 minutes into the game was pretty dirty considering Joel was all over the advertising material. At this point in the game I imagine a large chunk of the fanbase checked out immediately, however, I kept chugging along to see where it went. This action did exactly what they wanted it to do... It made me hate Abby with a burning intensity that no game has come close to before. In the next 10-15 hours of gameplay we play as Ellie going on an understandable but reckless quest of revenge that gets increasingly more violent and dark as it goes. Following the climax of Ellies portion we then get to "enjoy" the next 10-15 hours of the game playing as the person we hate, to see the story from her perspective. Again I get what they are trying to do here, everyone has a reason for the decisions they make and violence begets violence and all that jazz. However a number of issues spring from this decision to split the game into two separate halves, I will elaborate in the next few numbered items.
2. This split is totally jarring and occurs right at the climax of the main story and gives a serious kick in the balls to the pacing of the game.
3. This one is a negative to me, but some people might have enjoyed this part but I didn't want to play as Abby, I hated Abby, and the designers purposely made me hate Abby. Something about this just comes off manipulative to me. Ellie's section comes off uber violent and ruthless, she tortures people, she kills doggos (unavoidable on at least 2 counts), she kills a pregnant person (even though imo her hand was somewhat forced). Abby however, throws tennis balls to doggos, she saves a young outcast of the cultists, she comes off as heroic and good (for the most part). This manipulation really bothers me because they forced me to kill the dog, they forced me to kill the pregnant girl, they forced me to torture the woman for information. These weren't my decisions and I didn't want to do any of them. Again I get that the whole point is to make you see that no one is purely evil or good, and the decisions we make have downstream effects on everyone but I just found this to be a bad way to drive the point. I felt like I was being reprimanded for a decision that the game designers wrote into the game intentionally only to rub it in my face later. Almost like getting mad at your dog for peeing in the house even though you refuse to walk him or let him outside. The term Ludonarrative Dissonance describes this conflict perfectly. The games narrative wants us to feel guilty for our bloody rampage through Seattle but the game is designed in such a way where the minute to minute gameplay promotes and revels in large scale violence.
4. The decision to make you fight Ellie as Abby was insane. I've never lost a boss fight on purpose before. I don't care how much they tried to force me to care about Abby, she killed Joel, it was that simple to me. I must have let Ellie kill me purposely like 5 times.
5. After the Abby section we finally get back to the theater and get to see what is seemingly the finale of the game. Ellie has learned that revenge is a selfish desire and only causes more problems and returns home with her partner and child. But then completely out of character and without any real explanation as to logistically how this could happen Tommy has information that Abby is in Santa Barbara and essentially calls Ellies love for Joel into question because she doesn't want to travel across the country to try to kill Abby again. This is so out of character for Tommy, did we forget that he willingly went to try and handle the WLF by himself in order to stop Ellie from putting herself in danger at the beginning of the game? So what, he lost an eye so now he wants Abby dead more than when she killed his brother and beat the crap out him? It just makes no sense. So the loop essentially begins again, Ellie goes out to seek revenge one last time, and what happens? Ellie goes all that way for essentially nothing... Again. Ellie's presence actually works out pretty well for Abby because she is saved from the group of bandits, granted she has to take a beating from Ellie but still. Ultimately this again works out where Ellie is the one who comes up with the short stick, she loses her fingers and can no longer play the guitar Joel gave her. And this brings me to my next issue.
6. The punishment seems to be so one sided in this game. Both Abby and Ellie follow the cycle of violence and revenge, Abby just gets her ultimate revenge earlier on. If anything Ellie is on morally superior ground because she could have killed her main target and chose not to, whereas Abby did follow through with killing Joel. However the story seems to punish Ellie so much more than Abby, Ellie loses her friends, her significant other, her kid, her father figure, her mental health, her fingers and subsequently her most loved hobby. She is a broken husk of her former self by the end of the game... Abby on the other hand loses a couple of friends and does go through some tough events with the bandits at the end but she has gained a true friend and partner in Lev, has a purpose, and is in a pretty good place mentally. Part 2 just seems to show so much favoritism to Abby compared its main characters. Joel gets brutally murdered 30 minutes into the game and Ellie is just a broken shell of who she used to be by the end credits.
