DrBloodmoney's Super Scientific Ranking of Games!

[DrBloodmoney]

Just now, Sendai-Horatio said:

So if you were to start the LIS Series should it be release order or chronological order?

 

Release order, without a shadow of a doubt.

 

Before the Storm is designed with a level of dramatic irony baked into it - you are absolutely supposed to know the eventual fate of the characters while playing it, and a lot of the emotional content of the game only really works if you know what will happen after the events you are playing.

[The_Kopite]

@DrBloodmoney Just read your FFXIII-2 review. Really sound reasoning and analysis of a game that imho shouldn't have existed ( like X-2) but I'm glad it did. Some absolutely fantastic pieces of music in this one and I liked the characters interactions like you. Thanks for reviewing it!

[DrBloodmoney]

4 minutes ago, The_Kopite said:

@DrBloodmoney Just read your FFXIII-2 review. Really sound reasoning and analysis of a game that imho shouldn't have existed ( like X-2) but I'm glad it did. Some absolutely fantastic pieces of music in this one and I liked the characters interactions like you. Thanks for reviewing it!

I know what you mean about “shouldn’t have existed, but glad it did” - I kinda feel like it had that in common with Crisis Core for the PSP - not exactly necessary, and not at all what one would expect of an offshoot, but oddly successful in it’s wierdness!

[The_Kopite]

Just now, DrBloodmoney said:

I know what you mean about “shouldn’t have existed, but glad it did” - I kinda feel like it had that in common with Crisis Core for the PSP - not exactly necessary, and not at all what one would expect of an offshoot, but oddly successful in it’s wierdness!

Yeah I've heard great things about Crisis Core. Haven't ever owned a PSP though so never played it. Need to rectify that someday.Some of the FF sequels and prequels were actually done well. Just not all of them sadly.

[DrBloodmoney]

3 minutes ago, The_Kopite said:

Yeah I've heard great things about Crisis Core. Haven't ever owned a PSP though so never played it. Need to rectify that someday.Some of the FF sequels and prequels were actually done well. Just not all of them sadly.

it’s true - I was quite a fan of Crisis Core in it’s day, but I never thought much of the Vincent game they did - Dirge of Cerberus. 
 

X-2 was an odd one - as I recall I kinda liked how silly and j-pop it was, but I’m not sure I ever actually finished it - I remember it have quite a grind associated with it, and think I kinda fell off in the middle section.

[The_Kopite]

11 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

it’s true - I was quite a fan of Crisis Core in it’s day, but I never thought much of the Vincent game they did - Dirge of Cerberus. 
 

X-2 was an odd one - as I recall I kinda liked how silly and j-pop it was, but I’m not sure I ever actually finished it - I remember it have quite a grind associated with it, and think I kinda fell off in the middle section.

I didn't play Dirge of Cerberus much but no it didn't exactly grab me.

 

Yeah X-2 is definitely an odd one. It just wasn't needed. X ended right and for that of all the FF's to be the first to get a sequel was really random. There are parts I like about X-2, but compared to X it's not in the same league. The platinum is extremely hard to get from what I've read too but that's another story lol

[DrBloodmoney]

 

  NEW SCIENTIFIC RESULTS ARE IN! 

 

 

Hello Science-Awesomes and Science-Possums, as promised (and in some cases requested), here are the latest results of our great scientific endeavour!

 

 

Apotheon

 

Summary: 

An indie released in 2015 and created by Alientrap (developer of Cryptark and the recent Wytchwood,) Apotheon takes the bold, print-graphic visual style of ancient greek pottery, and transposes it to a semi-open combat side-scrolling platformer.

 

Taking the role of human champion Nikandreos, who, aided by Hera (Sister-Wife (yikes) of Zeus, and Queen of the Gods,) must fight various Gods of Olympus, who no longer see a use for mortals, and have abandoned them to suffering.

 

In terms of narrative, Apotheon is tilling soil that is already well explored in videogames. The ancient greek mythos - from a narrative point of view - has been approached many times before and since. God of War, Altered Beast, Hades, Kid Icarus, Immortals: Fenyx Rising - even Assassin's Creed got in on the action with Odyssey and its DLC.  Here, the level to which Apotheon delves into that mythology and makes it its own is fairly sparse from a narrative point of view - certainly there is less meaty n that bone than on display in something like God of War, and the depth of the narrative is relatively shallow. There is little backstory to Nikandreos and not a lot of narrative deviation outside of the general mythology - however, Apotheon is not really a narrative-heavy game, and it isn't trying to be. It's desired strengths lie elsewhere.

 

Firstly, let's address the one area that Apotheon absolutely nails: It's visuals. The game looks FANTASTIC.

Completely 2D, and using a black-and-terracotta colour palate in line with the pottery motif, the whole game is both gorgeous to look at in motion, and a work of art in every screenshot. While the "pottery-in-motion" angle may only be a veneer, (certainly, there is little the game does - or, to my mind, could do - to add to this aesthetic mechanically,) but that veneer is well established, completely bought-in to, and makes for one of the strongest, most unique signature styles I have seen in the indie landscape... certainly up to the point it released, but even long after too.
The limited colour palate never interferes with the players ability to gauge information or traverse the levels, and absolutely evokes the ancient print-work it is aiming for. Little additional flourishes, such as the inclusion of faint 'crack-lines' on the screen, or blemishes on the backgrounds, as if on an ancient amphora or pot that has survived through hundreds of years are charming and additive. The movement of the player character, and the enemies is slightly stilted and anthropomorphically odd, but in a way that lends their animations a 'static' feel that compliments the signature aesthetic, and means any single frame looks exactly as it is supposed to - like a printed pattern on a vase. I encroach anyone whose hasn't seen the game, and who's interest is piqued by this review, to check out any video of the game in motion - I can guarantee you haven't seen anything quite like it!

 

Mechanically, the game is playing in pretty old-school territory in a lot of ways. One might notice I shied away form describing Apotheon as a 'Puzzle Platformer' - that was deliberate, as while there are some limited puzzle mechanics on display here, (most notably in the temple of Athena,) they are not really the crux of the game. What is, is platforming and combat. That's a genre that, while extremely well served in the 8-bit and 16-bit era days, is actually somewhat underserved now. Most games that draw from that well tend to do so in addition to some other primary genre mechanic (Guacamelee or Sundered, for example, add metroidvania to the mix, Teslagrad leans harder on puzzles, and Mark of the Ninja adds robust stealth.) The straight combat-platformer is something of a relic of the past - and so perhaps it is apt that a game drawing narratively from ancient lore and stylistically from ancient art, should draw mechanically from 'ancient' gaming mechanics!

The game essentially boils down to the use of various weapons at Nikandreos' disposal against enemies, as he traverses several loosely themed dungeons full of traps and platforming challenges, culminating in a fight against one of the Gods on his hit-list. These bosses are pretty fun and well designed fights, each bespoke and requiring different approaches, however, the same cannot be said, really, for the regular enemies. 

There is something of a lack of variety to them, and not a particularly high degree of AI competency, and so challenge in these regular encounters is generally only offered when the player is mobbed by multiples, rather than through the specific eccentricities of individual enemies. While the multiple weapons at Nikandreos' disposal do add a tactical element to combat, there is something of an issue in Apotheon - it's awkward and somewhat poorly implemented control scheme. switching weapons on the fly requires cycling through them, which can often result - in critical moments - with the player over- or under-shooting, and selecting the wrong weapon. An alternative to the on-the-fly weapon switching is to pause the action and individually select the weapon desired, however, this does interrupt the pace, and tends to make the games combat feel more stilted and finicky than it should - particularly in later encounters, where multiple enemy-types in large numbers can require a constant and routine switching of weapon types within the fights. While this is not going to be a deal-breaker for some, it is something that bothered me quite a bit. I have never enjoyed Mega Man. Why, you ask? They are great game fundamentally, after all. That much I agree with, however, I have always found the content pausing-o-select-a-different-power to be cumbersome and unwieldy, and it was enough to put me off the series. With Apotheon, it didn't push me completely away, but it did hamper the experience. 

 

The other area in which Apotheon falls down a bit, is in its platforming and light platform-puzzling - or rather, once again, in the way its controls affect those aspects. The game contains quite a bit of platforming, and none of it should - on paper, at least -  be particularly challenging. This is not a Celeste or Super Meat Boy style 'pixel-perfect-precision platformer,' it is aping the 16-bit era, of light, fun platforming as a means to an end. However, because of the implementation of the mechanics, and the controls and mechanical feel of the game, Apotheon is lent a level of frustration I do not think was ever intended. Nikandreos tends to 'stick' to the platforms he is on - particularly when close to an edge. This is designed to stop the player falling off the edge when they don't mean to do so, however, it has a tendency to create a jarring 'juddering' pace to his movement around platforming sections. The 'flow' just does not feel good, As the player runs and jumps around, if they get close to an edge, the game takes over and 'halts' Nikandreos a little, like a driving instructor with a heavy foot, meaning there is often a feeling that the game scuppered what would have been a good jump, by slowing him at the last minute. The result is pretty much the exact opposite of what I suspect the intention was - the player ends up missing the jump, and falling, having to try again. 

The same can be said for puzzle mechanics where they are present - particularity where aiming is critical. General aiming of arrows in combat is fine - hitting an enemy requires less precision, but there are several sections in Athena's temple that require quite accurate aiming to hit switches / levers etc, and the aiming mechanics of the game are not really able to afford the level of accuracy the game asks for. Several of these moments caused genuine irritation, and dozens of attempts to get to work. That might simply be me - I am, after all, not the best gamer in the world - but in a game where puzzling is so minimal, I suspect the intention was never for these few instances to be that frustrating.

 

These control and movement issues in the game are not massive problems individually, however, the confluence of them over the course of the game does compound, and ends up having the unfortunate effect that Apotheon looks like a better game than it feels to play. 

 

Audio is pretty good across the board. There is voice work here - both in narration voice over, (mostly during cutscenes,) and in general gameplay, and it's all delivered well, with a gravitas and grandeur befitting the setting. The writing is not necessarily the most interesting ever written, however, it is good, and feels appropriate for both the mythology, and the tone of the game.
The score is simple for the most part, but fits well - sombre and ominous in general, but rousing and bombastic where required, and adds to the game well, if not ever wowing.
Foley work on shattering objects, or weapon clanks and swings are good, and give the necessary player feedback, while feeling appropriate to the tone and setting.

 

Overall, Apotheon is, I have to say, something of a disappointment to me, albeit a minor one. The game is, in reality, perfectly fine for the most part, however, the stunning visuals and awesome style of the game is so good, that it tends to show up the less well functioning aspects in a more glaring light by comparison.

The control issues, lack of enemy smarts or variety, and the poorly implemented weapon select are mot individually game-breaking (or even particularly egregious) qualities, however, as the game goes on, they add up, and tend to bog down a game who's visual style is so superlative, that its shortfalls feel sharper in contrast. 

 

 

The Ranking:

In thinking about ranking Apotheon, my first instinct was to look to games that have cool ideas but are hampered by control schemes and movement, and so the first ones to pop to mind were Dokuro, and Raji: An Ancient Epic. However, Apotheon is not nearly as afflicted as those games by its problems, and the base game is stronger than both those cases - quite markedly so. 

 

As such, I looked further up the list, for other games where the control issues did cause problems, but not in such a pronounced way - and the first one to come to mind was Carrion. I think the control issues there are marginally worse than in Apotheon still though, and the basic elements of the game - the mechanics and the visuals certainly, are also lesser as compared to Apotheon, and so Apotheon comfortably overtakes Carrion.

 

Quite a bit further up the list, we have a game that has a similarly unique visual style - puzzle platformer Hue. While the visuals are a fight Apotheon would still win handily in that match-up, the basic game isn't. Apotheon would take it on narrative, due to Hue's lack thereof, however, in terms of core gameplay, I think Hue is much stronger, and so I would have trouble ranking Apotheon higher than it.

 

In between those games, there is another visually stunning 2D game - Hoa. Hoa suffers for a lack of challenge and length, however, its visuals are beyond reproach, and it has basically nothing in the way of technical or mechanical faults - other than a sparseness of them. While Apotheon is the meatier game, I think on balance, Hoa wins of all the individual elements - including on Apotheon strongest one - the visuals.

It's not a crushing defeat, however, and the game one rung below - Lost Words: Beyond the Page - I think loses to Apotheon in most areas, and so Apotheon finds its spot!

 

 

 

 

Castlevania: Lords of Shadow

 

Summary: 

A reboot of the established Castlevania mythology, developed by MercurySteam and released in 2010 for PS3, Castlevania: Lords of Shadow redirects the gameplay from the traditional 2D metroidvania, (the genre who's name was in part coined by this very franchise,)  to a 3D brawler setting, more in line with God of War than with traditional Castlevania entries.

 

Taking the role of Gabriel Belmont, in a the year 1047 - a time known, within the fiction, as the "End of Days." The balance of Earth's concord with the ethereal has been slowly eroded by a malevolent force - the Lord of Shadow - resulting in the dead no longer departing the moral plane, their dead souls instead poisoning the mortal world, and filling it with even and dangerous creatures that threaten the lives of the mortals.

Gabriel, a member of the "Brotherhood of Light" - a sort of Crusader-esque holy organisation of religious knights, sworn to protect the common people from these rising threats. His sworn duty - to defeat the Lord of Shadows and the dark force he casts on the world, as conveyed by the Brotherhood of Light, (and its eldest member, Zobek, with whom Gabriel teams up at times,) is intertwined with his own personal one - to avenge, and possibly revive, his late wife. Slain by these forces of evil, Gabriel's wife's should remain trapped on Earth, but his knowledge of a 'God Mask' used to revive the dead, an currently in pieces, and in the possession of the Lord of Shadow and his champions, provides a personal slant to his duties... and a potential for his own ruin.

 

Narrative-wise, Castlevania: Lords of Shadow is fine - it's story is certainly very 'game-y' (fight through varying levels, beat a 3 big bosses, collect pieces of a mcguffin item - in this case, the God Mask,) - but it does do a decent job of turning that game-centric structure into a narrative that is well enough told, if never particularly clever. All Castlevania games are, of course, playing in well worn and fairly myth-standard territory, and Castlevania: Lords of Shadow is no different, though the simplicity of that narrative is shown up a little more here, simply because Castlevania: Lords of Shadow is leaning more heavily into narrative. In previous Castlevania games, the narrative is secondary to gameplay. Here, MercurySteam want it to stand toe-to-toe with the gameplay, but don't really step up the narrative game in a way that can handle that. There's nothing overtly bad in the story, (and it is lent a gravitas and grandeur by way of the voice acting, particularly Zobek's narration, provided by the inimitable Patrick Stewart,) but there is nothing particularly outstanding or original either. 

 

Gameplay-wise, Castlevania: Lords of Shadow is absolutely - and unashamedly - borrowing pretty much every element from some gaming high-watermark of the era. It's primary source of inspiration is, as said, God of War, and that is clear in both the brawler, mob-heavy (and often rather button-mashy) combat, and in the 3D fixed camera motions. Not content with simply being a clone of God of War though (and possibly trying to steer clear of the pitfalls of some true GoW clones, such as Dante's Inferno,) Castlevania: Lords of Shadows also adds in elements of Bayonetta, of Shadow of the Colossus, and of Uncharted - to vary levels of success.

 

The general loop of the game is one seen plenty of times before - arrive on the outskirts of some ancient castle or environment, fight through mobs of enemies, periodically broken up with sections of somewhat on-rails platforming (think 'closed' Uncharted traversal sections, rather than 'open' Assassin's Creed ones,) solve some environmental puzzles, (akin to God of War / Uncharted / latter-day Tomb Raider,) and arrive at a bespoke boss fight. 

 

The general combat is pretty simple in terms of challenge - as said, while there is a reasonable amount of combos and variability of moves at Gabriel's disposal, button-mashing will carry the player through a fair portion of the game,) however, it does feature a somewhat interesting push-pull dynamic, in the form of a light/dark mechanic. Essentially, Gabriel can chose to fight with 'light' moves, or 'dark' ones. K'Light' moves will slowly heal him as he does damage to enemies, whereas 'dark' ones will not, but do increased damage. As such, there is a light tactical element to the general flow of combat.

