Popular Post DrBloodmoney Posted November 20, 2022 Author Popular Post Share Posted November 20, 2022 (edited) ☢️☢️(SEMI)-SCIENTIFIC ANNOUNCEMENT☢️☢️ Oh, how time flies.... it feels like we were only just celebrating the Super Scientific Awards for 2021... ...and already, the award season for 2022 is approaching! Once again, I will be removing my Lab Coat, donning my Tuxedo, and having a little look back at games that I have played, and having a celebration awards ceremony! It's exactly a month until the celebration, so, in preparation for the end of the year 2022, I’m kicking off the "Awards Season" by announcing the categories that I will be awarding well ahead of time - so I remember them ? Most of the categories remain the same as last year - with one notable exception! Due to a rather excellent crop of games being loaded up this year, I am axing the "NOPE! Award (for game I deleted the trophy list for, due to shitness)... as frankly, I haven't even a single example of a game I disliked immediately upon beginning play this year! As such, that rather negative award has been replaced with the decidedly more positive - BEST MOMENT Award - where hopefully I can celebrate some of those points in games where I set the controller down, and either burst out laughing, pumped my fist in the air, wept a tear of joy (or catharsis)... or just went "Oh DAAAAAAAAAAMN!" in order to qualify, a game simply has to have been S-Ranked in the calendar year 2021, so whether I started and finished it that year, or all I did was mop up one last trophy, if the S-Rank happened in 2022, it's fair game! As was done last year, the awards will be posted on (or around, depending on my whereabouts!) the 20th of December, and games from the 21st of December 2021 up until that point will qualify! Look out your best dresses / kilts / tuxedos / moomoos / Bjork-style-swans, and I'll chill the champagne! Laters! Edited November 20, 2022 by DrBloodmoney 12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breakingthegreen Posted November 20, 2022 Share Posted November 20, 2022 £20 says Frogger Returns will win best game. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBloodmoney Posted November 20, 2022 Author Share Posted November 20, 2022 1 minute ago, breakingthegreen said: £20 says Frogger Returns will win best game. I’ll take that action ? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zvetiki Posted November 21, 2022 Share Posted November 21, 2022 On 10.11.2022 at 0:34 PM, DrBloodmoney said: 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'! I am considering requesting you to review Color Guardians, but that might be too cruel. Or maybe writing up a review woul be a cathartic experience? But anyway, I shall nominate Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney Trilogy (and reject any possible Objection!s in advance). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBloodmoney Posted November 21, 2022 Author Share Posted November 21, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, Zvetiki said: I am considering requesting you to review Color Guardians, but that might be too cruel. Or maybe writing up a review woul be a cathartic experience? But anyway, I shall nominate Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney Trilogy (and reject any possible Objection!s in advance). Haha - well, they all have to be done eventually - but Colour Guardians is actually already on the list (at a whopping No.306!) ? I'm slowing down a little in the legacy reviews of late, as I've been quite busy, and will be gearing up soon for the Award Season (got to press that tux and whatnot!) but, there's not too many Priority requests outstanding right now, so as long as you don't mind waiting a little bit for them, I'll add Phoenix Wright to the list, with your name! Edited November 21, 2022 by DrBloodmoney I got my own ranking wrong - how's THAT for dumb? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zvetiki Posted November 21, 2022 Share Posted November 21, 2022 13 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said: Haha - well, they all have to be done eventually - but Colour Guardians is actually already on the list (at a whopping No.304!) Ah, I see, you translated the title into British, that's why I didn't find it. OK, then I have to look up the review. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serrated-banner9 Posted November 25, 2022 Share Posted November 25, 2022 had a look at your list and i'll recommend Superhot for review because i have been interested in it for a while s it's a novel concept. the start of probanly many recommandations that based not on if i want to play but if they are on the list or not and if they sound cool lol 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBloodmoney Posted November 25, 2022 Author Share Posted November 25, 2022 1 minute ago, serrated-banner9 said: had a look at your list and i'll recommend Superhot for review because i have been interested in it for a while s it's a novel concept. the start of probanly many recommandations that based not on if i want to play but if they are on the list or not and if they sound cool lol Done! ? ? Courtesy of Batch 