7. The attempt to retcon Joel's decision in the first game to seem like it was purely selfish and evil was unforgivable to me. The most egregious display of this is Abby's father AKA the surgeon who got in the way. In the first game the surgeon operating on Ellie has sunken in eyes with dark black rings around them. He is wearing dingy green scrubs and giving off almost mad scientist vibes. The operating room is disorganized and dirty with a nice layer of filth on pretty much every surface. The setup doesn't inspire confidence and only helps convince you that you are doing the right thing. However in part 2, the surgeon is clean, well rested, and now wearing shiny new blue scrubs. The operating room is nice and clean with none of the aforementioned filth on the walls and equipment. They also go out of their way to show that he saves Zebras and is a really nice man who is struggling with the ethical dilemma in front of him. There was a clear change in tone here and it's just so obvious that it is off-putting to me.
The thing that made the first game great was that Ellie was a beacon of light in a horrible and dark world. She had unshakeable optimism and hope even though she had been through so much and this made her worth saving. The fireflies slogan is literally "when you are lost in darkness, look for the light"... Ellie was that light!!! It doesn't get more on the nose than that, and this is why so many people understood Joel's decision at the end of the game whether they agreed with it or not. And the writers respected the audience to make up their own mind about the final decision. Not in part 2 though... part 2 tells you exactly how you should feel, and that feeling is sad and empty. This game spits in the face of that light in the darkness theme by overloading the player with nihilism and cynicism. The world was already extremely bleak and when you turn the moral center of the game into a bloodthirsty asshole it just makes the game hard to get through and ultimately that's where I stand. I don't hate the game, but I can honestly say I don't think I will ever want to play it again because there is simply nothing endearing about it... unless you are into wallowing in a pit of despair.
2017
Hollow Knight brings back the metroidvania genre with a bang. What a great game, tonally perfect, fun combat, tons of ways to customize your abilities, fun boss fights, this game has it all. My favorite thing about the game is how the designers felt comfortable putting roughly 30% of the game in hidden or totally optional areas. I applaud this decision as it is the key to what makes the exploration in this game so fun.
2020
Essentially cocaine in video game form. Doom Eternal is an expertly crafted experience that uses clever game mechanics and a great soundtrack to push the pace of the action. When you are playing the game correctly you enter a sort of flow state where you are zipping around the arena dispatching hellspawn like a murderous pinball using your full arsenal of weapons to bring the armies of hell to it's knees. When it all clicks the feeling the game gives you is a singular one that I don't think any game has achieved before. Simply put, this game is momentum personified.
2021
The downfall of Inscryption is that act one was by far the best part of the game. I respect the attempt to shuffle genres and all the meta commentary but when your game peaks in the first quarter, it makes for a disappointing experience. However the first act of the game is really good. I loved the mysterious and dark tone, and I don't think I've ever seen a card game with horror elements. Maybe wait for a sale, but the first act alone makes the game worth playing and the rest isn't bad, it just doesn't reach the heights of the first act.
What makes this game so great is that the side quests are so much more complex than most open world RPGs. Where most games side quests consist of fetch quests and kill 10 pigs or generic crap like that. The Witcher 3 instead, has fully fleshed out stories for side quests that have narrative arcs, character development, and twists and turns not usually found in most side quests in games like it. This aspect alone makes the game feel so alive and interesting. Along with this, the combat is great, the main story is superb, voice acting is top notch. I can't really think of anything negative about this game to be honest. Definitely one of the best open world RPGs ever made.
2019
I loved the aesthetic and tone of Control. Such a unique idea for a game. For a person who has been playing games for as long as I have, it's rare that I see something genuinely new in a video game. This game had that for me. The combat might not be the best, but it is more than serviceable and feels punchy and impactful. You simply can't put a price on how good it feels to yeet an office printer at an enemies face in this game. But where this game truly shines is that it is steeped in spookiness and mystery. I'm finding it difficult to find the correct words to explain the genre/tone of the game and I think this is precisely what makes it special. If you are a long time gamer who is tired of the risk averse nature of the modern game industry and enjoyed shows like the X-files, Twilight Zone, or Twin Peaks, give this game a shot, you will be happy.
Naughty Dog hadn't quite found their footing in the narrative driven story department at this point as this was their first attempt. The game doesn't let you breathe enough, seemingly every room is a shooting gallery full of a ridiculous number of enemies who take way too many bullets to kill. The story is fine, but somewhat generic. Maybe if I played this when it was originally released I would have liked it more, but playing it after games like the last of us and the tomb raider reboots really made this game seem dated and poorly designed.
Better than the first, but still suffers from the same issues as its predecessor. Games like this work best when you have peaks and valleys in action when you transition between exploration/puzzle solving and your big set piece action sequences. I understand that their needs to be some action and shooting people, but like with the first game, I found there to be way to many bullet sponge enemies that you need to mow through in order to get to the next part of the story.