 

Boss fights are a different story however - for better and worse. The main fights against the bosses in the game are, I think, fairly well designed on paper. The easy-breezy, button-mashing-friendly combat is eschewed, in favour of a more careful and specific required approach, and that is more than welcome. What is not, however, is the QTE elements that these fights are absolutely saturated with.
Part of this is a byproduct of the era in which Castlevania: Lords of Shadow released, of course - coming in the middle of the 'first-wave-peak' of God of War's popularity, many games out there were incorporating God of Wars unfortunate love-affair with QTE elements, however, here, the issue is much more serious than in most cases.  In the case of Castlevania: Lords of Shadow, the issue is not simply the inclusion of QTE's - it is the fact that the implementation of them may actually be the worst example in 'Triple A' gaming.

QTE's are everywhere in the game, and generally present as two circles. A largely one becomes smaller, and the button must be pressed when it crossed the circumference of the smaller one, but before it disappears entirely. These circles are white, have a relatively tight timing window of success, and take place during the most frenetic and heightened action on screen. They are incredibly easy to miss. The number of times I watched a death play out, only to realise there must have been a QTE in there that I didn't even see because I was watching the on-screen action was pretty dismaying. The solution to the problem, of course, is playing the game while always only half-watching the animations (you know, the parts of the game crafted to catch your attention, and into which a huge amount of the animators time and effort has been poured,) as the player needs to be more cognisant of a possible semi-transparent circle appearing n the screen, than the actual action playing out on it. This is a pretty foolish design decision, as it means the exact moments the narrative is relying on to provide tension, are the same ones the player has to - to some extent - ignore.  
 
The puzzle sections are varying, but generally fairly fun, if simple. I think the Uncharted comparison is apt not only mechanically, but also in terms of challenge. These are not environmental puzzles likely to stump a player - indeed - the solutions are generally obvious immediately, but they do provide a variety to the gameplay, and care a welcome diversion from the standard 'go-here, fight-this, go here, fight-this.'

 

The traversal sections are - it should be said - very simple, but do actually allow the game to to show off what is probably its strongest element - its art design, and visuals. 

These are of extremely high quality for a 2010 game - and in many cases, still stand out in the field today. While the game was never a technical or graphical showpiece on the level of an Uncharted, or a Final Fantasy game of the era, it never looks less than good, and in some cases, approaches stunning. The gothic architecture and design of some of the castles, or the run-down, brooding design of villages and outskirts are very evocative, and designed and rendered to a really impressive degree. 

The environments of the game are generally quite 'tried-and-true' videogame staples - medieval villages, swamps, castles, dungeons etc. - but there is a very admirable variety to the areas over what is a pretty long game, given the genre. There is a certain visual signature that Castlevania: Lords of Shadow has, that does set it apart from other games playing in the same arenas. Gabriel (and Zobek, in  fact,) are oddly designed - absurdly tall in the worlds they inhabit, in a way that is odd to look at, but kind of cool.  The general design of the world, in fact, follows suit - while the basic bones of environmental design is fairly standard, the whole world has a sort of off-kilter scale to it, that feels wholly deliberate, and stylistic, as opposed to accidental. It's an unusual design, and one I actually really like. 

 

Music is - like the environmental design - playing in a fairly genre-standard arena, however, it doesn't benefit from signature flourishes around the edges. While the score is not bad, it is very standard, and not particularly original or memorable. There is a scope and heft to it that is fitting, but nothing to really make it stand out - in fact, the areas in which it does draw attention, are often in how overblown or grandiose it can become. Some of the choral sections are so bombastic and ominous and on-the-nose for gothic horror, that it begins to stray into parody territory. It never quite gets there, but it does veer close at times.

The voice work is - as said - generally good.  The actual writing is a little unimaginative at times, but the slack is picked up by the voice work. Patrick Stewart has a theatricality and gravelly seriousness that could make reading the phonebook sound awesome, and Gabriel's voice (provided by Robert Carlisle,) is well delivered too. 

Foley sounds are good here - weans hits sound good, and Gabriel's stoning footfalls sound heavy and weighty on the terrain, and enemies sound quite menacing, particularly en-masse, though can get a little grating after a while, simply due to the volume of them in specific areas.

Overall, Castlevania: Lords of Shadow is one of those strange, difficult to classify games. It plays relatively well, looks relatively good, and sounds relatively nice, but without any single element really standing out, or feeling particularly original, it has trouble defining itself as anything but an also-ran. A decent also -ran is most areas, but an also-ran for sure. 

The lack of any really original hooks makes its flaws - the flat writing, the rote combat and those appalling QTEs - stand out more. Without any really positive original hooks, the only elements of particular note become the negative ones, and tend to cast a game that would be described, by all rights, as "Perfectly serviceable", or "adequate", into the less favourable barrel of "troubled" or "has issues."

If you are going to have some glaring flaws, you really need to have some stand-out good points to offset them. Here, Castlevania: Lords of Shadow has plenty of decent parts, but none that really elevate it to any lofty level, so it feels the drag of its unfavourable more.

 

 

The Ranking:

Ranking Castlevania: Lords of Shadow was one I expected to be difficult, but in fact, two games on the current list made the task considerably easier!

Those games are oddly unnecessary one-sequel-too-many Prince of Persia entry Prince of Persia: The Forgotten Sands, and visually-impressive-but-otherwise-perfunctory R&C entry Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart.

 

While Castlevania: Lords of Shadow has its problems, and fails to really make a big mark in a positive way elsewhere, I do think it still stands taller than Prince of Persia: The Forgotten Sands. That game felt tired and unimaginative in a way Lords of Shadow didn't, and while it has no flaws as egregious as Lords of Shadow has, its blandness is so alarming as to border on unfathomable - and is more jarring than any of Lords of Shadow's issues.

 

In the case of Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart however, as dull as much of the gameplay is, it is still a more fun experience than Lords of Shadow - and while it might do nothing as impressively as it does visuals, those visuals are SO impressive, that they carry it to some extent. With Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart one can always say "well, it looks amazing." As decent as Lords of Shadows workmanlike showing can be, there is no element anyone would call amazing at all. As such, it has to fall below Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart.

 

There's only a few games in between, none with much in common, so it comes down to feel - and my gut tells me Castlevania: Lords of Shadow belongs above the PS3 port of Plant's vs. Zombies, but below the interesting little curiosity of One Night Stand.

 

 

 

 

 

Hitman GO

 

Summary: 

A turn-based puzzle game take on the Hitman franchise, Hitman GO was developed by Square Enix Montreal, and released in 2014 for iOS tablet devices, to critical acclaim. A 2016 port of the game came to PS4 and PSVita consoles in 2016, as a definitive edition. 

 

Taking visual and gameplay cues from board games, the basic mechanics are relatively simple - the player guides Agent 47's 'piece' around set levels made up of interconnected nodes. By moving to a node occupied by an enemy piece, that enemy is 'assassinated'. After each player turn, the cpu takes a turn, and Agent 47's piece can be assassinated in the same way by the enemy pieces. Various specific mechanics are introduced over the course of the game, consisting of new 'node types', each of which has some loose connection to an element of the traditional Hitman games - plants providing hiding spots, tougher enemies, cameras, disguises allowing the Agent 47 piece to be ignored by certain affiliated enemy pieces etc. - and each of these changes the requirements of the player attempting to clear out the level, with a view to assassinating thee level's designated target, and completing the level.

 

Gameplay-wise, Hitman Go works very well. The puzzles are never overly challenging - the node structure of the levels means there is rarely ever too much scope to really feel lost, however, it also means there is rarely a single 'correct' path to take. While the simple mechanics of early levels can feel overly simplistic, the introduction of more complicated mechanics, and combinations of mechanics is smooth and fairly quick, and before long, levels can get quite tricky. An optional 'collectible' mechanic, wherein a briefcase collectible is added to each level, the retrieval of which is often more difficult than simply assassinating the target adds some additional optional challenge on top of the base mechanics.

 

Hitman GO is, it should be said, not so much a Hitman game turned into a puzzle game, as it a puzzle game lent flavour and tone by way of a Hitman veneer. That being said though, it is remarkable - and laudable - both how much care has clearly been taken to give nods to the main Hitman franchise in the mechanics of the puzzle game and in the locations, and how well implemented the veneer is. While the game operates entirely within its own signature aesthetic, there are more than enough Hitman trappings for any \Hitman franchise fan to feel at home, even within a wildly divergent core genre.

 

That signature aesthetic is - quite simply - fantastic. The whole game is crafted to look like a board game, and the adherence to that aesthetic choice, as well as the level to which it works both in a Hitman franchise, and puzzle genre sense is pretty fantastic. There is a clear an unmistakable iOS feel to the visuals of the game - the clean, bright colour palate and stark, crisp lines of a touch-screen original are clear even after porting to a controller-based console - but that look still allows for a very imaginative and unusual style to really shine here. 
Different level collections start with a themed 'box' - as if the collection of levels is an add-on pack to an existing boardgames.

The levels are made op of simple looking pieces - walls are only built so high, and only obstruct the parts they need to, as they would in a table-top set-up, and the characters are statues pieces, complete with a base-coin to which their inanimate legs are affixed. In motion, the pieces move with a clean precision and yet with some unmistakable weight to them - as of pewter pieces on a board.

When an enemy piece is assassinated, not only does it shift like a play piece, and then be removed from the board as if lifted, it also stays in view - off the edge of the playable area. The player is able to view their handiwork, via the stack of pieces that have been removed from the playfield, as a chess player might glance at the row of taken pieces standing at the side of the board.
The whole visual design of the game has clearly had a level of care and attention paid that far outstrips the basic requirements, and it really does pay off here. All the information required to solve the puzzles is there, of course, but more than that, this is a puzzle game that is just great to look at, and part of the joy of getting to a new set of levels, is simply seeing the way the aesthetic deals with new biome types and new environmental details.

 

Audio is an interesting one here, as there isn't much to go on. There is no background music to Hitman Go. That might seem odd - certainly a lot of puzzle games do add some kind of ambient music to the proceedings, though to be honest, often times these are the games where such music is, necessarily, muzak. Without a set narrative pace, the music has no emotional or mechanical beats to follow, so it ends up being looping background ambiance. In some cases, that can work - Superliminal's 'hotel lobby Jazz', for example, does work fabulously to set a dreamlike tone - but in most cases it is unnecessary.

In this case, because of the iOS original, it is clear the developers expect the player to be listening to something else as they play - the TV, or music or a podcast, and so they simply opt to have some ambient noise - birds chirping in outdoor areas for example - along with the actual stings for the puzzle moves. What that means is that the player is free to play their own audio, without having to miss the important audio-cues, as they don't need to turn the audio completely off to do so.
What audio there is is totally fine - the musical stings add to the board-game visuals nicely, with each piece sounding like a small but weighty playing piece on a wooden board. 

Overall, Hitman GO is a good little pass-the-time puzzler at heart - one not devoid of challenge, though unlikely to truly stump the player for long - but is elevated considerably by it's visual and auditory attention to detail, its atypically imaginative style, and its remarkable ability to evoke the spirit of a Hitman game, without any of the normal staples of that series.

 

A recommended game for Hitman franchise fans who could imagine enjoying a little puzzle-time, and with a fairly strong endorsement for puzzle-game fans generally - you won't likely linger long with Hitman GO, but it's fun while you do, and the game is certainly a visual treat worth seeing.

 

 

The Ranking:

In ranking Hitman GO, once again I am afforded some help in the form of two clear points of comparison, between which I think Hitman GO comfortably lands - clever, visually interesting and surprising puzzler The Pedestrian, and also fun, if slightly less interesting but still visually appealing puzzler Shady Part of Me.

 

While Hitman GO (somewhat surprisingly) is mechanically more fun and engaging than Shady Part of Me, and takes it on visuals, I don't think it measures up to The Pedestrian on either of those most important fronts, and so we are in the gulf between.

 

There are a few puzzle and puzzle-adjacent games between the two - in particular Critter Crunch, The Last Campfire and Operation Tango, and while I like Hitman GO quite a bit, I think on merit it has to fall below all three of those rather bigger and more meaty games.
The same should be said for those the three games below those - Flipping Death, Psychonauts in the Rhombus of Ruin and Stories Untold, however, I cannot say the same for the next game down - Concrete Genie.

 

While Concrete Genie is fun and vibrant and looks good, I think the stylish minimalism of Hitman GO actually outdoes it on that front. Concrete Genie's mechanics also aren't really much to write home about, in contrast to Hitman GO's fun diversionary gameplay, and Concrete Genie's narrative is problematic, and so Hitman GO's lack of one doesn't end up hurting it in the fight either.

 

As such, Hitman GO finds a good spot on the ranking. 

 

 

 

 

 

Life is Strange: Before the Storm

 

☢️☢️SCIENTIFIC NOTE☢️☢️
There are minor spoilers in this review - of Life is Strange: Before the Storm, and Life is Strange.

They are unavoidable, in the sense that narrative is the most important element, and discussion of that is inevitable. However, I have been careful to avoid serious spoilers, that I think would genuinely lessen the experience for anyone.  If you want to go in completely blind, I understand, but I would say - you have to trust me to some extent, that where something feels like a spoiler, it is a minor one, and I talk in broad strokes, rather than specifics, where possible.

 

Summary: 

After the runaway success of Life is Strange - the 2015 episodic, indie-movie inspired narrative game from DotNod - DotNod themselves began working on Life is Strange 2, a new story, featuring new characters, and continuing the focus on how abnormal powers influence the pedestrian world and cast their character is a sea of uncertainty. 
A second developer, Deck Nine (rebranded from their original moniker, Idol Minds) were drafted to develop a more direct sequel (or in this case, prequel,) to the first game, to be released in the interim, keeping the story within the confines of the established Arcadia Bay setting, and focussing on one of the two principle characters from Life is Strange - Chloe Price.

 

Let's just get this out of the way right up front - Life is Strange: Before the Storm is my favourite entry in a franchise that has - over the course of 4 games - established itself as both my absolute favourite narrative franchise, and one of my favourite franchises generally.

 

Set two years prior to the events of Life is Strange, Before the Storm works within a timeline that is already established. That is a decision that can be a burden in the case of some narrative-heavy games - there is a certain deflation of impact or tension that can happen with prequels, where the impact of narrative beats can be lessened by the player knowledge of what is to come, though in the case of Before the Storm, that dramatic irony tends to be a benefit, rather than a problem. 
The rough template of Chloe's journey - her father's death and its impact on her, her relationship with her mother and with David, her mother's new boyfriend (and her soon-to-be step-father,) and her connection with Rachel Amber - the popular, talented girl with whom she establishes an intense bond and romance - are known to the player prior to playing the game, however, the actual events and details of these elements are not. The events of Before the Storm are background colour in Life is Strange, not detailed history, and so there remains considerable leeway for Deck Nine to tell their own rounded, well plotted arc within that framework - and they execute on that incredibly well.

 

While the absence of Max Caulfield - our protagonist character in Life is Strange - might feel like a risk given how endearing she was in the first game, I think it's extraordinary how switching to Chloe as the controllable character feels markedly different, without losing any of the tone, or the overall charm of the series. 
Chloe is not Max, and the game never pretends she is.

Max was an earnest character - endearingly so. In Life is Strange, her slight naiveté and genuine wistful love of the world around her was, at the outset, almost meme-worthy. The gameplay of Life is Strange as a franchise necessitates a continual stream of inner-monologuing as the principle character comments to themselves, (i.e to the player) on a litany of objects and situations, and Maxine's earnest and positive outlook in these comments, while initially almost comical, won us over, and became endearing over time. Her ability to see goodness in everything started out hokey, but became lovable.

 

Chloe, on the other hand, is anything but earnest.
Max is loving and kind and cares deeply about the people she encounters, but her understanding of pain, and sadness and emotional trauma is second-hand, for the most part. Chloe knows those things first hand, and that experience has shaped her outlook, and coloured her personality. Chloe also cares deeply about people - that much becomes obvious through implication and narrative beats over the course of the game - but her internal monologue is much more acerbic and witty than Max’s ever was - more cutting, and often genuinely funny. 
When Max, for example, looked at artwork in the gallery section of Life is Strange, her comments were often about how beautiful a photo or painting was, or how talented the artist is. When Chloe sees an expensive abstract hanging on the wall of Rachel's parent's house, her comment of “Oh wow! i think that’s an original Whogivesashit!” is delivered so well, and with such dead-pan authority, it drew a genuine, out-loud laugh!