24: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Copanele Posted December 1, 2022 Share Posted December 1, 2022 On 11/10/2022 at 1:34 PM, DrBloodmoney said: Unravel I just realized -- I never managed to actually reply to this particular one i got so sidetracked I even forgot my request was completed (for which I thank you once again) On 11/10/2022 at 1:34 PM, DrBloodmoney said: Summary: The most striking and obvious thing about the game - apparent even in the level-select hub, but breathtakingly more so once the first level is entered - is how it looks. The visuals of Unravel are stunning. The nature of Yarny himself, being magically animated and personified yarn, tends to conjure natural comparisons to a few other games -most notably Little Big Planet, but also Yoshi's Woolly World and Kirby's Epic Yarn - but Unravel is quite distinct, even within that particularly small pool of "yarn-work" art-styles, because while Yarny himself is clearly magical and whimsical, the environments in which he exists are not. They are, to all intents and purposes, photo-realistic. They are gorgeous too. The almost photo-real environments give the impression of the game being more "stop-motion-adjacent" than the "CGI-animation-adjacent" style most whimsical games lean on. The game is particularly concerned with nature and environmentalism in its themes, and as such, the fact that realistic natural environments are rendered to such a high degree, both of fidelity, and of verisimilitude, those theme lands particularly well. When I played this game I was shocked - wait, this is an EA game?? Looking this good? Like damn this game is BEAUTIFUL! Not only beautiful, it was PLEASING to look at On 11/10/2022 at 1:34 PM, DrBloodmoney said: While there isn't an explicit narrative, there is certainly a through-line to the tone-piece, following the family over the course of their lives, as more and more is revealed, following their detachment and displacement and loss as they move from their rural home, to a a more urban setting... primarily because the place in which they lived is being industrialised and becoming polluted and destroyed. It's a relatively simple environmental message, and while it doesn't have a lot to say beyond "nature is nice" it doesn't really need to go further than that. That's the advantage to a game in which the visuals are so striking and sumptuous - the pro-environmental credentials of the game are a virtual fait-accompli, since the levels themselves do such a good job of conveying the beauty of the natural environments in which it takes place... and the horror of the polluted, poisoned after-effects of that industrialisation. I found the implied narrative to be excellent. The pollution levels were grim, but honestly the final levels were heart breaking while I was playing through the last levels (including the blizzard one), I heard a whispered "i so hate your game for torturing Yarny like that" from my wife. Bottom line, the game successfully got the message across On 11/10/2022 at 1:34 PM, DrBloodmoney said: The controls are loose and floaty by design - the closest analogue would be Little Big Planet, and can feel a little fiddly. Physics based movement works for the most part, though can sometimes seem a little arbitrary in terms of how "heavy" Yarny feels. I do not believe there is any material difference in the "weight" of Yarny dependent on his density (determined by how much yarn he has spooled,) however, there are clear points where the game "fudges" the relative weight and/or momentum of Yarny in order to make certain solutions work... and this can be a double-edged sword. Probably my only gripe with the game (I always complain about gameplay). The controls can become an utter headache, especially in the no-death runs, mainly because you never know what Yarny would do. Will he grab that ledge? Will he fall to his doom? Find out next retry! Really beautiful game, thanks for reviewing it once again! I don't think I'll ever approach Unravel 2 however I see that one is way more gameplay focused with an extra yarny and...honestly I was in this for the story and feeling, not for yarn slinging shenanigans. On 11/20/2022 at 5:19 PM, DrBloodmoney said: ☢️☢️(SEMI)-SCIENTIFIC ANNOUNCEMENT☢️☢️ Oh damn, it's time for Agent 47's Tuxedo suit! I should prepare for it! Weird how time flies when you have fun! Also I think 2022 was a great year in terms of played games , not as many rants from my side compared to 2021. Maybe I learned to pick my games better (not really) Anyway, looking forward to it. Ties with Christmas as the best yearly event 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBloodmoney Posted December 1, 2022 Author Share Posted December 1, 2022 4 minutes ago, Copanele said: Will he grab that ledge? Will he fall to his doom? Find out next retry! You get double points, for being funny and right at the same time ? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post DrBloodmoney Posted December 4, 2022 Author Popular Post Share Posted December 4, 2022 (edited) SCIENTIFIC RE-CERTIFICATION! A little update here, necessitated by the DLC addition to a previously ranked game, who's DLC I have now earned, re-qualifying it for the main list! Resident Evil VIII: Village - "Shadow of Rose" DLC Summary: The first (and so far, only announced,) major, trophy-enabled DLC for Resident Evil VIII: Village; Shadow of Rose is an interesting combination DLC pack, combining multiple DLC "flavours" - to pretty good effect. The main new element is a sizeable narrative mini-campaign, of the kind more often seen in the better DLCs during the PS3 and early PS4 era. It follows the now teenage Rose, (the baby and principle mcguffin of Ethan's main narrative campaign,) who, having grown up with some hazy knowledge of her father's actions, some limited understanding of the events that led to her own birth and kidnapping, and - crucially - with the powers that those events bestowed upon her by the Megamycete, has not had the easiest time trying to live a normal life. When Chris Redfield tells her that there may, in fact, be a way for her to rid herself of those powers - and to finally be able to live a genuine life, and not the fearful and trapped facsimile of one she has been - she jumps at the chance. The way this will be achieved? Why, by entering the retained consciousness of the Megamycete, and confronting it within itself, of course! The plot is - let's not beat about the bush - quite silly and convoluted. However, like a lot of Resident Evil over the years, that convoluted plot does actually work. RE often asks the player to meet it half way, and in its successful incarnations, it holds up its end of a unique deal: If the player is willing to set aside logic for a silly premise, the game is willing to give back a pretty well worked out, fun, and fairly internally-logical ride within that illogical premise. Shadow of Rose is one of those successes. While the player will need to take some pretty big steps to accept the premise conceptually, once they do, the game itself is quite engaging, and well plotted. Shadow of Rose essentially follows an Alice in Wonderland archetype - with Rose being whisked away, and descending deeper and deeper into a mysterious, and often dreamlike version of some of the locations of the main game. There are some curious twists and an ambiguous, mysterious, disembodied entity named "Michael" acting the part of Cheshire Cat: guiding in riddles, helping sporadically, but never quite defining his role in the adventure - at least at first. Like some of the best DLC campaigns of a decade ago, (Red Dead Redemption's Undead Nightmare, Mass Effect 2's Lair of the Shadow Broker, or arguably the best DLC campaign of all time - Bioshock 2's Minerva's Den,) Shadow of Rose essentially works on the same plotting, pacing and gameplay as the main game that it is attached to, but truncates and trims the gameplay loop, offering a similar progression and pacing to the main game, but sped up considerably. New weapons, power-ups and enemy escalation happens in the same way, but at a faster clip. What is most interesting about the Shadow of Rose campaign, is actually the locations chosen to be revisited from the main game. Anyone who read my main review of RE8 knows, I felt that game had serious "front-loading" issues, in that the first and second areas - Castle Dimitrescu and House Beneviento - were far, far more interesting than the latter two main areas. Shadow of Rose feels like something of a tacit admission that the developers feel the same way, as the game uses these two areas, then skips past the dam and factory completely, to whisk Rose to the endgame area. The DLC does still, unfortunately, feel oddly front loaded still, however. Castle Dimitrescu is used pretty much as the staging ground for the game offering the largest, most explorable area - comprising over half the campaign. House Beneviento is actually the most interesting area here - and the most Alice in Wonderland adjacent. It features a section where Rose is shrunk down to doll size - and this section is visually and tonally very cool, and quite scary. It allows the developers to use a lot of existing assets from the main game, but have them feel wholly different and interesting, in a way almost reminiscent of Alice: The Madness Returns. Remember when Mario would enter the Giant Worlds, and even standard enemies became more interesting, simply due to the change in scale? That's played well here. The final area is essentially used just for a narrative section and boss fight, but it works fairly well - giving the memory of the main campaign highlights, without any fat or flab. The one issue, however, is that while the game never feels bloated or over long, and is narratively well paced - the difficulty is oddly backwards. Castle Dimitrescu is by far the hardest area to traverse, and features a boss that is much more difficult to battle (particularly on Hardcore mode) than any future section, or even the final boss. Overall, Shadow of Rose as a mini campaign is a success. It is scary at times - arguably more scary than anything in the main campaign - and Rose, while doing a little too much PS3-style "that's my name!" talking to herself (well, to the player, via monologue,) is a fairly winning and likeable character. In addition to the main campaign, the DLC