I also found the plot to be essentially identical to the first game. Drake gets word of a historical object and goes on an adventure to find it, however he is pursued by generic bad guy who somehow remains one step ahead of him even though drake is the one solving all the puzzles. Drake eventually finds the object and discovers it has supernatural powers only to have it taken away from his at gunpoint, then faces off against the bad guy with all odds against him, but comes out victorious. You might be able to make this argument against any Indiana Jones-esque adventure movie/game but I would just like to see some unique ideas in a game that is usually touted as one of the greats. Again, I'd probably feel a little different if I played it at the time of release but I still enjoy plenty of games from the 2000s so that doesn't totally absolve the game of its issues.
Also a few notes on things that don't make sense narratively.
- how has no one found this mystical city when it is literally visible from the sky.
- In the section where Chloe sets the C4 in the enemy camp then you have to go back there and arm the C4, killing everyone in the camp in the process. Why didn't she just arm it as she set it?
- Drake doesn't bring guns to the museum heist because he doesn't want to kill the guards, but he throws one of them off a building on a drop that is sure to kill him.
I also found the plot to be essentially identical to the first game. Drake gets word of a historical object and goes on an adventure to find it, however he is pursued by generic bad guy who somehow remains one step ahead of him even though drake is the one solving all the puzzles. Drake eventually finds the object and discovers it has supernatural powers only to have it taken away from his at gunpoint, then faces off against the bad guy with all odds against him, but comes out victorious. You might be able to make this argument against any Indiana Jones-esque adventure movie/game but I would just like to see some unique ideas in a game that is usually touted as one of the greats. Again, I'd probably feel a little different if I played it at the time of release but I still enjoy plenty of games from the 2000s so that doesn't totally absolve the game of its issues.
Also a few notes on things that don't make sense narratively.
- how has no one found this mystical city when it is literally visible from the sky.
- In the section where Chloe sets the C4 in the enemy camp then you have to go back there and arm the C4, killing everyone in the camp in the process. Why didn't she just arm it as she set it?
- Drake doesn't bring guns to the museum heist because he doesn't want to kill the guards, but he throws one of them off a building on a drop that is sure to kill him.
I never played the original so I don't have the extreme nostalgia for it that some seem to have. But after watching a YouTube Video by Jacob Gellar titled "The Decade-Long Quest For Shadow of the Colossus’ Last Secret" which I highly recommend you watch, I decided to give the remake a try. I was immediately enthralled by the mysterious empty world, and my first few Colossi fights were a magical experience. The concept of fighting an enemy so large that you have to climb up its body and cling to its fur to stab it in the head was just awesome to me. The puzzle solving aspect of each fight was intriguing and I was genuinely enjoying the experience
However, the gameplay loop is repeated 16 times and somewhere around the 10th or 11th Colossi I began to fatigue of this repetitive loop. The world that was originally eerie and mysterious became dead and devoid of anything interesting. The bosses who were breathtaking and fun slowly became tedious and in some cases annoying.
With that said the game is worth playing and is definitely a unique experience if you are looking for something different. Just be aware that it gets quite repetitive and doesn't give you much in terms of variety in gameplay but I respect a game that is designed with a singular experience in mind, this is the brain child of Fumito Ueda and it definitely doesn't suffer from the "too many cooks" design by committee issue that a lot of triple A games do so kudos for that.
However, the gameplay loop is repeated 16 times and somewhere around the 10th or 11th Colossi I began to fatigue of this repetitive loop. The world that was originally eerie and mysterious became dead and devoid of anything interesting. The bosses who were breathtaking and fun slowly became tedious and in some cases annoying.
With that said the game is worth playing and is definitely a unique experience if you are looking for something different. Just be aware that it gets quite repetitive and doesn't give you much in terms of variety in gameplay but I respect a game that is designed with a singular experience in mind, this is the brain child of Fumito Ueda and it definitely doesn't suffer from the "too many cooks" design by committee issue that a lot of triple A games do so kudos for that.
Everything Fromsoft creates is gold! They really are one of the only companies that never seem to release a flop. The combat in this game when you are in the zone and parrying perfectly feels so good. It's the best feeling sword fighting game I can think of. The sounds of clashing steel from a successful parry is just mmm... Chefs kiss, great sound design. And I loved the decision to go with posture instead of the normal health bars. Fromsoft have always been masters at designing their games to promote a certain style of play and rewarding players for playing how they want you to. For example, using posture meters instead of just health bars rewards you not only for attacking but also parrying properly and staying on your target. This is what pushes you towards staying in the thick of it and not dodge rolling away to gather your composure like you would in previous souls games. Without ever outright telling you what to do or how to play, they subtly guide your hand towards that "in your face" intense clashing of swords style of play... They simply nailed it. Great game design.