 

The change in time-frame in Before the Storm actually feels somewhat moot in terms of overall tone, as a result of this difference in the principle characters personality. In a lot of ways, Chloe at 16 feels older, and more worldly than Max did at 18. Chloe has already endured real pain in her life - her father's fate, her closest friend being pulled from her by circumstance, her feeling that her own life is being reshaped around her, without a place left for her to fit into it, as her mother tries to move on from the tragedy - but more than that, Chloe is simply more experienced at this age than Max is two years later. That shows in hew outlook on the world. 
As Chloe so eloquently puts it to Rachel at one point - "Her 'V card' has already been punched." 
We certainly got the sense in Life is Strange, that Max was still a virgin, and her outlook betrayed that. 

 

Before the Storm steps up as compared to Life is Strange is in terms of animations. Chloe is - as said - more witty and cutting than Max in her dialogue, but the animations (and the excellent performances, of both Chloe and Rachel) make it very clear that both girls are putting up fronts. There is obvious vulnerability beneath the surface that works very well, and when combined with the dramatic irony element afforded by the knowledge of what is to come, it turns the narrative - less of a mystery, more of a love story - into something of a tragedy.

 

This is, I think, the most successful and well executed element to the narrative. We, as players, know that no matter what we do, fate is set. One (or both) of these young girls who's love is blooming and who's future feels so open to them, will be dead in tragic circumstances within two years. 
Deck Nine avoid the obvious pitfalls this kind of storytelling can fall into, however. While there are characters from Life is Strange featured in Before the Storm, and occasional references to the previous game sown into the fabric of the narrative, Deck Nine never feel the need to hover or linger on the eventual fate of Chloe and Rachel. When the girls are discussing the future they want to build together - what they plan to do, and how they will do it, and how they will be together forever - the game never smacks the player over the head, or hangs lanterns on the plot beats that are portents. 
There is no mention of Max's eventual return, or of the photography teacher who's fateful actions we know will happen, or the inevitable downfall - it isn't needed. We KNOW what will happen. These moments of cruel fantasy are allowed to simply be sweet and poignant and tragic without the distraction of harsh reality. The game never feels the need to point at them and go "See!?"... it lets us twist that knife ourselves.

 

The game is set over 3 episodes, rather than the established 5 in Life is Strange, however, the overall game is not particularly shorter than the norm. Each individual episode is longer than those in Life is Strange - plus there is a bonus episode, though that’s more a bridging point from the original game than this one.
The game never feels abridged or squashed to fit into the shorted episodic arc. There is, admittedly, something of a jarring point early on, where it feels like a little bit more establishing material prior to Chloe meeting Rachel might have served to set up the in-narrative unlikeliness of their friendship, however, this is alleviated somewhat over the course of the game. What we lack in establishment of the pre-game dichotomy of the school, we come to learn via other student's reactions to Chloe and Rachel's relationship after the fact.

There is also a slight under-writing of one character in particular - that of Chloe's friend Elliot - in the early game, that does slightly under-cut a later game reveal. While the use of Elliot in the narrative is, I think, quite clever, and shows a maturity and subtlety over-and-above that on show in the first game, where the 'bad' character were more black-and-white, I do think the choice-based elements in Before the Storm cause an issue. They allow the player to largely ignore Elliot in the early game, makings his 'heel-turn' potentially feel a little out-of-the-blue. This could be seen as a positive - by ignoring the character, or dismissing him, the player is doing exactly what Elliot is reacting to Chloe doing to him - but without an established relationship to reference, it makes the moment feel less impactful than it should. A little more establishment in the first episode might have improved this aspect. 
These are relatively minor concerns though, in the grand scheme of the game. The overall narrative is one between Chloe and Rachel, and that plot is handled very well throughout.

 

Mechanically, the game follows the established format of Life is Strange pretty closely, however, unlike Life is Strange, (and unlike both subsequent entires in the franchise,) there is no supernatural element to Before the Storm. 
While that does remove some of the mechanical gameplay aspects of Life is Strange, and potentially one of franchise selling points, I do think it is notable (and surprising) how little the removal of the time-rewinding mechanic impacts the feel of the game generally. If anything, it actually heightens the tension of the decision-making aspects of the game. Where in Life is Strange, Max Caulfield's ability to "take a mulligan" in any conversation allowed the player to view potential outcomes to any conversation, and rewind to choose their "best" outcome. Chloe has no such safety net. When a decision is made in Before the Storm, the player has to live with those consequences, and can only imagine how things light have played out differently. In many cases throughout the 3 episode arc, those decisions are difficult ones, and with significant and far-reaching consequences. 

It's something of a testament to the strength of the storytelling in both Life is Strange and Before the Storm, that one of the primary mechanics of the original game can be removed, and the feel and flavour of the game remains strong and unscathed. That establishes, without question, that the true power of the franchise is not in some mechanical or gameplay overlay on top of the core narrative - it is in that core narrative itself. What lingers long after finishing the game is not some other-worldly Twilight Zone element to the characters, it is the characters themselves. 

 

There is something of a nod to mechanical gameplay functionality added in place of the time-rewinding mechanics in Before the Storm - called "Back Talk". Chloe has the ability, at various points in the game, to begin a sort of "conversational duel" with certain characters, wherein a form of "convince-meter" appears on screen, and her responses are set against a ticking clock and a 'success/failure' bar. These sections are - I will say - largely unnecessary in my opinion, and feel like an attempt to gamify something that doesn't really need it... but they don't really ever get in the way of, or detract from, the plot. 
To be honest, they can be largely ignored, as the actual dialogue that comprises them is not so different from the regular dialogue anyway - and it's not like they form the only 'high-tension' conversations. Really, every choice made in a Life is Strange game feels material to shaping the narrative, and so 'gamifying' some, and not others does feel rather moot. In reality, they are all 'gamified' - backtalk mechanic or not.

 

In terms of visuals, Before the Storm is tilling the same soil as Life is Strange - certainly stylistically, but more than that, in actual set-pieces, as a good portion of the locations (Chloe's house, the school, the dormitories etc.) are the same locations featured in the original game. There is a fun element to this - seeing how Chloe's room, for example , evolved from this point to how it looks in the original game is interesting, and speaks to character development as much as the actual dodagloue, plot and conversations do. 
There is, however, a reasonable step up in terms of graphical fidelity, and the game really steps forward, in terms of facial and body animations. There is more hay made through the use of non-verbal communication in Before the Storm - likely as a result of increased confidence in the ability for this to play correctly - and it works very well. Before the Storm is a story about teenage girls, and teenage girls don't communicate exclusively verbally. In many cases, verbal communication is the least part of their dialogue!

There is also a little more use, here, of 'flight-of-fancy' scenes. The lack of a supernatural element means less in the way of otherworldly set-pieces (there is nothing approaching the extended dream-sequence / time-breaking section of Life is Strange's final episode,) however, there are metaphorical and dreamlike sequences included, wherein Chloe speaks to her dead father, and these are used very effectively, as both a way for her to order her though, and use her fathers memory as a sounding board to consider her own emotional journey, and as a way for her to come to terms with her own grief and feelings of abandonment that her fathers death have left her with.

 

Audio is a point that really has to be addressed. 
In terms of voice work, I think Before the Storm steps up the Life is Strange game a little. I thought the voice work in the original game was very good, but here, it is even better. 
Due to complications around the SAG-AFTRA voice actors strike, Chloe's original voice actor - Ashely Burch - did not reprise her role here, replaced instead with Rhianna DeVries. While it is lamentable that Ashley Burch did not play the character, having established such a strong performance in the original game, it is hard to really complain, as the performance deliver by Rhianna DeVries is absolutely excellent - capturing the tone and tenor of Burch's original performance, and more than filling the role with her own take. While the change is noticeable and jarring at first, it took less that a couple of scenes for me to completely forget about it, and for Chloe to feel like Chloe.

 

Music is always a key component in a Life is Strange game, with the curated indie-rock soundtracks providing as much of the personality of the games as any character, and in Before the Storm, I think that element has never been stronger. The soundtrack is superb - featuring a full album of original songs by personal favourite Daughter, and with additional tracks from Wolf Alice and Lanterns on the Lake, and adding greatly to the game overall. 

It's worth noting, of course, music is very much a personal taste thing, but I cannot deny that when - during Chloe and Rachel's first 'date' - one of my all time favourite songs kicked in - Through the Cellar Door, by Lanterns on the Lake - it pretty much guaranteed that I'd be all-in, and invested in this budding romance. 

When another personal favourite -Bros, by Wolf Alice - was chosen to play over the closing montage, as the player is finally left to watch how they are leaving the story, and remember what these girls' eventual fate is, it felt like the game had delved into my own Spotify, to find the best way to stick a knife in my heart.

 

I mean... seriously:

"Shake your hair, have some fun,
Forget our mothers and past lovers, forget everyone,
Oh, I'm so lucky, you are my best friend.
Oh, there's no one, there's no one who knows me like you do.

 

Are your lights on?
Are your lights still on?
I'll keep you safe,
If you keep me strong"

...come on to fuck.
Have a heart, Deck Nine. 
You're fucking killing me here.

 

Overall, as said, I think Life is Strange: Before the Storm is both the best entry in its franchise, and one of the best narrative-heavy games in a long time. It's a sweet and sad tale, told very well, and one that drew me in with every element at its disposal, and kept me there. The music is fantastically well chosen and well used, the writing is smart and well devolved by an excellent cast, the visuals and animations are strong, and the setting - both physical, and in time - allow for a welcome return to Arcadia Bay, a fresh look at the characters, and a significant fleshing out of an already well told and established narrative with a new emotional journey that doesn't tread on what came before it, but casts replays of that earlier story with new shades of grey and new texture. 

 

I'd never recommend playing Before the Storm without first playing Life is Strange, as the narrative is absolutely contingent on having that background, but I also recommend anyone with any indie-film / narrative-game... or just a heart, play it...

... so take that as a ringing endorsement of the franchise as a whole!

 

 

The Ranking:

Let's just address this point here, as it does need to be stated somewhere - Before the Storm - and all Life is Strange entries - don't distinguish themselves on mechanical gameplay. They trade on narrative - but more than that - on emotional investment.
In fact, Life is Strange games are in the almost unique position, that having more complex or robust mechanics would likely lower them on the rankings, rather than raise them. The narratives are what matters, and so they are entirely taste-based, but they happen to meet my own tastes so well, that the narrative, (and the absence of detraction from that narrative,) elevates them considerably. 

 

The fact is, while it is an indisputable fact that Life is Strange as a franchise is not competitive at the top end of the list on technical or mechanical levels, the effect the narratives, music and tone of the games has a lingering and impactful effect on me that far outstrips most games - and is something I refuse to ignore. 
Good mechanics are common. Genuine emotional connection is rare - and I choose to treat it with according respect on the list... as the already high placement of Life is Strange and Life is Strange: True Colours, I'm sure, demonstrates!

 

With that in mind, as said, I think Before the Storm is certainly the best entry in the Life is Strange franchise, which places already very highly, given that True Colours is placed pretty highly right now.
It's really a question of how much the considerable narrative investment I have with the game carries it above True Colours.

 

There, it becomes a purely gut-feel exercise - measuring which games on the list have an overall package that is realistically too good in summation for Before the Storm to surpass on pure  emotional investment, narrative and music. I'm not going to specifically go through every entry, but two are worthy of discussion, as emotional investment in the narrative is a big part of them too - Mass Effect, and Pyre.

Both those games stomp all over Before the Storm in terms of pure gaming, however, while drawing considerable emotions investment form me, they don't reach the level to which Before the Storm did. It therefore comes down to overall package, and while I think Before the Storm's use of music and narrative are enough to overpower Pyre pound-for-pound, I cannot say the same for Mass Effect.

 

I do, however, think all of the games in-between those two (which are all powerhouse games on their own merits, all of which I've loved,) are also unable to meet my personal involvement with Before the Storm, and so Before the Storm takes it's rightful place, just below Mass Effect, and very high on the list... and sits as a testament to how strong a narrative can fare, when it really speaks to a player, I guess!

 

 

 

Life is Strange 2

 

☢️☢️SCIENTIFIC NOTE☢️☢️

There are minor spoilers in this review.

They are unavoidable, in the sense that narrative is the most important element, and discussion of that is inevitable. However, I have been careful to avoid serious spoilers, that I think would genuinely lessen the experience for anyone. If you want to go in completely blind, I understand, but I would say - you have to trust me to some extent, that where something feels like a spoiler, it is a minor one, and I talk in broad strokes, rather than specifics, where possible.

 

Summary: 

The third game in the Life is Strange franchise, (and second by franchise creator and instigator DotNod,) 2018's Life is Strange 2 continues the staple set in the first game, taking a realistic, indie-movie inspired thematic motif, and injecting a supernatural power into that pedestrian world, following ordinary characters on an extraordinary path those powers instigate.

 

The player takes the role of Sean Diaz, a 16-year-old high school kid of Mexican descent, living in Seattle with his father, and younger brother Daniel. After a tragic incident in which their father is killed, and an - until now, dormant - supernatural, psycho-kinetic power within Daniel is awoken, the brothers lives are turned upside-down, and they are cast into a dangerous and arduous journey, on the run from the law, across the underbelly of America, heading south towards Mexico, with young Daniel being forced into the role of being Daniel's guardian, and mentoring him as he comes to terms with his dangerous gift/curse.

 

Technically and aesthetically, Life is Strange is working with the established format. Yes, the graphics take a step forward - animations are better than in Life is Strange, and on par with Before the Storm here, and visual design and cinematic framing is also on the level of Deck nine's prequel game. 

 

Audio remains very strong, both in voice acting, and in curated soundtrack - this time featuring such artists as Bat for Lashes, Milk & Bone, First Aid Kit and Sufjan Stevens - an eclectic mix, that while not quite hitting my personal tastes as hard as Before the Storm's soundtrack did, still receives regular listening on my Spotify. 

 

These aspects are great, and worth noting, however, this is the fourth Life is Strange review I have written, and any Science Chum reading this thread on the regular already knows what they are in for auditorially, technically, mechanically and visually. What is of note is where Life is Strange 2 sets itself apart - and that is narratively.

 

Life is Strange 2 takes a step outside of the established formula laid out in Life is Strange and Life is Strange: Before the Storm, in terms of broad formula. This is not a soap opera, as much as a road movie - and in some ways, almost feels like an anthology series. Because the brothers Diaz are constantly moving, each episode feels more self-contained, as the cast of surrounding characters changes along with the environment. There is less in the way of getting to know individual secondary characters over time, and more focus on seeing how a constantly changing zoetrope of new, eclectic characters affects the personalities and outlooks of our two principles, and how those fleeting relationships impact the evolution of Daniel and Seans relationship as they travel.
While the mechanics of the game feel largely in line with the previous entries, along with the aesthetic stylings and the broad tone, this gives the pacing and plot a markedly different feel. Where the other Life is Strange games are cut from a Catcher in the Rye adjacent cloth, Life is Strange 2 is very much in the Of Mice and Men vein. 

 

Because the story is a road-trip, and one featuring characters that are outsiders (both in terms of ethnic background, and in the sense that they are fugitives,) the tale is one less concerned with showing an underbelly to suburban life, and more with talking snippets of broader societal concerns - xenophobia, inherent racism and the cloak of patriotism that it hides beneath, sexism, classism, and the seediness that power affords people when the 'normal' societal constructs of law and order and the pretence of decency are no longer governing their actions. While I've certainly seen complaints about this move towards more 'hot-button' political conversation within the game, I have to admit, I have found these complaints largely asinine and petty. While the game does approach political aspects, these are done via the use of specific characters with specific points of view. Yes, the game clearly has a message - but while the content may be views as political, the point of view it espouses are not political, they are moral.

The message of the game, fundamentally, is that inclusion breeds inclusiveness, understanding trumps rejection, and good fences do not make good neighbours. Regardless of political affiliation, it is difficult to argue that these points should be seen as in any way controversial. That the characters on display are generally 'minorities' merely serves to sharpen the thesis of the game's point, rather than shape it. If someone feels the game is in opposition to their own political views, that is fine - there are plenty of games I enjoy who's politics are divergent from my own - but if someone feels their philosophical or moral views lie in opposition to those fairly universal leanings of the game? Then I struggle to imagine myself - or DotNod - caring about their opinions. Inclusion, understanding, reason, and doing the right thing regardless of whether someone is looking at you - these are hardly 'minority' values - nor should they be. Whether a border fence should exist is a political view. Whether one should have empathy for the people whom it affects, regardless of whether they see its existence as a good or bad thing, is not.