adds a couple of other noteworthy things. Firstly, there is the new 3rd person mode, allowing the main RE8 campaign to be played in the same gameplay style as the RE2 Remake and RE3 Remake, as opposed to the 1st person style begun with REVII, and continued in REVIII. I have only dabbled with this mode in the main campaign, however, Shadow of Rose the narrative DLC is played entirely and exclusively this way. This is an interesting add on - in an age where "1st Person Modes" are often added to 3rd Person games as post-release DLC, it's curious to see REVIII be possibly the first big AAA game to do the opposite. Personally, it's not something I was terribly excited for - (despite being trepidatious about the change initially, REVII made me love 1st Person RE even more than 3rd Person,) however, options are nice, and it certainly is a novel and interesting way to encourage and facilitate a new play-through of the game, beyond a simply FPS or resolution change, or a new difficulty mode. Finally, Shadow of Rose also adds some significant additions to the more arcade style "Mercenaries" mode from the main game. There are two new Mercenaries runs available, both of which are fine, though not exceptional, and not necessarily any better or worse than the bulk of the original ones - but it also adds new characters to play as for these, and for all pre-existing maps. These new characters (Chris Redfield, Lady Dimitrescu and the turgid Heisenberg,) all play quite differently to each-other, and this addition really is the fleshing out Mercenaries needed to make it feel less like a throwaway add on, and more of fully fledged mode. Mercenaries as a mode is not for everyone, but now, it is more viable and enticing as side activity, and an alternative to the narrative campaign. Overall, Shadow of Rose is a very welcome, and very good, meaty addition to REVIII. It adds good narrative story, fleshes out a fairly bare-bones Mercenaries mode into a proper thing, and adds a genuinely different enough feeling mode to the main campaign, to extend the life of an already quite fleshed out product. Does it mean RE8 can compete with REVII’s absolutely massive, varied and awesome stable of DLC? Certainly not… but it does, in one fell swoop, place RE8 in the upper tier of “well-supported” Resident Evil games. Re-Ranking: I actually think Resident Evil VIII: Village, with the Shadow of Rose DLC added on, does add up to a better product than the base REVIII did. The new narrative adds, without subtracting, and recognises the good elements of the base game, wisely choosing to highlight those, and sideline the less good areas and characters. Mercenaries feels like more of a viable fun time for a few evenings play, and the 3rd Person mode essentially means REVIII is in a position to cater both to the fans of the new RE style, and the older style, depending on their preference (or whims, that particular evening!) Looking at it's current placement, I think the addition of the DLC is enough to see REVIII climb a few spots, past Sly Cooper and the Thievius Raccoonus, Bayonetta and Final Fantasy XIII-2... ...but I still think the negative elements are enough of an anchor on the overall product to preclude it passing the original God of War. As such, Resident Evil VIII: Village finds itself only the second game to manage to improve it’s scientific standing with a DLC addition, and finds its new spot! Edited December 4, 2022 by DrBloodmoney 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post DrBloodmoney Posted December 5, 2022 Author Popular Post Share Posted December 5, 2022 (edited) SCIENTIFIC RE-CERTIFICATION! A little update here, necessitated by the DLC addition to a previously ranked game, who's DLC I have now earned, re-qualifying it for the main list! Deathloop - "Golden Loop Update" DLC Summary: The first trophy-enabled DLC update for Deathloop is something of a curiosity for me, in that it's the kind of DLC that is fairly common, but generally for more multi-player focussed games. These kinds rarely grace the single-player arena... and even more rarely bring new trophies in tow. Unlike something like the recently reviewed Shadow of Rose DLC for Resident Evil VIII: Village, Deathloop's Golden Loop pack is not a sizeable new narrative, or stand-alone content, but rather, a small smattering of little additional elements to the main campaign. In terms of the added main-game content, there are a quite a few small changes made (some additional Julianna upgrades for example,) and these are simply folded into the main game, without particular fanfare (or trophies to accompany them.) The more significant additions, however, do have a trophy attached each, and those are probably the most noteworthy. Firstly, there's a new enemy type introduced, and peppered throughout all areas at all times of day - the Paint Bomber - who act like walking alarms / Berserkers, screaming and running at the player when they see them, and exploding. They can be fun, and add a unique danger to some existing areas - as well as a new benefit... taking out a paint-bomber silently lets Colt pick up his unexploded paint-bombs, and chuck them where he sees fit! An additional