funny to see the visual style from the 2000s making a comeback amidst the sea of high saturation youtube thumbnails and deconstructed internet culture. maybe i’m skewed by nostalgia hard but i'm genuinely enjoying this game. although the race events feel a bit short, they add to a more punchy and fast paced gameplay. the donut media tie in actually makes sense here in comparison to the donut media update in forza horizon, where they should have doubled down on top gear. the arcade physics are forgiving enough that you can full throttle the entire race for dumb fun, yet drifting around corners feels engaging and satisfying. the soundtrack is genre appropriate and adds so much flavor to the game. i appreciate how it fully embraces itself as a concussion of colors and aesthetics, which might be a turn off but at least it has a distinct identity and isn't afraid to be self referential. it's truly a breath of fresh air in an industry where many racing games have become stagnant and even regressed in pursuit to become palatable to the masses.

i see myself a lot in javik as in i also have sensory issue and need to wash my hands like a lot

uj/ for a more serious review:

It took me three games and hundreds of hours to finally tap into the magic of Mass Effect, and I'm so happy that I'm finally here.

The third installment stands as a triumph in the trilogy, merging the best elements of its predecessors while surpassing the second game in many areas. It boasts better gunplay, more mature writing, featuring characters who interact with each other in meaningful ways, all presented in a prettier package. I love the funny but sometimes creepy quips from crewmates, and most welcomingly, homosexuality is finally legal in the Citadel. The base game is action-packed and had me hooked from the start, while the DLCs expanded on various gameplay styles and added so much breadth to the galactic lore.

The game is a masterclass of character building, I found myself growing to love every crew member, even those I previously hadn't cared for. The offshore activities provided some of the most memorable moments throughout the trilogy. Massive kudos to all the voice actors for delivering stellar performances and bringing these characters to life (with the exception of male Shepard, although his portrayal remains inoffensive).

However, my critique lies in the narrative direction and thematic coherence. It feels as though the game imposes a different meaning onto the story, failing to recognize the thematic groundwork laid out in the previous two games. The resolution of the storyline, centered around the incompatibility of organics and synthetics, feels disconnected from the established themes and was massively anticlimactic.

This is coming from someone who thought that The Last of Us 2 had a perfect story and never liked a happy ending in media because it discounts the emotional labor imposed onto the audience. This departure from established narrative threads creates a sense of dissonance and detracts from the impact the previous games had.

The potential of AI as a classic sci-fi trope within an RPG format is immense; it's a question that has been thoroughly explored by the previous two games. However, Mass Effect 3's ending dismissed this well-established narrative foundation, negating the possibility that creators and their creations could coexist under a mural agreement. In doing so, it undermined the significance of EDI’s character arc and the sacrifices made by beloved crew members in the Geth and Quarians plotline. Consequently, it falls short on a rhetorical level and fails to provide a logical resolution to Mass Effect's established central conflict.

The resolution also feels disappointingly cheap; it’s completely disconnected from the personal choices you have made throughout the trilogy and the collective efforts of the squad. Despite the multitude of choices presented across the trilogy, the conclusion narrows down to three essentially identical endings, trivializing the significance of the hundreds of carefully considered decisions into an unnecessarily lengthy epilogue followed by "Pick a color." It lacks the depth to provoke thought or evoke emotional catharsis; instead, I found myself dumbfounded by the absence of any meaningful attempt to elevate the message at the end.

At the risk of being yelled at by half of the community here, I think Starfield achieved a more satisfying conclusion and served some higher meaning with its ending. Surprisingly, both games share similar story arcs, featuring the introduction of the Starchild and Starborn characters tasked with safeguarding galactic evolution. Themes of the pursuit of truth and power, symbolized by artifacts and the Catalyst, echo the story of Icarus, presenting protagonists with moral dilemmas and the ultimate choice of their fate.

The contrast lies in the distinct themes and the emotional resonance they evoke. Starfield delves into the story of humanity, emphasizing the fundamental need for purpose in our existence. On the other hand, Mass Effect tackles the existential peril posed by the creation of artificial life forms. However, its conclusion feels flawed, lacking substance beyond the rushed decisions made in the final hours of gameplay. This isn't a direct comparison between the two games, as both excel in exploring the breadth and depth of their universes. But I can't help but hope that BioWare dedicated more time to crafting an ending that acknowledges alternative solutions to the narrative conundrum already established within the series.

Nevertheless, I love the trilogy to pieces, and I can’t believe it took me so long to finally get into it. Playing all three games back to back immediately after Starfield only made me realize how ambitious this franchise was set out to be. The depth of the world-building, the intricacies of the characters, the diverse colonies portrayed, and the romantic interest (singular as I had my eyes on Kaidan from ME1) my Shepard had along the way all contributed to an unforgettable journey.

It took me three games and hundreds of hours to finally tap into the magic of Mass Effect, and I'm so happy that I'm finally here.

The third installment stands as a triumph in the trilogy, merging the best elements of its predecessors while surpassing the second game in many areas. It boasts better gunplay, more mature writing, featuring characters who interact with each other in meaningful ways, all presented in a prettier package. I love the funny but sometimes creepy quips from crewmates, and most welcomingly, homosexuality is finally legal in the Citadel. The base game is action-packed and had me hooked from the start, while the DLCs expanded on various gameplay styles and added so much breadth to the galactic lore.