 

In a lot of ways, the other games in the Life is Strange franchise are about people at, or nearing, breaking point. Life is Strange 2, however, is primarily concerned with people already broken. Not just broken people, in fact, but the people who, after breaking, were unable to put the pieces back together. The cast of characters who surround Max Caulfield, Chloe Price and Rachel Amber in Arcadia Bay, or  Alex Chen in Haven Springs, are people with painful histories, but coping and carrying on. The cast of characters Sean and Daniel Diaz encounter, however, are different. Because of thier situation, outside of the law and riding a trail through the unseen backstops of their country, the people they encounter are often those who couldn't find a way of coping. Who's ability to maintain some facsimile of normalcy faltered, and who slipped out of even the pretence of any regular, suburban lifestyle. They are the those rejected by societal norms, or those who rejected societal norms themselves.
That can, in some capacity, make these characters liable to feel less sympathetic to the player - for two reasons. 

Firstly, from a mechanical/ plot standpoint. As the game is a road movie following our principle characters, we, (along with them) meet these characters at a set point in their lives, then move on. Unlike in all the other Life is Strange games, there is rarely any multi-episode arcs to the secondary characters. Where in the other games, considerable milage is gained from establishing secondary characters as being one way, then slowly teasing out changes or below-the-surface aspects of those characters that run in contrast to the front they put up to the world, here, each episode is much more self-contained. There is not room for that kind of slower paced method of adding complexity to the characters - the characters need to be complex and interesting immediately upon encountering them. That, by necessity, means more broken or troubled people, and less of a chance to come to empathise with them before we are forced to reckon with their darker shades of grey.

 

Secondly because those playing this game are not in the same position. If one is playing Life is Strange 2, then one has, (or at least has access to,) a TV, a PS4, electricity, heat, light, money and shelter. We, as players, exist within the societal norms that these characters have either rejected, or been flushed out of. We, as the players, are part of the very constructs these characters are contrasted against, and so there is less of ourselves to latch onto in them.

 

This is never more apparent than when, in a later episode, the boys encounter their mother. The Diaz brother's mother is a mythological character to them - she left their father, and them, when they were young, and their memories of her are fleeting, minimal and rose-tinted. When they finally encounter her, living in a sort of desert commune of drifters and down-and-outs, she can be a particularly unsympathetic and difficult character to connect with. This is, of course, deliberate - her part in the story is to provide a contrast to Sean, and to show the effects of being unable or unwilling to continue fighting to remain within a social construct to which one does not feel connected, however, for anyone still within that construct - i.e. us, as players - she is not a likeable person. Seans reactions and emotions during these scenes are difficult, and the scenes are often genuinely uncomfortable for the player. This was by design, and works, but it is still challenging on an emotional level, in a way that few games attempt, for the simple reason that making your player recoil or bristle at a character who is not the quote-unquote "big bad" is not generally viewed as a good thing. 

 

That is, in fact, the real crux of what makes Life is Strange 2 feel divergent from the franchise norm - the challenging relationship the player has, and is asked to have, with empathy. 
In all other Life is Strange games, it is very easy to empathise with the characters - principle, and secondary. There is little effort required on their part to feel for Max Caulfield, or Chloe Price, or Alex Chen. It's easy to love Steph Gingrich. There's no effort required to want to protect Kate Marsh. We're even given considerable help, in finding aspects to the 'bad guy' characters through which we can at least sympathise, if not empathise - Victoria Chase, Diane Jacobs, even Nathan Prescott are characters that are foils, but we are given time for the game to colour them in shades of grey. Empathy is an offering in those games, not a challenge. 

In Life is Strange 2, however, the primary thesis of the game is the CHALLENGE of finding empathy. 

The secondary characters are in play here, of course, as stated above, but really, this runs to the principles more than anyone - in the relationship between player-controlled older brother Sean, and NPC younger brother Daniel. 

Sean is forced - by virtue of the initial disaster that is both the initial discovery of Daniel's supernatural powers, and the catalyst that sends them on their long, arduous journey together - into the role of the parent, without any of the preparation, or skills to handle such a role. 
Throughout the game, the gameplay follows much the same mechanical tropes as the previous games, however, there is an ongoing and continuous measurement of the player actions that is going on under the surface, which can (and will), fundamentally change the conclusion of the game, based on how well Sean is able to divorce himself form the 'antagonistic older-brother' role, and live up to the 'guardian' role he has had thrust upon him. This is not something the game allows to be easy though. Guiding Daniel is not simple, nor does it always feel rewarding, or rewarded.
Daniel's powers make him dangerous. He is not an evil or bad character - he is just a 9-year-old boy. 9-year-old's are not yet fully capably of measuring consequence, or of controlling their emotions, or of accepting or dealing with things they perceive to be unfair. They can be greedy. They can be selfish. They can be mean, or spiteful, or downright foolish. They throw tantrums, they push boundaries, and they test their parents at every turn. As any parent knows, young kids can be completely infuriating at times - and they don't need to have dangerous psychic powers for that to be an issue!
As much as Sean's relationship with Daniel is tested by their situation and by his powers, the players relationship to Daniel is tested too. Daniel can be absolutely infuriating. The game takes deliberate steps to push the player to be angry with him just as Sean might be, challenging them and goading them to respond in kind. It forces situations where the obvious responses Sean might have are available - and often the most obvious one that the player might choose when dealing with a fully fledged adult are clear - and lets them decide how to handle each situation. While any response will move the story along, the game is still taking note of how the player handles these situations, and as they stack up, Daniel's behaviour begins to be affected by it. If the player is consistently harsh with Daniel, or fails to guide him well, there are consequences in Daniels ongoing behaviour and attitude. These are generally subtle in the moment-to-moment - indeed, it is rare to have a 1-to-1 action/consequence response, where the player can immediately see the effect of a 'parenting mistake', but over time, these build up and have a compounding effect on the brother's relationship.

 

The confluence of all of these elements mean that Life is Strange 2 has two fundamental aspects that set it apart from the franchise in which it sits. 

 

Firstly, there is much more potential for subtly in the way the game ends. Where in most of the other games, the finale tends to fall in one of two main endings, with all other player decisions adding flavour, but not necessarily having a major impact on the direction the denouement takes, in Life is Strange 2, the ending is more variable. There are multiple factors all in play, all throughout the 5-episode arc that effect it, and these feel less binary in the moment, but make more substantive changes than in previous games.

 

Secondly - I must admit - it makes the game work a little less well, in terms of my own enjoyment. While I think that mechanically, Life is Strange 2 is almost unquestionably the most interesting game in the series, it is also the one I felt the least overall attachment to emotionally. 

Party, I think this may be a case of my own personal circumstances. As a father to a 7-year old, there is possibly a little less flight-of-fancy element to playing as guardian to a child, (I'm living it, I don't need to play it too!) but that's not the only reason. The very things that set the game apart form the franchise norm - the lack of permanence to secondary characters, the less spiralling, more linear point-to-point-to-point road movie aspect, and the outsider nature of the characters - these elements are what make the game interesting, but also the aspects I found less joy in.

 

Diverging form a franchise norm is admirable - it keeps things fresh - but in this case, the norms it is deviating from are the very ones I love the most about the other games in the series.

Do I dislike the game? Absolutely not. I enjoyed my journey through the undercurrents and backwynds on America along with the troubled brothers plenty - I cared about them, I fell in love with some of the broken characters they encountered along the way, I felt hope and sadness and fear and disappointment and rage right along with them - however, I didn't continue to have a relationship with them beyond the end of the game to the extent I did with the other games. When I heard there was a Chloe Price game coming (Before the Storm) I was desperate to play it. If I heard there was a Daniel-centric sequel coming, I would certainly be interested - I'd probably pre-order - but I wouldn't necessarily be giddy. 
I doubt I would read a comic book about the continuing adventures of Sean.

I did read the continuing adventures of Chloe and Max.

In the end, as interesting as the characters of Life is Strange 2 were to me, throughout the course of the game, they were not as indelibly burned into my brain as the denizens of Arcadia Bay were - or latterly, as Alex Chen and the citizens of Haven Springs. 
I liked Sean Diaz... but I loved Chloe Price. 
If Sean Diaz were real, I'd buy him a beer, and give him some sound advice. If Chloe were real (and I was her particular romantic persuasion,) I'd marry her. 
(Actually, I knew my wife in high school... and... blue hair and lesbianism aside... I sorta did.)

 

Overall, I like Life is Strange 2 a whole lot - I'd recommend it to anyone who wants more Life is Strange (and that should be everyone with a pulse and a heart not made of stone and poop,) but if there is any entry in the series which I think falls short of being 'required play', it has to be this one. I think I admire it more than I actually love it.

 

It's a good game, but it lives in the shadow of better games, and in the (admirable) attempts it makes to step out of that shadow, it also steps just a little outside of my own personal preferential wheelhouse.

 

 

The Ranking:

So, as said, I think Life is Strange 2, despite some big and admirable swings, remains the weakest link in the Life is Strange canon, and as such, that guarantees a ranking lower than the lowest Life is Strange game on the current list - the original.

In fact, the three other games are quite closely ranks at the moment, and while I like LiS2, I cannot deny that it has to fall quite considerably lower. That is simply because these games trade on one major strength - emotional investment - to the exclusion of most other traditional gaming aspects, and fundamentally, this one did that less well for me. 

 

There are a few narrative-exclusive games on the ranking below Life is Strange, or at least games that trade primarily on narrative, and those are where the best comparisons are. In descending order, the most appropriate of these would be: Firewatch, What Remains of Edith Finch, Oxenfree, The Artful Escape, Afterparty, The Walking Dead, The Wolf Among Us, Detroit Become Human.

 

Looking at that list, I actually think the split point in terms of narrative games is fairly clear to me - Life is Strange 2 is unable to beat out everything down to The Walking Dead, but still sits higher in my estimation than The Wolf Among Us and Detroit, and any that fall lower.

The reason for that split point is fairly simple - all those other games drew an emotional investment that outweighed Life is Strange 2, but The Wolf Among Us (possibly due to my prior knowledge of the source material) did not - and certainly no David Cage game ever has come close.

 

That leaves only a smattering of games in-between The Walking Dead and The Wolf Among Us, none of which are really comparable 1-to-1. It comes down to feeling, and my feelings once again came through rather quickly in the end. I think LiS2 handily places above Far Cry Primal, but it doesn't beat out Tales of Arise.

 

As such, it finds its spot!

 

 

 

 

So there we have it folks!

 

Thanks to @Cleggworth & @Neef-GT5 for putting in requests!

 

 

 Hitman 3 remains as 'Current Most Awesome Game'!

LA Cops stays as the worst-of-the-worst, with the title of  'Least Awesome Game'

 

 

What games will be coming along next time to challenge for the top spot... or the bottom rung?

That's up to randomness, me.... and YOU!

 

Remember:

 

SPECIAL NOTE

 

If there are any specific games anyone wants to see get ranked sooner rather than later - drop a message, and I'll mark them for 'Priority Ranking'! 

 

The only stipulation is that they must be on my profile, at 100% (S-Rank)....

 and aren't already on the Rankings! 

 

 

 

Catch y'all later my Scientific Brothers and Sisters! 

 

[YaManSmevz]

 

I've heard about Apotheon! Took a closer look upon your suggestion, and it is indeed its own unique brand of gorgeous! I love the look, but find myself wishing it had a bit more of a unique pop to it than just its look. It's firmly entrenched in the maybe pile.

 

Also..

 

*looks left and right*

 

...has anyone asked you to talk about Mark of the Ninja yet?

 

....y'know. Asking for a friend.

 

I've been thinking about Hitman Go for a long time, looks like I'm gonna pull the trigger next sale! It's one of those rare instances where it sounds almost exactly like what I've always pictured, except better. Thanks, Doc!

 

Sadly I had to forgo the Life Is Strange reviews altogether, as I still feel I will get to them at some point. But maybe I should get to them sooner than later, eh? They don't seem to be terribly time consuming games, and everybody with an opinion I trust has played more than just one in the series, so that's a good sign, right?

[DrBloodmoney]

29 minutes ago, YaManSmevz said:

I've heard about Apotheon! Took a closer look upon your suggestion, and it is indeed its own unique brand of gorgeous! I love the look, but find myself wishing it had a bit more of a unique pop to it than just its look. It's firmly entrenched in the maybe pile.

Oh, it’s certainty worth a look, but I must admit, as much as I liked the visuals, I wasn’t as enamoured with the gameplay as some were - I know @Copanele is a big advocate for it, so I do wonder if I was just missing something…but the Science must be based on my own research!

 

 

Quote

Also..

 

*looks left and right*

 

...has anyone asked you to talk about Mark of the Ninja yet?

 

....y'know. Asking for a friend.

Oddly enough no - seems like an oversight. I shall correct this with your name, post haste ?

 

Quote

I've been thinking about Hitman Go for a long time, looks like I'm gonna pull the trigger next sale! It's one of those rare instances where it sounds almost exactly like what I've always pictured, except better. Thanks, Doc!

cool! Yeah, totally worth it - expect a good puzzler with some Hitman flavour, rather than a Hitman game, and I think you’ll be in for a great time!

 

Quote

Sadly I had to forgo the Life Is Strange reviews altogether, as I still feel I will get to them at some point. But maybe I should get to them sooner than later, eh? They don't seem to be terribly time consuming games, and everybody with an opinion I trust has played more than just one in the series, so that's a good sign, right?

 

haha, man, my most impassioned arguments ever… scuppered by my spoilers! ? 

 

Nah, totally get it - and I absolutely recommend them. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that, like you say, people rarely play just one… they’re like Pringles that way!

Edited February 10, 2022 by DrBloodmoney

[YaManSmevz]

11 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

Oddly enough no - seems like an oversight. I shall correct this with your name, post haste 

 

 

11 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

 

haha, man, my most impassioned arguments ever… scuppered by my spoilers!  

 

Nah, totally get it - and I absolutely recommend them. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that, like you say, people rarely play just one… they’re like Pringles that way!

 

In all fairness, it's kind of on me - I'm good at unfurling the spoiler flag, but once I reveal said spoilers I'm like a gossipy older woman in her knitting circle, and while I'm sure most people are faaarrr better at it than I am, I simply can't take the risk!

 

And I do love me some pringles?

[Copanele]

Ohhh bless, this has been another review that I've been waiting  

2 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

Oh, it’s certainty worth a look, but I must admit, as much as I liked the visuals, I wasn’t as enamoured with the gameplay as some were - I know @Copanele is a big advocate for it, so I do wonder if I was just missing something…but the Science must be based on my own research!

Ok, to explain, because yes, I loved Apotheon. And many might ask "how can this be? this Kratosichu asshole craps on a game at the slightest gameplay issue!". 

What made me love the game is not the gameplay - it sucks - but how well the implemented the Greek motifs.

Artwork, we already discussed about it. Pretty good. But what I loved (as a Greek mythos fan) was the subtle things that weren't in glorious games like God of War. 

For instance, Artemis' boss battle is one of the best battles I had conceptually. Won't spoil it here but damn it was a battle worthy of the Goddess of the HUNT.

Or meeting Hades and Persephone, the "classical BAD GUYS IN MYTHOLOGY". Well....they were more true to the actual mythos than all of the other games.

That's why I loved Apotheon so much. These little touches. But yeah, gameplay sucks I won't lie here  

 

For Castlevania LoS I won't say anything new - I hated the game  Thought it was trash and QTEs should die from videogames forever.

 

I am glad however that Hitman GO is actually a decent game. I will definitely grab that one and play it, since I want to play all Hitman games anyway. Plus it's another great relaxation game   

[grayhammmer]

I just realized that the first Darksiders game was the second game you ever analyzed and yet you've yet to do the second one. I feel that after seeing Arcesius talk about Genesis, I would like to see how you feel about Darksiders 2.

[DrBloodmoney]

4 hours ago, grayhammmer said:

I just realized that the first Darksiders game was the second game you ever analyzed and yet you've yet to do the second one. I feel that after seeing Arcesius talk about Genesis, I would like to see how you feel about Darksiders 2.

 

Flagged, with your name! ?

[Cleggworth]

Thanks for the Apotheon Review. Its disappointing to see its gameplay doesn't match its stunning visuals, its not necessarily a no but its on the back burner for now. I've played plenty where it's style over substance, Hoa being the one that springs to mind which I know you also played recently. It'll get its shot eventually.

 

Life is strange.... yeah its just a no from me. I doubt anything will change my mind on it. I'll inevitably let True Colours try but I don't see it.

 

Castlevania LoS was an interesting one, besides Patrick Stewart nothing at all is stand out its just exceptionally mediocre. Which isn't surprising considering its just a melting pot of ideas from other games. I enjoyed it but couldn't tell you a whole lot about it.

Actually that's a lie The Forgotten one, despite his name lives on in my memory. On Paladin he was no joke!

[DrBloodmoney]

6 minutes ago, Cleggworth said:

Thanks for the Apotheon Review. Its disappointing to see its gameplay doesn't match its stunning visuals, its not necessarily a no but its on the back burner for now. I've played plenty where it's style over substance, Hoa being the one that springs to mind which I know you also played recently. It'll get its shot eventually.

 

Yeah - I must admit - it might find a little more favour with you now than when I played - I didn't mention in the review, as I'm pretty sure its no longer relevant, but there were some proper issues with it when I played - crashes and whatnot. Pretty sure they're all fixed and patched now, so not relevant to a review... but the sour note those strike can be hard to separate from the memory of the experience, if you know what I mean. They could have cast a bit of a shadow on it for me.

 

6 minutes ago, Cleggworth said:

Life is strange.... yeah its just a no from me. I doubt anything will change my mind on it. I'll inevitably let True Colours try but I don't see it.

 

?

 

Well, I did my best!

 

Hey - no game is for everyone - and those ones are particularly acquired tastes, since they aren't exactly technical or mechanical marvels. They are 100% based on emotional investment - and like films, the ones that really speak to people are all different.

 

For me, there are certainly better written games out there, but I struggle to think of games that have a tone and vibe that speak to me and draw me in as much as those ones do... or characters I feel as invested in.

 

... I am, after all, this guy:

 

 

??

 

6 minutes ago, Cleggworth said:

Castlevania LoS was an interesting one, besides Patrick Stewart nothing at all is stand out its just exceptionally mediocre. Which isn't surprising considering its just a melting pot of ideas from other games. I enjoyed it but couldn't tell you a whole lot about it.

Actually that's a lie The Forgotten one, despite his name lives on in my memory. On Paladin he was no joke!

 

You know - the one thing (that obviously I couldn't say in a review) that did really stand out... was that ending. The very ending I mean - post boss - that was pretty cool.

You know the bit I mean?

You know.

That bit. 

That was hella cool!

 

(some nice, specific stuff there!)

[realm722]

On 2/10/2022 at 0:48 PM, DrBloodmoney said:

The other area in which Apotheon falls down a bit, is in its platforming and light platform-puzzling - or rather, once again, in the way its controls affect those aspects. The game contains quite a bit of platforming, and none of it should - on paper, at least -  be particularly challenging. This is not a Celeste or Super Meat Boy style 'pixel-perfect-precision platformer,' it is aping the 16-bit era, of light, fun platforming as a means to an end. However, because of the implementation of the mechanics, and the controls and mechanical feel of the game, Apotheon is lent a level of frustration I do not think was ever intended. Nikandreos tends to 'stick' to the platforms he is on - particularly when close to an edge. This is designed to stop the player falling off the edge when they don't mean to do so, however, it has a tendency to create a jarring 'juddering' pace to his movement around platforming sections. The 'flow' just does not feel good, As the player runs and jumps around, if they get close to an edge, the game takes over and 'halts' Nikandreos a little, like a driving instructor with a heavy foot, meaning there is often a feeling that the game scuppered what would have been a good jump, by slowing him at the last minute. The result is pretty much the exact opposite of what I suspect the intention was - the player ends up missing the jump, and falling, having to try again. 

 

Wonderful review! We've been in sync on a number of games lately. ? There's absolutely something fishy going on with the platforming in Apotheon. I didn't mention it but there's absolutely a huge factor of momentum in terms of Nikandreos movement. If from a stopped position you try to jump up to a platform, you likely won't reach it to the other side. You need to get some runaway and take off on a sprint in order to have sufficient speed and reach the other side. I don't think I've ever played a game quite like that which wasn't a hardcore platformer (which I would say Apotheon isn't going for, more combat-focused). It definitely took a bit of an adjustment but as long you as clung to the wall you'd be able to slowly climb up and reach the platform. I think your criticisms are plenty valid and made me pause and say: "yea I did kinda need to adjust to that to enjoy the game while I played."

 

As for polishing, I can say the game did crash twice for me. Once during a segment before reaching Hades and another when opening one of the boxes needed for the collectible achievement. It was a tad annoying but due to the frequent save system in each new area, I never lost more than 5 minutes worth of progress. I hope to get around to Wytchwood soon since I'm curious to see how much the developers have improved in the 5+ years between projects. 

[DrBloodmoney]

3 minutes ago, realm722 said:

 

Wonderful review! We've been in sync on a number of games lately.  There's absolutely something fishy going on with the platforming in Apotheon. I didn't mention it but there's absolutely a huge factor of momentum in terms of Nikandreos movement. If from a stopped position you try to jump up to a platform, you likely won't reach it to the other side. You need to get some runaway and take off on a sprint in order to have sufficient speed and reach the other side. I don't think I've ever played a game quite like that which wasn't a hardcore platformer (which I would say Apotheon isn't going for, more combat-focused). It definitely took a bit of an adjustment but as long you as clung to the wall you'd be able to slowly climb up and reach the platform. I think your criticisms are plenty valid and made me pause and say: "yea I did kinda need to adjust to that to enjoy the game while I played."

 

As for polishing, I can say the game did crash twice for me. Once during a segment before reaching Hades and another when opening one of the boxes needed for the collectible achievement. It was a tad annoying but due to the frequent save system in each new area, I never lost more than 5 minutes worth of progress. I hope to get around to Wytchwood soon since I'm curious to see how much the developers have improved in the 5+ years between projects. 

Thanks man! 
 

Yeah, it’s a had thing to articulate exactly what it is that is a little off with the platforming - it’s one of those things that you know right away is slightly iffy, but it’s hard to nail down the exact reason! I think I’m right, but only because that’s the closest to a reasonable explanation I could come up with ?

 

Those crashes are not ideal, but it does sound like an improvement - I can’t remember my ‘crash count’ but I’d place it in the “more than 5, less than 10” region!

 

Yeah, Wytchwood does look interesting - I’ll be curious to check that one out myself!

[rjkclarke]

I might be about 551 years late to the party again..... But that was another set of cracking reads.... That I have re-read for a bit of familiarity here.

 

First off though, I'll just quote this one thing from before!

 

On 07/02/2022 at 7:27 AM, DrBloodmoney said:

Thanks! Truth be told, that one felt a bit wishy-washy in the end - like most of the JRP games, most conversation among people who played is about story specifics, but trying to summarise those plots is impossible without going for thousands of words anyways, and doing it in a non-spoiler-heavy way is a fools errand, so the reviews end up pretty vague by necessity!

 

I do think both the games I've payed of that XIII trilogy were pretty hard-done-to really. Are they on the level of some of the brightest FF stars? No, not really - but since when did "not as good as some of the best games in a genre" equates to "Bad"? ?

They're still a great time, and have their ups and downs like most every game - and I think both FXIII and FFXIII-2 have some pretty great high points!

 

You are not alone in this..... I know exactly what you mean.... and I mean EXACTLY, going the no spoilers route when discussing JRPG's is a bit of a nightmare. I had the exact same feeling myself after writing my one about Tales of Zestiria late last year. I just felt it lacked something because I had to be deliberately vague about so many obvious plot elements that you can only give a cursory glance to.

 

But yes..... Final Fantasy XIII-2 gets a very unfair time of it. Precisely as you say, when did not as good as other very good games in a franchise, make it a bad one. I might be tempted to change my stance on that when I review Lightning Returns whenever I get to it..... 2049 at this rate, where we will have all migrated to the newly found planettoid FLARG, and we'll just be heads in jars..... And unfortunately I'll be a 59 year old head in a jar ..... Okay I'll stop now.

 

Okay TO THE NEW BATCH!

 

You're actually saving my wallet more than harming it so far this year ?....... I'd always kind of been half interested in Castlevania: Lords of Shadow, admittedly for the wrong reasons probably, my interest stems from the who's who of actors in it, and as you know I love hearing a familiar voice crop up in a video game. Now? Nah, no thanks, that game does not sound like it'd be a good time for me.

 

I absolutely struggle with tolerating QTE's at the best of times... You'd think that would make me hate Shenmue, but for some reason I just sort of politely ignore that element.  The fact I have to endure them any time I replay Tomb Raider Legend already makes me sad.... Lords of Shadow doing them as abysmally as they seemed to here does make me want to run away screaming and flailing my arms .......

 

So long story short, I don't think I need to align several atomic clocks and pray to some forbidden deity that the PS3 store will work long enough to purchase that and it's DLC, so I might have just dodged a bullet there, so thanks for that!

 

I absolutely loved your HItman GO review...... It made me both very happy to recall what a pleasant surprise that game was, but also undeniably a little bit sad when I remember how much of a let down I thought Lara Croft GO was in comparison. It's not even a bad game,it's just got almost none of the charm to it that HItman GO has.....

 

Hitman GO though is a hard +1 from me, for @YaManSmevz and @Copanele who've been on separate Hitman kicks the last few months, it might be short but there is a hell of a lot of enjoyment to be found there.

 

I'm cautiously optimistic about Apotheon, I've always wanted to play it, but I stupidly never claimed it when it was a free plus game...So if it goes on sale again I might have to give it a look, I think there's enough there to have a good time with it.

Fantastic write up of Life is Strange: Before the Storm too..... That's my favourite of the LiS titles myself. Although admittedly I'm now 2 behind.

....  You did such a brilliant job of getting across how much those games really spoke to you on a multitude of levels.

 

I have to ask though, I'm assuming this was a review of the recent remaster version? Because I always thought Before the Storm always looked much worse than the original LiS did, mainly as far as animations go though.  I always remember it having some really awkward animations, like I thought Chloe walked like a Duck when I played it originally, and I couldn't unsee it.

Edited February 14, 2022 by rjkclarke

[DrBloodmoney]

37 minutes ago, rjkclarke said:

Fantastic write up of Life is Strange: Before the Storm too..... That's my favourite of the LiS titles myself. Although admittedly I'm now 2 behind.

....  You did such a brilliant job of getting across how much those games really spoke to you on a multitude of levels.

 

I have to ask though, I'm assuming this was a review of the recent remaster version? Because I always thought Before the Storm always looked much worse than the original LiS did, mainly as far as animations go though.  I always remember it having some really awkward animations, like I thought Chloe walked like a Duck when I played it originally, and I couldn't unsee it.

 

That's interesting - I certainly did review it right after finishing the remaster, though I must admit - I remember thinking the animations were better even in the original version. Having said that - that's entirely the facial animation stuff - the ability to "converse" through subtle facial animations, without dialogue - like in the dinner scene with Rachels parents, or in the play. I think Before the Storm shows a lot of the promise that would eventually lead to True Colours, which I would genuinely hold up as having some of the best facial expression animations outside of massive AAA games like The Last of Us and God of War 2018!

I actually think those facial animations are better n Before the Storm than in Life is Strange 2 - and even than DotNod's future project Twin Mirror.  Deck Nine seem to have a real flair for that stuff, above what DotNod were doing.

 

I guess didn't really consider the actual walking animation cycles and the movement - those never really stood out to me as better or worse...

...I guess I just wasn't concentrating on that stuff as much? - That's perfectly possible - I could be blinded to some of that stuff just because it isn't where the meat of the narrative beats lie 

 

 

Edited February 14, 2022 by DrBloodmoney

[rjkclarke]

1 hour ago, DrBloodmoney said:

That's interesting - I certainly did review it right after finishing the remaster, though I must admit - I remember thinking the animations were better even in the original version. Having said that - that's entirely the facial animation stuff - the ability to "converse" through subtle facial animations, without dialogue - like in the dinner scene with Rachels parents, or in the play. I think Before the Storm shows a lot of the promise that would eventually lead to True Colours, which I would genuinely hold up as having some of the best facial expression animations outside of massive AAA games like The Last of Us and God of War 2018!

I actually think those facial animations are better n Before the Storm than in Life is Strange 2 - and even than DotNod's future project Twin Mirror.  Deck Nine seem to have a real flair for that stuff, above what DotNod were doing.

 

I guess didn't really consider the actual walking animation cycles and the movement - those never really stood out to me as better or worse...

...I guess I just wasn't concentrating on that stuff as much? - That's perfectly possible - I could be blinded to some of that stuff just because it isn't where the meat of the narrative beats lie 

 

 

No you aren't wrong at all.... The facial animations are better than in the original Life is Strange. They really are good too, I probably should have mentioned that part.  I just found a few of the non-facial animations pretty janky and awkward looking. I was just wondering if they bothered to do anything with that in the remastered version. It doesn't impact the game at all, I just found it really jarring the way some of the characters moved sometimes, so I doubt it was probably something they felt the need to change. 

 

I mean it's not even particularly a criticism, and it definitely doesn't change my opinion of it one way or the other......

 

......I don't know why you would pay attention to whether or not those specific things were different. in the newer version ?... It isn't like its actually important at all in the grand scope of the game. I mean the main protagonist of probably my favourite game ever looks like he wears a pair of knickers on his face, some leggings and flip-flops, and I can  overlook that design decision ?.... Chloe might walk like a Duck in a few scenes, but it was more of a " okay then....." moment than an "OMG, game is ruined moment" haha

 

I'm glad that it's laying the groundwork for True Colours though - especially if they carried some of those excellent facial animation tech through to that game. That makes me quite excited for that one.... I really ought to try out LiS2, I wanted to read your review of it, and I probably should, but I know you slapped a spoiler warning on it. I just always hear such conflicting things about it, but certainly when it comes to the two of us, our opinions align way more often than they don't, so maybe I'm just tying myself up in knots about it for no reason?

 

It sounds as if Dontnod should probably have outsourced some of Vampyr to Deck Nine in that case, because that games got some pretty stiff facial animations, and it could have really benefited from some of these ones, would have helped with some of the pretty bland wide shots that the cutscenes seem to love using... Seems to think it's a BBC Serial from the mid 50's at times I swear! 

 

Oh yeah, also, when I mentioned that thing about the Final Fantasy XIII-2 review, on the incredibly slim chance you misunderstood that (seems highly unlikely,) I was agreeing with you finding it tough to write spoiler free, or about the plot in JRPG's..... Not that, it read like it was wishy-washy, I just wanted to be very clear on that one so I didn't look like - well, the end of a bell, lets say

Edited February 14, 2022 by rjkclarke

[DrBloodmoney]

22 minutes ago, rjkclarke said:

 

No you aren't wrong at all.... The facial animations are better than in the original Life is Strange. They really are good too, I probably should have mentioned that part.  I just found a few of the non-facial animations pretty janky and awkward looking. I was just wondering if they bothered to do anything with that in the remastered version. It doesn't impact the game at all, I just found it really jarring the way some of the characters moved sometimes, so I doubt it was probably something they felt the need to change. 

 

I mean it's not even particularly a criticism, and it definitely doesn't change my opinion of it one way or the other......

 

......I don't know why you would pay attention to whether or not those specific things were different. in the newer version ... It isn't like its actually important at all in the grand scope of the game. I mean the main protagonist of probably my favourite game ever looks like he wears a pair of knickers on his face, some leggings and flip-flops, and I can  overlook that design decision .... Chloe might walk like a Duck in a few scenes, but it was more of a " okay then....." moment than an "OMG, game is ruined moment" haha

 

You know, honestly  -I really enjoyed playing through those remasters... but they are the very definition of unnecessary from a technical point of view. There might be some slight differences in terms of lighting effects / shaders etc. but honestly... I'm probably as close to a LiS super-fan as we're likely to find, and even I struggled to discern real differences from the originals. ?

 

Quote

I'm glad that it's laying the groundwork for True Colours though - especially if they carried some of those excellent facial animation tech through to that game. That makes me quite excited for that one.... I really ought to try out LiS2, I wanted to read your review of it, and I probably should, but I know you slapped a spoiler warning on it. I just always hear such conflicting things about it, but certainly when it comes to the two of us, our opinions align way more often than I don't, so maybe I'm just tying myself up in knots about it for no reason?

 

Oh, I think it's worth playing, for sure - I do rate it the lowest of the lot, but whole FFXIII argument stands here - being the least good in a good series is still a far cry from bad - and I like that it took some bigger narrative swings - they just didn't connect with me on quite the same level.