The game is a masterclass of character building, I found myself growing to love every crew member, even those I previously hadn't cared for. The offshore activities provided some of the most memorable moments throughout the trilogy. Massive kudos to all the voice actors for delivering stellar performances and bringing these characters to life (with the exception of male Shepard, although his portrayal remains inoffensive).

However, my critique lies in the narrative direction and thematic coherence. It feels as though the game imposes a different meaning onto the story, failing to recognize the thematic groundwork laid out in the previous two games. The resolution of the storyline, centered around the incompatibility of organics and synthetics, feels disconnected from the established themes and was massively anticlimactic.

This is coming from someone who thought that The Last of Us 2 had a perfect story and never liked a happy ending in media because it discounts the emotional labor imposed onto the audience. This departure from established narrative threads creates a sense of dissonance and detracts from the impact the previous games had.

The potential of AI as a classic sci-fi trope within an RPG format is immense; it's a question that has been thoroughly explored by the previous two games. However, Mass Effect 3's ending dismissed this well-established narrative foundation, negating the possibility that creators and their creations could coexist under a mural agreement. In doing so, it undermined the significance of EDI’s character arc and the sacrifices made by beloved crew members in the Geth and Quarians plotline. Consequently, it falls short on a rhetorical level and fails to provide a logical resolution to Mass Effect's established central conflict.

The resolution also feels disappointingly cheap; it’s completely disconnected from the personal choices you have made throughout the trilogy and the collective efforts of the squad. Despite the multitude of choices presented across the trilogy, the conclusion narrows down to three essentially identical endings, trivializing the significance of the hundreds of carefully considered decisions into an unnecessarily lengthy epilogue followed by "Pick a color." It lacks the depth to provoke thought or evoke emotional catharsis; instead, I found myself dumbfounded by the absence of any meaningful attempt to elevate the message at the end.

At the risk of being yelled at by half of the community here, I think Starfield achieved a more satisfying conclusion and served some higher meaning with its ending. Surprisingly, both games share similar story arcs, featuring the introduction of the Starchild and Starborn characters tasked with safeguarding galactic evolution. Themes of the pursuit of truth and power, symbolized by artifacts and the Catalyst, echo the story of Icarus, presenting protagonists with moral dilemmas and the ultimate choice of their fate.

The contrast lies in the distinct themes and the emotional resonance they evoke. Starfield delves into the story of humanity, emphasizing the fundamental need for purpose in our existence. On the other hand, Mass Effect tackles the existential peril posed by the creation of artificial life forms. However, its conclusion feels flawed, lacking substance beyond the rushed decisions made in the final hours of gameplay. This isn't a direct comparison between the two games, as both excel in exploring the breadth and depth of their universes. But I can't help but hope that BioWare dedicated more time to crafting an ending that acknowledges alternative solutions to the narrative conundrum already established within the series.

Nevertheless, I love the trilogy to pieces, and I can’t believe it took me so long to finally get into it. Playing all three games back to back immediately after Starfield only made me realize how ambitious this franchise was set out to be. The depth of the world-building, the intricacies of the characters, the diverse colonies portrayed, and the romantic interest (singular as I had my eyes on Kaidan from ME1) my Shepard had along the way all contributed to an unforgettable journey.

(this review was originally written for ME3)

i fucking hate ubisoft so much.

i want to preface that not every game has to be a think piece, and you can make a good game with just interesting level design and satisfying gameplay. but watch dogs is so obviously desperate to compete with the grand theft autos of the world, and it missed the mark completely because ubisoft is the tech oligarch that the game set out to mock and they are incapable of seeing beyond the quarterly earning calls.

instead of investing in a good script and original gameplay mechanisms, it cut corners by using assassin's creed's foundation, where it still focuses on physical combat, relegating hacking to a cosmetic layer and cliches. wherever it fails to fit the premise of the game, it resorts to throwing pistols and sniper rifles at you to push forward the plot. everything about this game feels extremely out of touch and insincere regarding the theme it attempts to unpack.

despite the effort to inject some world-building into the game with the npc background labels, the city of chicago feels utterly flat and lifeless. the technically advanced yet uninspiring graphic style is a veneer meant to deceive players into believing it's a better game than it actually is. every aspect of this game screams gimmick and marketing ploy to move units off the shelves, with zero creativity invested.

i fucking hate this game so much and everything it stands for. fuck you ubisoft.

watch dogs had so much potential and material to work with to become THE commentary piece for sovereignty in the age of big tech oligopolies, especially considering the political events and scandals coinciding at the time, and Ubisoft leveraged none of that??? the Hollywoodification of the technical mechanism, the forced edgy writing with PG13 dialogues, the cookie-cutting art direction void of any identity, this game feels nauseatingly plain and unoriginal as a player.

as a media enthusiast, i fucking hate the corporate indoctrinated approach to media production and the braindead content taking up so much space in the public sphere. i would rather play horse boyfriend simulator than continue endorsing this piece of shit. fuck you ubisoft.