 

 

Quote

It sounds as if Dontnod should probably have outsourced some of Vampyr to Deck Nine in that case, because that games got some pretty stiff facial animations, and it could have really benefited from some of these ones, would have helped with some of the pretty bland wide shots that the cutscenes seem to love using... Seems to think it's a BBC Serial from the mid 50's at times I swear! 

 

Ha - yeah, I imagine they get a bit jealous when looking at Deck Nine in that area - when you look at Twin Mirror vs. True Colours the difference is stark. I remember thinking Twin Mirror was pretty impressive on those terms when I played it... but then True Colours was like "Hold my Beer" ?

 

It's actually odd, thinking about how much Twin Mirror has in common with True Colours, given that it's DotNods own property, vs. Deck Nines continuation of their old one - both small mining towns, both have a mystery, both have a central character with "issues"... it's almost weird!)  

 

 

Quote

Oh yeah, also, when I mentioned that thing about the Final Fantasy XIII-2 review, on the incredibly slim chance you misunderstood that (seems highly unlikely,) I was agreeing with you finding it tough to write spoiler free, or about the plot in JRPG's..... Not that, it read like it was wishy-washy, I just wanted to be very clear on that one so I didn't look like - well, the end of a bell, lets say

 

Nah, I got what you meant - though you'd be right either way ?

Fact is, I've pretty much given up trying to summarise plots almost completely - I pretty much just give the starting points, and the gist, but if it goes longer than a few sentences, I just cut it. After all, these should be somewhat spoiler free!

TBH, The LiS ones are not really any more spoiler-filled than any others - but they are games much more plot dependent, so I wanted to be a bit more careful up front!

Edited February 14, 2022 by DrBloodmoney

[DrBloodmoney]

 

!!SCIENCE UPDATE!!

 

 

The next 5 (somewhat) randomly selected games to be submitted for scientific analysis shall be:

 

36 Fragments of Midnight 
Control
Darksiders II
Frogger Returns 
Modern Tales: Age of Invention

 

 

With a minimum of 1 Bonus game this round, including:

Death’s Door

 

 

 

Subject(s) in RED marked for PRIORITY ASSIGNEMENT

[Care of @Neef-GT5 & @grayhammmer]

 

 

 

Can 'Current Most Awesome' game, Hitman 3, maintain the title again?

 

Is gaming mould LA Cops going to be disinfected, and finally lose the title of the title of 'Least Awesome Game'?

 

 

Let's find out, Science Chums!

[Cleggworth]

2 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

 

!!SCIENCE UPDATE!!

 

 

The next 5 (somewhat) randomly selected games to be submitted for scientific analysis shall be:

 

36 Fragments of Midnight 
Control
Darksiders II
Frogger Returns 
Modern Tales: Age of Invention

 

 

With a minimum of 1 Bonus game this round, including:

Death’s Door

 

 

 

Subject(s) in RED marked for PRIORITY ASSIGNEMENT

[Care of @Neef-GT5 & @grayhammmer]

 

 

 

Can 'Current Most Awesome' game, Hitman 3, maintain the title again?

 

Is gaming mould LA Cops going to be disinfected, and finally lose the title of the title of 'Least Awesome Game'?

 

 

Let's find out, Science Chums!

 

Are you stalking me doc? Another game reviewed just after I've played it ?

 

Darksiders II is of interest too. I loved the first one but everything I've read about the second one is mixed so I've avoided it for the time being

[DrBloodmoney]

4 minutes ago, Cleggworth said:

 

Are you stalking me doc? Another game reviewed just after I've played it ?

 

Darksiders II is of interest too. I loved the first one but everything I've read about the second one is mixed so I've avoided it for the time being

 

?

I didn't realise that - The last Life is Strange batch may have been reactionary... but this one's pure coincidence, I promise! 

[DrBloodmoney]

 

  NEW SCIENTIFIC RESULTS ARE IN! 

 

 

Hello Science-Misters and Science-M'Ladies, as promised (and in some cases requested), here are the latest results of our great scientific endeavour!

 

 

36 Fragments of Midnight

 

Summary: 

A simple puzzle-platform game from Ratalaika staple Petite Games, 2017's 36 Fragments of Midnight is the first game in a mini-series, wherein the player is tasked with guiding a little white cube through a series of levels, collecting coloured gems, and returning them to a group of magical forrest creatures, to complete the level.

 

The levels are all fairy simple, (as, indeed, is the game itself.) There is no real challenge peak to the game, though that's not to say the player will never die. In fact, there are a fair few dangers in the world, though nothing that a couple of tries won't overcome. There can occasionally be some irritation in terms of the level layout - because the screen scrolls around with the player, there can be some deaths that feel a little 'cheap', where they couldn't have really been seen ahead of time, (generally when falling downwards through the level,) but these are relatively minimal, and the game is quick to reset the player for another go.

 

The actual mechanics are fine, with threats consisting of the usual platforming staples - spikes, buzzsaws, lasers etc - and the controls feel good - nice and responsive. The game is predicated on a simple doubled-jump mechanic, and that feels fine - there is a nice visual 'streak' left behind Midnight, giving some good feedback to the player of where they messed up if a jump goes awry, and letting them learn the timing and feel of the game easily.

In fact, it's a bit of a shame that the game is so short and simple, as the mechanics are actually sound enough that they could easily have supported a longer, more challenging game!

 

Visually, the game is very simple - levels and obstacles are in black foreground silhouette, and the background is a pleasant night-sky with a few woodland features, evoking a mysterious forrest hideaway.The look is one that is not original - certainly games like Hue and Limbo have done versions of the same aesthetic - to admittedly greater effect - however, it never looks bad here, and there are some nice flourishes in terms of lighting that make the game pop nicely. Midnight him/herself is his/her own light source, a-la Dark Souls (is this the first instance of someone comparing 36 Fragments of Midnight to Dark Souls?!) and there are nice, simple effects when that light is has near obstacles or foreground platforms. 

The whole game is actually very nicely presented - the UI is clean and classy, and the fonts used and the simple design in the whimsical characters are pleasant to look at.

 

Audio is a little strange - there is little music, and the whole game is accompanied by a simple, slightly haunting wind-howl sound that is certainly evocative, though possibly pitched a little scarier than the gameplay really justifies.

There are some perfectly adequate stings when collecting gems, though it does feel strange that there is no accompanying sounds for jumping - as that feels like the most appropriate place for one, given that it is the primary mechanic! 

 

Overall, 36 Fragments of Midnight is a perfectly competent, and quite pleasant little platformer with a nice aesthetic, which is only really undone by its shortness and its lack of challenge. Those elements have, (fairly,) seen the game lumped into the "EZPZ Trophies" category, which is a pity, as it tends to gloss over the fact there is a perfectly competent set of mechanics, and some nice little flourishes on show here.

 

 

The Ranking:

The biggest thing working against 36 Fragments of Midnight is, without doubt, how incredibly short, simple and easy it is, and that does ensure a fairly low placement on the list, as there isn't any narrative or gameplay elements strong enough to offset that. That ensures a fairly low placement, however, the game doesn't actually do anything particularly wrong, and it still looks nice and feels good to play. 

 

Two other games that really stands out as having similar issues are Zero Zero Zero Zero, and Black & White Bushido. Both of those games feel good to play, and have interesting looks, however, both are undercut by their shortness and lack of challenge.

 

I think 36 Fragments of Midnight has to fall between them. Black & White Bushido is the higher placed of the two, and while it does suffer some of the same issues, it does have a more signature look, played even better, plus it has a really quite great couch-competitive mode that is genuinely fun to play.

 

Zero Zero Zero Zero is fun, and has more to it overall (setting aside trophy requirements,) but I don't think it looks nearly as good, and the audio isn't as interesting as 36 Fragments of Midnight.

 

For the games I'm looking at in-between, it comes down not necessarily to similar genres, but rather ones that are also shot and simple, and asking "did this game undercut itself with problems more egregiously than 36 Fragments of Midnight's shortness does?"

 

Working up from Zero Zero Zero Zero, the first game to which the answer is "No", I think, is probably Grim Legends 2: Song of the Dark Swan.

The game right below - Dokuro - is a much more ambitious game than 36 Fragments of Midnight, however, it is absolutely saturated by control issues, which drag all those ambitions into the toilet. 36 Fragments of Midnight is fleeting, but perfectly fun to play, and so it has to place higher... but even a middling Artifex Mundi entry like Grim Legends 2: Song of the Dark Swan is a much more likely candidate for a send play on my part, so it has to keep its spot.

 

 

 

 

Control

 

Summary: 

A 3rd person Sci-Fi New-Weird powers-shooter, 2019's Control was created at a somewhat difficult time for its developer. Remedy, the storied creators of the Max Payne and Alan Wake games, had quite a bit to prove, as the magic upon which they built their success had floundered considerably at their last outing. 

The lacklustre reception of flawed 2016 Xbox exclusive Quantum Break (their full first console game since 2010's Alan Wake,) had put a dent in their credibility, and left more than a few critics and consumers questioning whether their stylistic format of unusual, highly cinematic games, and their signature mix of pulp literature influences and in-game FMV oddness -  which had served them well in the past - was capably of moving with the times... or if they would be destined to live alongside the small cadre of successful PS3 / Xbox 360 era developers who's star faded as technological capabilities outpaced their own ability to harness them. 

 

With so long between Remedy console games, the question of whether Quantum Break was anomaly or trajectory, was a very real one.

Happily, as Control confidently proved - it was the former.

 

Taking the role of Jesse Faden - a woman on a personal quest to discover what happened to her brother after a paranormal event seventeen years prior - the player arrives near the end of her journey. She has spent years following a trail, which has led her to a a nondescript, brutalist building in New York - The Oldest House, headquarters of a shadowy government organisation called the Federal Bureau of Control. 

The FBC deal in something called Altered World Events - paranormal events connected to Object of Power out in the real world. Studying them, cataloging them, and controlling them. The FBC itself exists partially within an alternate dimension known as the Astral Plane, and is administrated both by a human bureaucracy, and by 'The Board' - a sort of otherworldly presence from within the Astral Plane, represented as a giant, inverted black pyramid.

Stepping inside, Jesse is met with a non-newtonian, otherworldly space in the full throws of a cataclysmic event. A dangerous entity known as The Hiss is escaping the Astral Plane, and infecting The Oldest House... and the previous director of the FBC is - apparently - dead. The Board, caring not for human notions of duty, rank... or confusion, takes the decision to elect the most appropriate human to the role of FBC director... whether she likes it or not.

That's right, no sooner is Jesse allowed to explore the chaos around her, than she is dragooned to run the organisation she barely understands.

 

That synopsis most likely sounds baffling - and somewhat ridiculous to anyone who hasn't played the game. It IS baffling and fairly ridiculous on paper. However, while actually playing the game, it somehow doesn't ever feel so... and that is an almost perfect distillation of the overall tone of Control. In every facet, the game is about mundane treatment of the profoundly peculiar.

 

Control's world - the FBC, AWE's, Objects of Power, The Board, The Directors - these elements are complicated and ridiculous, but treated as absolutely standard - almost banal, in fact - by the game itself, and by the characters who make up the FBC. The key reason that Control's world building works, (in addition to the excellent writing, of which there is a huge amount,) is that while it is conceptually dense, and often conceptually confusing, it is all treated with a deadpan, clinical and dry nature.

There is a heavy influence in Control from pulp Sci-Fi - The Twilight Zone, The Outer Limits, The X-Files... and in particular an early aught's Sci-Fi miniseries called The Lost Room. (Seriously, anyone who enjoyed Control, and hasn't seen The Lost Room - give it a watch. I guarantee the writers of the game did... its influence is so strong, it borders on litigious!) 

 

The world building in Control is extremely odd - but I say that in the best sense. Absurdist, as opposed to absurd. It requires a level of buy-in from the player - perhaps even a little more than is the norm in games, or in sci-fi, as they are hit with a lot of conceptually unusual aspects and terminology quite quickly - but that buy-in is not without recompense. If they take that leap, the player is more than rewarded with a level of care and attention that has been paid to crafting the fascinating plastic reality of the game. Through stylistic design, dialogue, written descriptions of items and recorded documents, and through the extreme peculiarity of the cut-scenes and cinematic effects.

 

That world-building is really top notch. Where the narrative doesn't quite match that high bar, however, is in the more immediate Jesse through-line story. The tale of her and her brother is very well done in terms of how the history of it feeds into the larger lore, however, in the immediate, it is the weak link in a strong chain. While never bad, the game does suffer a little in pacing, in the sense that the true 'A-story' tends to be less interesting than the B-stories supporting it. Almost every time the game followed the brother storyline for any length of time, I tended to find myself wishing it would speed up, so I could get back to learning about the FBC through the side-content and tertiary information lying around. Jesse is not a bad character, but she is something of a blank slate, and the best aspects of the narrative are generally where she is at her most 'cypher'. Where she is merely a vessel for the player, the game is strongest, and so the best narrative tends to be around her learning about other characters, rather than around her own points of view. When the game tries to lean on her own personal feelings, or emotions, it tends to feel less engaging, as there just isn't much meat on that bone.

 

The thrust of the game is in the exploration and the discovery of the lore, and in 3rd person action combat. This combat is very well done - fun, with powers that are varied and interesting, and use of which can significantly alter the play style of the player. 

The best parts of this system tend to be when fighting hordes of enemies in wide open areas, however. The chaos of a large-scale 1-vs-50 fight with Jesse using her full breath of powers is TREMENDOUS fun. 

Bosses, however, while interesting enough narratively, and relatively well designed, do tend to be less enjoyable to actually engage with. They tend to be bullet-spongey, and a little irritating in how long they take to go down. It is stark how limited those fights are, as compared to the open fire-fights elsewhere.

 

There is a 'slotted, findable augments' mechanic, which gives the player new ranked augments after virtually every encounter, and combining these with different power elements results in a fun, varied meta-game that really works well. In fact, I would wager that Control features the best implementation of such a system I have played since The Surge - and I like it in The Surge a lot!

 

If there is one major issue with the gameplay (and it is, admittedly, a relatively big one,) it is the map.

Considering the game is a soft-metroidvania, and requires a lot of backtracking, the map provided is woefully inadequate. The Oldest House is purposely confusing - that is a deliberate narrative element - and so there is certainly an argument that mapping such a structure is not easy, however, the map provided does seem to hit an almost perfectly debilitating sweet-spot: it is bad enough to be awkward and difficult to use, but just good enough to make you keep trying to. 

Ironically, using the in game signage is a much more effective method of navigation, and actually, by not including a map at all, the developer would have much better encouraged the player to learn the routes they need using that in-game navigation. By having a sub-par map, they distract from that in-game signage, with an inferior tool.

 

Visually, the game is very, very impressive. The stark clinical look of the office environment is certainly a baseline design that we have seen before, however, in the case of Control, that sterility of environment is deliberate. It is the canvas upon which its weirdness is painted, containing it, and making it stand out by contrast. Both elements though - the still, pedestrian office elements, and the ways in which that aesthetic is toyed with in crafting the non-newtonian elements of The Oldest House, are filled with stylish flourishes, and look really phenomenal from a technical perspective. Lighting, explosions, the particle effects and chaotic flurries of interactable objects caught in powers-based firefights all look great.

 

There are aesthetic choices made in the more ethereal elements of the game - conversations with The Board, for example - which are incredibly stylish and cinematic. These are extreme high concepts, and Remedy clearly understand that anything short of truly bizarre and unique visuals would only pop the bubble, and render them less interesting than the player conjured in his/her mind. Rather than try to show these as true 'elements' in the world, they are represented in the abstract. It works a charm - giving a visual signature to the game that is extremely haunting and memorable. It is using confusion and lack of specificity as virtue, rather than vice - following a visual tone set by the narrative one. 

 

The UI is particularly stark and stylish here too - following the brutalist, almost Soviet style of the building itself.

 

Character models, while of very high quality, are really the weaker element in the visual side of the game. While Jesse and most of the characters she encounters are rendered well - and recognisable as the actors who play them - they can stray a little into LA Noire-esque uncanny valley territory. The graphical elements are certainly high quality, however, the photo-mapping of the faces look a little odd on the character models, and don't quite blend as well as they might with the rest of the visuals.

 

Audio is very good in the game - the general score is brooding and haunting, but not averse to exploding into raucous - and fun - musical elements at time. There is one particular section, towards the end of the game, (in the 'Ashtray Maze') where Jesse is at full power, coming into her own and understanding her role and power, and the audio goes full Heavy Metal, to pretty awesome effect. Admittedly, the song (in reality by Poets of the Fall, though here credited as the Old Gods of Asgard, in an Alan Wake reference,) is exactly the kind of warbling Metal-Ballad-Butt-Rock that I personally can't stand, but... in this instance, it just works!

 

The voice work provided in the game is pretty high quality - the cast play it straight, clearly understanding the kind of tone the game is going for. Again Jesse tends to be the weaker link here, as her character is such a blank slate, and therefore somewhat unengaging, but that is more than made up forby the eclectic mix of characters she encounters.

 

Overall, Control is a fun, smart, absurd game that knows the very specific tone it is aiming for, and tends to nail it at every turn. The gameplay is good fun - more than enough to keep the player engaged as they negotiate the narrative.

That narrative is doing exactly what Remedy have always done - taking B-Movie material, and giving it A-Grade polish - but for my money, Control does it to a higher degree of quality than they have ever managed before.

 

 

The Ranking:

So, Control ended up narrowing its placement incredibly quickly for me, as there are two games on the list - currently pretty close to one another that really stand out as being the ceiling and floor for Control - Batman: Arkham Asylum, and Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor.

 

While neither game is comparable in terms of combat style, both are 3rd-person action games, and Arkham Asylum even shares a little more DNA, given it also has the 3D Metroidvania elements.

 

As much as I love the narrative in Control - and the excellent combat - I don't think either quite combine to make a push past Arkham Asylum. Yes, the world-building elements of the lore are stronger in Control (it is original after all, whereas Arkham Asylum is working in an 80-year-old canon,) however, as good as the combat is, it isn't quite as tight and clever as Arkham Asylum's rhythm-dance-brutality.

 

Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor, on the other hand, also has the weaker world-building and narrative, but the combat (which is, after all, aping Arkham Asylum closely,) doesn't manage to outpace Control's efforts either, and so Control beats it out across the board.

 

Looking at the games in-between, Control actually has some early trouble, one spot above Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor, with 2D Metroidvania Dandara. That game is smaller in scope, and with much more limited narrative, however, the world-building is, I would argue, equally, if not more, fascinating, the music is awesome, and the movement mechanics are so interesting that I think pound-for-pound, it does manage to hold its place. 

 

As such, Control finds its spot... that was easier than expected!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Darksiders II

 

Summary: 

For the follow up to surprise critical and (relative) commercial success of their debut game Darksiders, Vigil Games err on the side of artistic safety, but mechanical risk - keeping the Heavy Metal album cover aesthetic that their original Zelda-like post-apocalyptic hack-n-slash had revelled in, but expanding the game out on the gameplay front - to relative, (if notoriously divisive,) success.

 

Telling a parallel story to that of the first game, as War is charged with bringing about the apocalypse prematurely by the Charred Council and goes on his own quest to prove his innocence, the player this time takes the role of his horseman brother - Death. Seeking to clear his brothers name, Death takes on his own quest - not to find the guilty, but to erase the crime itself, by restoring humanity to life, thus readdressing the cosmic balance sent into disharmony... and thus begins a winding, silly and pretty fun tale.

 

The narrative of Darksiders II is long, and just as overblown and grandiose as the first game. While that would be fine on its own - I personally am quite fond of the blasphemous retelling of arcane religious dogma, and the Darksiders canon is so chock full of such Heaven and Hell-flavoured angelic malarkey it is practically growing fiery wings - this time the tale has a slightly more knowing, slightly less edge-lord quality to it, and that is to the game's benefit. Like the game itself, the narrative here is bigger, and a little sillier than that on show in the first game, but that slightly knowing quality, and occasional deliberate humour peppered throughout serves it remarkably well. The game is, as said, much, much longer than the previous entry, and while the original Darksiders was a game who's narrative tone I enjoyed, I suspect its level of self-seriousness would not be able to sustain a game so much longer.

 

In terms of the gameplay, Darksiders II is certainly a clear sequel to it's predecessor - the combat is in the same ballpark and the Zelda-esque themed dungeons remain intact - however, there are a number of distinct changes made to the formula here - primarily around the injection of a plethora of RPG and RPG-adjacent mechanics.

 

For starters, Darksiders II feels much more of an open-world. This is, actually, not quite as different from the first game as it might seem - in reality, there is about the same level of freedom to explore than there was in the first game, however, the actual era design, and the scope of the world is so massively increased, that what felt more linear, is lent the feeling of an open-world RPG, by simply economies of scale. That might seem like damning with faint praise - after all, who wants a game to simply feel bigger without reason? - and I have heard complaints to that effect before, however, the feeling I had when playing was not that Darksiders II was overstretched, but rather, that the original Darksiders felt cramped by comparison. The openness of the areas (facilitated by the use of Death's horse, Despair,) does feel barren at times, but this is relatively rare, and to be honest, while the game does drag at points, that feeling was never as a result of the open-world aspect. If anything, there areas where the game dragged was in the more linear, climbing / ledge traversal sections, which are a holdover from the original.

 

Unlike Darksiders, Darksiders II is very much a loot-game. Almost every fight in the game results in Death finding colour-coded loot, adding a significant meta-game on top of the narrative and combat/puzzle elements. Equipping the best new items on Death is a fun endeavour, (you do actually see these items in game (not necessarily a given in 2012 - thus giving something of an aesthetic, character-customisation element too,) and it adds a level of customisation and user-input to the combat that is welcome in a game this long.

The colour-coded rarity levels of loot mechanic, at the time, was relatively common only to MMO's, though now has been roundly adopted by the Looter-Shooter genre, and by many RPG-adjacent open-world games. Curiously though, very few do so with the user-friendly flourishes that Darksiders II employed. 

The player can, for example, see the stats of an item when simply getting near it - they don't need to pick it up and inspect it. 

'Fast-equipping' new gear is tied to a single button push.

A mechanic called the 'Cursed artillery' allows lower level items, or items not useful as equipment to be 'fed' to it,  meaning even finding the things you don't need can be used in other ways. (This employment means to reward the player even when finding things they don't necessarily need is a mechanic I love, and find is curiously absent in most games, despite almost always receiving praise when it is present. Prey, for example, with it's 'break-down' mechanics in the fabricators.

 

While a lot of these RPG-adjacent mechanics are more common now than they ever were, and have found their way into many character-action and open-world games in the past decade, (Assassin's Creed, for example, has entered this arena with its newer entries,) Darksiders II did them with a confidence and with a keen eye on the user-experience that is rare, and very welcome. Frankly, many of the games that came after could have done well to take some lessons from Vigil's effort.

 

Aside from the RPG adjacent additions, the meat of the game is still rooted in the two areas that were the bread and butter of the previous game - hack-n-slash combat, and Zelda-like dungeon exploration.

 

The combat remains good. IT is broadly 3D Brawler-adjacent, though Darksiders II is neither a precision-based or overly punishing game in the Devil May Cry mould, nor a complete button-mashing cake-walk in the Musou vein. In terms of challenge, the combat falls somewhere close to God of War / Dante's Inferno level, though the pace is a tad slower, and there is less focus on complex combos. While variety and care is rewarded, button mashing is not heavily punished in regular combat - and on normal difficulties, it is a reasonable strategy. There is a good, solid weight and heft to Death's movements, and weapon impacts and attacks feel heavy and crunchy and visceral.

 

Boss fights are well designed for the most part, and the one area where mashing is not really viable - this isn't a Souls-like, and stumbling through fights is possible, but for the most part, the bosses need at least a modicum of tactical thinking and pattern-recognition to defeat. There is a good sense of scale to these fights, and each felt quite unique and interesting.

 

The dungeons remain broadly 'themed', with generally fun, if not overly difficult puzzle mechanics. As in most aspects of the game, some of these can feel a bit over-long though, and the game tends not to recognise when a mechanic is being over-used. While most of the puzzle solutions are clever enough and fun to engage with the first time, there can often be simply too many uses of similar mechanics in close proximity, and some do wear out thier welcome a little by the time a dungeon is completed.

 

On the artistic side, the signature style of Darksiders is continued in Darksiders II - a mishmash of Heavy Metal stylings and 90's Image comic-book leanings - though it is given a rather more vibrant, colourful and slightly more whimsical pass on the design side here. The grim, dark-fantasy of Darksiders is still present in some areas, but the larger scale and lusher environments, couple with some more High-Fantasy influences lend Darksiders II a greater variety of aesthetic, and a rather more pleasant visual palate overall.

 

Character design in the game is pretty strong, in NPCs, bosses, and Death himself, who has an interesting look. Death has appeared in popular media for centuries - as long as popular media has existed, we have been personifying Death - and so it is difficult to imagine trying to come up with an entirely original concept for him, however, the combination of some of the traditional elements (the scythe, the Death Mask etc,) with the signature 'muscles-upon-muscles', wrestling-adjacent style of Darksiders works far better than it really should here.

Death both looks pretty cool in context, and actually, becomes oddly endearing as a character. Part of this, of course, is his role in the narrative - Death feels like the 'put-upon' character to some degree...he spends the entire game being told he needs to find this next thing for so-and-so to be able to progress, however, a lot of this is down to the character design itself.

 

The world is grand, on a scale that dwarfs the original, and while that does mean there are barren areas in terms of content, visually, these vast, sweeping landscapes look very nice.

 

The game did suffer a little in the visuals department in terms of the technical aspects - it had a tendency to drop frames, or get a little choppy in spots, which was disappointing - though it is worth noting, I played the original version on PS3. There is a PS4 re-release, and from what I understand, this is no longer an issue in that version.)

 

On the audio front, the game plays on two levels. Voice work is generally fine, if never particularly stand-out. Characters favour a relatively traditional high-fantasy or grim-gothic pastiche, which is delivered solidly, though few characters really stand out as giving particularly memorable performances.

Foley work is, again, good though not stand-out - weapon sounds and footfalls have a workmanlike competency, but not out-and-out flair.

 

Where the audio really does stand out though, is in the score. Video-game soundtrack aficionado Jesper Kyd has provided some bangers over the years - his scores for Hitman and Assassin's Creed games are ones I've loved - and his Darksiders II scores one of my personal favourites. 

It is as varied and evocative as the art design of the game itself, haunting in places, yet prone to thumping and pounding rhythmic sections and grand, thundering overtures, and really adds to the game in a very meaningful way. 

 

Overall, Darksiders II is a solid, well put together game, that retains the core concepts of the original Darksiders, but builds it out in all directions, adding in significant new elements and increasing the scope of the game immensely. The slightly lighter tone of the game works for me - as do most of the added elements, and the end result is a game that, while maybe a little over-long, is still a great, fun solid good time, that is nice to look at, great to listen to and just a ton of fun to play.

 

 

The Ranking:

For ranking purposes, the first point of comparison is, naturally, the original Darksiders. 

The original game was ranked on this thread very early - prior to me writing these full reviews - and so I never really articulated my feelings on it - and I am well aware that Darksiders II is somewhat divisive among fans of the original. Some people hate the changes to formula. I am not one of them however. I liked the original game quite a bit - but I think almost all of the changes made in Darksiders II, while not necessarily required, are successful, and work to the game's benefit.

 

Between the better art design, the better music, and the added meta-level provides by the well-implemented looter aspects, I think Darksiders II leaps past it's already very good predecessor handily.

 

Above Darksiders though, there are quite a few very good games in quite close proximity. One one spot above, in fact, is God of War II, and that match-up gave me a lot of pause. 

Both games are dealing in a lot of the same areas - brawler-esque combat, environmental puzzles, narratives that are grandiose and overblown in a good way, and protagonist anti-heroes exploring a world rendered from interpretation of ancient mythology - in God of War II's case, greek mythology, in Darksiders II's case, religious dogma.

 

In the end, there is little between the two but I am erring on the side of Darksiders II just managing to squeeze the win. God of War II takes it on pacing and probably on combat (though that is close,) however, Darksiders II has to take it on narrative tone, visual style and on music.

 

It is such a close fight though, and with the strengths of the next game up - LA Noire - being pretty myriad, I am electing to leave Darksiders II ranking just one notch above God of War II!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Frogger Returns

 

Summary: 

A modernised version of the arcade classic, released on PS3 in 2009 by Hijinx Studios, Frogger Returns was one of the last of a spate of old arcade games being modernised on the PS3 at the time - and while none of them really hit well, Frogger Returns was a particularly flat offering, even within that camp.

 

Let's begin with the visuals, as they are not only a point of note, but feed directly into the mechanics of the game. 

They... are not good.

The original arcade game is given a 3D treatment - which is essentially the entire raison d'être of these PS3 modernisation releases - but it is not a particularly good one. 

The 3D models are very rudimentary - blocky, sharply polygonal, and lacking much in the way of cartoonish character or charm. The level design aesthetic is simple - as it should be - however, the game manages to somehow find a perfect problematic sweet spot - it adds just enough tertiary detail to the levels to make them confusing and difficult to gauge the threats in, but not enough to actually become pleasant or interesting to look at, or provide any real variety.

 

The game's aesthetic really runs counter to the playability of the game itself. Levels are oddly dark and lack much of the colour-pop that the original arcade game relied on to help the player identify threats to Frogger as he crosses them. That is an issue in and of itself, however, it is made much worse by the real problem added to the playability of Frogger in this version - the camera.

 

In the original Frogger, the camera is directly top-down. While that makes gauging the length of a level, or the future threats harder, it allows the player to have complete confidence in the position of obstacles, moving platforms and incoming dangers. 

Here, the camera is forward-facing-isometric. This allows the player to see much more of the level ahead of them, however, it sacrifices precision immensely. It becomes quite difficult to gauge - particularly in fast moving areas - where exactly the obstacle is in relation to Frogger himself, and where Frogger will end up after a hop. 

Given that positioning Frogger out of harms way IS the game - Frogger is entirely about avoiding threats and hopping to-and-fro to keep safe - this is an absolutely catastrophic mistake to make on Hijinx's part, and one that is ruinous to the fun of the game. Frogger should be - indeed it always was - a fairly punishing and unforgiving game. That is part of its charm, however, that was when it was punishing in the right way. 

The original Frogger felt like it was tough but fair - when Frogger got squished, it was the player who was at fault. In Frogger Returns, the actual navigation of the levels is slightly less difficult in terms of pure gameplay, however, the camera makes it such that failure is far more often a case of having misjudged the actual position of a platform or threat, than simply failing to see or account for it.

 

The basic gameplay is fine - it is Frogger after all, and that is a proven classic.

There are some additional modes added here also - including some multiplayer modes, which are relatively good in concept, though still undercut by the aesthetic and mechanical problems. In fact, these multiplayer modes are even further undercut by the fact that there is no online connectivity, and so all multiplayer must be local.

 

The real issue Frogger Return's has though - and which highlights all the problems it has rather acutely - is that, try as Hijinx might to faithfully bring the concept of the original arcade game into a modern era, their effort not only shrinks in the shadows of the original arcade game, but also in the shadow of another game. 

Four years after Frogger Returns was released, Crossy Road, by Hipster Whale would release for touchscreen devices, and do exactly what Hijinx failed to do. That game managed to take the core elements of Frogger, and give it a much fresher, much more interesting flavour, art-style, mechanical feel, camera, and sense of humour. It is also an isometric game, but by stylising the world and character models using a 3D Dot Game Heroes-style 'polygon-pixels' look, it neatly avoided all the perspective and parallax problems Frogger Returns suffers from.

 

Overall, Frogger is a classic, but this version of it fails to capitalise on the good aspects it retains, by consistently fluffing the elements it choses to change. 

The camera change is the biggest mis-step, but all the new elements - from the 3D graphics, to the hamstrung local-only co-op, to the new obstacles and threats only drag down the purity of the concept, rather than modernise it.

 

 

The Ranking:

Frogger Returns is a bit of a whiff across the board, unfortunately, and so a pretty low placement is inevitable. There aren't too many of these 'modernised' older games on the current list (I tend towards port of original arcade games, rather than updated versions, with the Hamster ports for example,) however, one updated older game on the list where the modern elements didn't really help was Cell Damage HD. 

 

While Cell Damage HD suffers simply because the original game wasn't good, Frogger Returns feels worse, as it is remaking a genuine classic, and boning it so hard that it becomes almost unrecognisable. Cell Damage is a game I would probably have hated in its original iteration, whereas I know I like Frogger, and so Frogger Returns feels more of a painful stab, and it has to rank lower.

 

We're down in the true cast-off region, therefore, and it simply comes down to the unfortunate question: "Would I hate replaying this more than replaying Frogger Returns?"

 

Working down from Cell Damage HD, the first game for which the answer is a "Yes" - and it is a pretty resounding "Yes!" is Watchmen: The End is Nigh.

Yes, you are right - watching a not-real cat for 5 minutes in Aabs Animals is still preferable to watching an ugly Frogger impersonator hop limping under a van that looked further away than it really was.

 

As such, Frogger Returns hops to his pretty woeful placement on the list, only narrowly avoiding being squished by the trucks and cars of all those better games.

 

Don't play this.

Go play Crossy Road.

It's way better.

 

 

 

 

 

Modern Tales: Age of Invention

 

Summary: 

A great addition the the Artifex Mundi stable, Modern Tales: Age of Invention is notable in that it is one of their more modern games to begin a new franchise strain, (and as yet, doesn't have any sequels,) in addition to simply being one of the finer examples of their standard canon.

 

Set in Europe in the year 1900, and focussing on fictional scientific exploration as opposed to magic, with a mystery at it's heart and noir trappings around the edges, the plot is as goofy as most AM games, however, there is a fun and flair to it that is a little more pacy and jumpy than the norm.

 

There is a freshness to the location and the art-style - Paris, Switzerland and Siberia are all quite distinct looking locations, and the location-hopping nature of the game allows for an artistic variety that few AM games manage, and Modern Tales: Age of Invention also maintains an overall artistic standard at the top end of the AM stable.

 

The puzzle selection is very good here - all the traditional AM staple puzzle types are accounted for, but there are a few bespoke or less usual ones thrown in too. Modern Tales: Age of Invention leans much more on puzzles than the Hidden Object side of the AM flavour - and is the better for it in this case. I think purely on a 'puzzle-preference' factor, this might be one of the strongest I have played.

 

No boss fight at the end of this one - always a plus! - and while there isn't a bonus chapter, the main story is pretty long as Artifex Mundi games go, and is packed with more puzzles than usual, meaning the lack of any extra game doesn't harm the game.

 

Overall, a nice, fairly modern example of the AM formula working well. Not so distinct from the standard as to feel markedly different, but working great within it, with a setting and artistic flair that rival the best AM games.

 

 

 

The Ranking:

Modern Tales: Age of Invention is a particularly good Artifex Mundi entry - and so the natural comparison point is the current AM frontrunner, Enigmatis 3: The Shadow of Karkhala.

 

While I appreciate the globe-hopping nature and the excellent puzzle variety in Modern Tales: Age of Invention, I do think that makes the game feel a little less focussed. It's fun, and varied in the art-style, but that sacrifices a little of the aesthetic theme, and the story isn't quite as good as in the best Enigmatis offering.

 

That places it a little lower than Enigmatis 3: The Shadow of Karkhala, but not by a huge margin. I would still argue it's good elements place it higher than Enigmatis 2: The Mists of Ravenwood, and so it comes down to feel in between those two.

 

The natural point that jumps out for the game is just a few spots below Enigmatis 3: The Shadow of Karkhala, between Black & White Bushido and Bentley's Hackpack. While Black & White Bushido's competitive fun manages to stay above even a very good Artifex Mundi entry, Bentley's Hackpack just doesn't have the interest or the range to beat it out.

 

As such, Modern Tales: Age of Invention finds a pretty decent spot on the list as Artifex Mundi entries go!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

⚛️⚛️BONUS GAMES⚛️⚛️

1 Additional eligible S-Rank included this round!:

 

 

 

 

Death's Door

 

Summary: 

A 2021 Isometric Combat Metroidvania from Acid Nerve - developers of well regarded (though unplayed by me) Titan Souls - Death's Door puts the player in the role of a crow, employed by the Reaping Commission - a sort of bureaucratic, administrative office, in charge of reaping souls on Death's behalf.

 

After being sent on a routine reaping, the crow encounters another, much older crow, the Grey Crow, who reveals a conspiracy within the Reaping Commission that goes all the way to the top - to the Lord of Doors. The player is dispatched to traverse the game worlds, and reap three 'giant souls' from three distinct bosses, and return them to the Grey Crow, in order to unveil this conspiracy, dismantle the Reaping Commission, and discover the secret that the Lord of Doors has been hiding.

 

Mechanically, Death's Door is pretty simple. The game is isometric, and cribs fairly heavily from 16-bit era Zelda games. Each of the three main 'dungeons' is themed to the individual boss it houses, and while the game feels quite open, and certainly allows for exploring off-the-path to some extent, it's actually much more linear than it first appears. The Metroidvania elements are fairly simple, with traversal blocked by the requirements for the game's only 3 upgrades (a fire spell, a bomb, and a hook-shot,) and these are used fairly liberally to block access to areas until they are found.

 

These metroidvania elements are actually pretty clever, in the sense that the traversal is not quite as 'black-and-white' as in some games in the genre. 

While the fire spell can be used to light brasiers easily, it is awarded after a dungeon where lighting brasiers is actually a requirement already - but they must be lit by firing arrows through a previously lit one, crossing the path of the unlit one. 

The 'bomb' spell can easily destroy a weak wall, however, to get it, the player must first traverse a dungeon full of weak walls, using a particular plant which fires its own 'bomb' equivalent at the player. This helps to keep each dungeon feeling quite puzzle-focussed, as the player has to not only identify a place where they can light a brasier, for example, but on their first run, they must also identify whether it is possible to do without the spell, as part of their initial traversal, or if it is one related to a secret, where they must return later, spell in hand.

It also makes the upgrades feel quite meaningful in terms of 'adding power' as opposed to simply opening up new paths. Gaining the ability to do something that was previously impossible feels like progression, but gaining the ability to easily do something that was tricky before gives a much stronger feeling of 'levelling up'. The distinction is fairly semantic on paper, but the feeling in the game is quite palpable.

 

The puzzle elements of the game are the real highlight of Death's Door. The world is lovely to look at, and very well designed. Each dungeon is relatively small in terms of floor-plan, however, each individual room is crafted with a lot of secrets and clever little hiding spots hidden in plain sight, with just enough clues to let the player know there is something to find, but not so obviously that these ever become tiresome. There are a lot of quite bespoke and specific solutions to these non-critical puzzles and retreading previously trodden ground once a new ability is gained is almost always fruitful - lending a welcome fun to retreading ground, and showing a remarkable depth and cleverness to the level design.

 

There is a bit of a problem in the later game, owing to the lack of inclusion of a map, however. While each area is completely traversable without one in first pass - as the puzzles and metroidvania elements effectively guide the player, as their abilities gate certain areas off. Later though, once all paths have been opened, it can be very tough to remember which one of the convoluted paths actually lead to where. While the earlier puzzle elements are great, the cleared field, post-puzzles is difficult to navigate, and a map would have helped this.

 

The other mechanical aspect of the game, however, is the combat - and that does let the game down quite a bit. For all the work that has gone into designing the world, and the secrets and nooks and crannies, and the smart metroidvania elements, the combat feels remarkably flat and un-nuanced... and there is a LOT of it.

 

The player has relatively few combat options available to them - a melee swing, a 'hard' swing (which borders on useless, due to the lengthly wind-up, given that all enemies attack quickly and without much telegraphing,) plus the few combat-enabled spells. 

Combat is a HUGE part of the game - there are virtually no areas that do not contain significant numbers of mob enemies, and fighting these does tend to become a chore rather quickly. Healing in the game is relatively minimal, and confined to set locations. Rooms often have 3-5 'phases' of enemies that spawn in. Melee swings don't do a huge amount of damage (particularly when attempting the platinum, which requires a full run using only the 'meme' weapon - a low-power umbrella!), and have very limited range, but spells require charge, which is only gained by connecting with melee swings. As such, the general flow of combat is always the same - back off, fire some spells, get close, swing a few times, dodge roll the counter-attack, repeat.

This isn't a terrible flow, however, it does get a little dull - and is made unnecessarily frustrating by both the tendency for ranged attacks to come from off-screen, and the healing mechanics... or lack thereof.

 

That, and one other thing, of course: All enemy hits do identical damage. 

Yes, you read that right. 

A hit from the weakest enemy, or one from the strongest boss, all do one 'blip' of damage. The player is limited to a small number of 'blips' (4 to begin with, increasable to 6 total, though - full disclosure - I did not manage to find enough secrets in my first playthrough to increase beyond 4 blips until well into the post-game.) This means that lengthier enemy encounters tend to be a simple endurance test - trying to avoid the inevitable eventual hits coming form all sides (or dodge-rolling off the edge of a platform, which is a common occurrence, as the dodge roll always goes a set (oddly lengthly) distance.

 

This 'uniformity of damage' concept has a good and bad aspect - it helps to make boss fights more interesting,  but general combat more frustrating. 

Fighting a boss with a limited number of hits you can take is fun, as it involves learning the patterns of the boss in a rather 'Souls-like' way, and mastering the battle, rather than simple attrition.

In general combat though, where traversal is also happening, and multiple enemies move in much less predictable patterns, it tends to just feel arbitrarily frustrating. Getting through several encounters in a row, and having only one 'blip' left, can be fun and exciting, however, when that is immediately followed by another multi-phase encounter, it tends to simply result in feeling hopeless, as the multiple ranged attacks from all sides (and often offscreen) and tight spacing of the encounters are very tough to avoid taking any damage during.

 

Death's Door is actually the first game I have played in a very, very long time, where repeated deaths in the same locations became so frustrating and irritating that I found myself simply turning the game off for a while. Let's be clear: I do not consider myself good at games - there are hundreds of games I have played where I die over and over again (including quite a few you probably found easy, dear reader!...) but few games ever frustrate me in such a withering, deflating way than this one did. 

I do not think Death's Door is a particularly difficult game - certainly I have played much harder ones - but I do think it speaks to something negative that this was one of the only ones I can ever recall where that frustration lead to my preferring to play nothing for a while, than to continuing to play Death's Door!

 

Narratively, the game is in an odd spot. The story is fine, and the world is an interesting and fun one, however, there is a strangely limited amount of actual lore and world-building, given how unusual it is. We get to see the oddness, but learn little of the actual state of the world, beyond what is immediately presented - which is atypical and a little disappointing for a game with such imaginative concepts.

 

It took me a while to figure out why I wasn't connecting with the plot as much as I felt I could be, and I think I figured it out after a while:

The fundamental issue with the narrative, I think, is that Death's Door has all the TRAPPINGS of a story that should be allegorical, or at least metaphorical - but as far as I can tell, it isn't. 

The whimsical reality and eclectic mix of odd concepts and esoteric characters is charming and fun, and feels analogous to something like Lewis Carroll's Wonderland, or L Frank Baum's Oz,  but where those whimsical, crafted realities were in service of direct allegory to real-life concepts, Death's Door isn't. It makes a head fake towards allegory, but never really follows through.

 

There are certainly emotional or philosophical leanings in some of the dialogue - in particular the discussion of the roles of hope, complacency and failure that the Grey Crow gets into, or the role of duty, fate and the will to live brought up by the Lord of Doors, however, without any kind of connection between the make-believe world of the game and our real world, it's hard to connect much with them, or form any real investment with the characters. We only know as much about this world, its rules and its cast of characters as we are told. That isn't much, and without broader context to the world, or a metaphorical connection to some world we do understand better, the emotional moments are reduced to simply beats in a peculiar tale. Perfectly fine and interesting to see, but no more impactful than the comedic ones.

 

While this does not necessarily make the narrative bad - I still fundamentally enjoyed seeing the story play out, was interested in the mystery of the conspiracy within the Reaping Commission, and found the eclectic mix of characters fun to see and interact with - it does lessen the impact of the narrative a little. There was a continual feeling, throughout my time with the game, that the developers and writers wanted me to have an emotional investment in their material that I never did find.

I take no issue whatsoever with narratives that are simply fun and strange and unobtrusive, but here, I do think there is a clear intention for more - it simply doesn't manifest.

 

Visually, there is, however, nothing to complain about here. Death's Door looks really nice. The art is heavily stylised, simple polygonal and somewhat cell-shaded, but the whole thing is rendered in a glossy, smooth pastel-shade, with some of clean, crisp, simple aesthetic of the best looking iOS games. Environments look excellent in this style, and it really lends itself fabulously to the puzzle aspects of the game - there is just little enough detail for clues to stand out, but still hide in plain sight in the isometric format.

 

Audio is an odd case for me personally, as I think it is all very high quality, though not all my personal cup of tea. There is no voice work, but the score is ever-present, and odd in tone. There are some sections where I really like the music - during the "Avarice" chest battles, it becomes a pounding, rousing anthem, reminiscent of the great music in boss battles in Child of Light, and in some areas it was soaring, haunting melody, reminding me of the Shadow of the Colossus score, however, generally, there is an unusually maudlin piano-jazz that accompanies the adventure - and it wasn't really my bag. As was the case with some of the music in Kena: Bridge of Spirits, it is certainly nicely written and produced, and adds a distinct character and flavour to the game, but didn't do much for me personally.

 

Overall, Death's Door is very much a game of two halves for me - a great little puzzle-focussed Metroidvania, but with a fairly poor combat-focussed action element bolted onto it. The game looks great, sounds good, and the plot, while relatively undersized, is interesting, if never truly engaging.

 

Let me be clear - Death's Door is not a bad game. In fact, it's a pretty good game.

The problem is, there are just enough consistent irritations, minor oversights and curiously under-baked or ill-conceived elements to prevent it ever being the great game that it often gets close to feeling like it could be. That 'near-miss' makes the overall game feel worse than it probably is. 

To simply be 'good' is fine, but to be within spitting distance of great, but stumble over the confluence of small annoyances and silly design choices is worse than annoying. 

It's a little bit heartbreaking.

 

 

The Ranking:

For ranking, the comparison games for Death's Door need to be primarily indie or indie-adjacent, smaller metroidvania games - particularly those with a strong focus on combat.

The two that immediately come to mind as providing a floor and ceiling are Apotheon, and Headlander. 

 

Apotheon is a game with an amazing visual style - one that unquestionably beats out even Death's Doors nice visual style. Its narrative elements are pretty much on par with Death's Door though, and its puzzle and metroidvania aspects pale by comparison. It's combat is significantly worse than Death's Door's, however, I would argue the gulf between the puzzles and the combat in Death's Door is a more jarring issue...

Overall though, the result is a pretty resounding victory for Death's Door. 

 

Headlander, however, is a game that simply has to beet out Death's Door. It's narrative is sillier, but more clear and consistent, and more successful in what it tries to do. The visuals are less technically proficient, but more interesting and more consistently interesting, and while the puzzle elements are simpler, the combat in Headlander is fantastically fun - and additive to the experience, rather than detrimental.

 

that puts us somewhere in between, and looking at those games, the first one that really gives me trouble is The Touryst. The Touryst is a much smaller, less serious game, however, it looks AMAZING - much better than Death's Door looks - and while its gameplay is completely different, it is much more engaging, much more varied and has no real detrimental element the way Death's Door does.

I would argue that while The Touryst has the equivalent of 'game-dev-ADHD', flipping mechanics every ten minutes, actually, doing fifteen different things really well - as The Touryst does - is much more impressive than doing two things (puzzles and combat), and fluffing one of them - as Death's Door does. 

As such, despite the more frivolous nature of The Touryst, I cannot conceive of a world in which Death's Door ranks above it.

 

I am certain, however, that Death's Door deserves to be placed above Josep Fares toy-murder-simulator It Takes Two, and with only two games in-between (Déraciné and Stick It To the Man,) both of which I think Death's Door manages to squeeze past, that gives Death's Door its spot!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So there we have it folks!

 

Thanks to @grayhammmer & @Neef-GT5 for putting in requests!

 

 

 Hitman 3 remains as 'Current Most Awesome Game'!

LA Cops stays as the worst-of-the-worst, with the title of 'Least Awesome Game'

 

 

What games will be coming along next time to challenge for the top spot... or the bottom rung?

That's up to randomness, me.... and YOU!

 

Remember:

 

SPECIAL NOTE

 

If there are any specific games anyone wants to see get ranked sooner rather than later - drop a message, and I'll mark them for 'Priority Ranking'! 

 

The only stipulation is that they must be on my profile, at 100% (S-Rank)....

 and aren't already on the Rankings! 

 

 

 

Catch y'all later my Scientific Brothers and Sisters!