ability slab that Colt can find - "Fugue", which essentially makes the enemy seem drunk and stoned for a while - is quite fun to use, but not particularly powerful as a viably ability for anything other than goofing around... at least as far as I could tell. Deathloop is, of course, an Arkane game, and Arkane games often have secret, clever ways for powers to be used that are only worked out long after their release, when people tinker with them in the right ways... but for the moment, I don't see Fugue as much of a game-changer, just a fun side addition. Where Fugue is found, however, is pretty fun - this is grabbed after taking out a new enemy - the Garbage Collector - and his lair is entirely new, and des have some fun little side-lore hidden within it, which is worth seeing. There's a brand new weapon - the ridiculously overpowered HALPS Prototype to be found - and this, unlike Fugue, is likely to make a new player stumbling across it during their main playthrough have a pretty easy time dealing with crowds! These are the small additions to the game, (and, sadly, probably the only new parts many trophy-thirsty people will see upon returning.) However, there is one big addition to the game that The Golden Loop DLC adds that doesn't have an associated trophy, but is certainly the most significant in the narrative - the expanded "Break the Loop" ending. In the original game, the endings were a little oddly weighted, in that the "bad" endings were quite a bit longer, and more fleshed out, than the "Good" ending - the one where Colt breaks the loop. Colt woke up on the beach, the sky was completely fucked up and weird - the world having presumably suffered the effects of centuries of looping time on the island - and Julianna, after sparing him, walked away... then suddenly disappeared.... making use of a "Slab Power"... that she shouldn't have been able to, given that the loop was broken. I thought this was a cool, ambiguous ending - hinting that the damage the loop had caused might be irreversible, and the whole world might now be messed up, and the loop powers valid everywhere - not just contained on the island. The extended version essentially sticks to this ambiguity somewhat, but does decide to be more specific in terms of the Visionaries reactions. It takes the form of a 3-4 minute "music video montage" showing some of their reactions upon awaking in their first "real" next day. Obviously, none but Colt and Julianna remember the loop at all, so the reactions are interesting to see - essentially, they are waking, assuming the loop experiment did not work, and they just have a hangover... but then see the calamity on the sky, and react to that. Some with horror, some with confusion... and one - interestingly - with joy. I'm in two minds as to the benefit of the extension really - on the one hand, it's nice to see some closure, but on the other hand, Arkane seem to want to have their cake and eat it too - to retain some ambiguity for stylistic reasons, but give the audience some breadcrumbs to alleviate the (rather irksome) fan reaction to their previous ambiguity. In some ways, it has the slightly sour "Mass Effect 3 Ending Debacle" taste to it - fan appeasement at the expense of artistic integrity - and like ME3 did, the new ending tends to open up more questions than it answers, since the developers are clearly loathe to completely capitulate to their whims. It ends up simply moving the points of ambiguity around, and spreading them a little thin. Lots of questions remain curiously unanswered - just as before - but now, rather than having the ending hit like a big punch, that the player can them puzzle over for a long time, wondering about all the individual strands, they get each single point of ambiguity pointed out to them... but still not really answered. I like ambigous endings. I always have... and Arkane clearly do too. Trying to satiate an audience that doesn't, while still satisfying the primary audience that does is a tricky thing... and while I don't think the Golden Loop update is a resounding failure in that regard, I'm not sure I'd call it a massive success either. What is fun though, is the music - I won't spoil the method, but in the extended ending, the audio is used to make a much more explicit and specific reference to the world of Dishonoured - essentially confirming that Deathloop does - as was always posited - take place in the future of the Dishonoured timeline. That is a fun thing, and done pretty well. It is unclear to me whether Arkane means to leave this as mere hint, or plans to do more with it in future DLC (or sequels). Certainly, the Golden Loop DLC changes open up a far more obvious path to future Deathloop DLC actively tying back to the worlds of Corvo, Emily, Billie Lurk... and the Outsider... so that remains to be seen! Overall, The Golden Loop Update is a bit of a funny one. On the one hand, all the additions, while small individually, are good additions to the game. On the other hand, coming so long after the original release, it can't really be said they add much to a player already finished with the game. Yes, it's fun to find the new power and weapon, and playing through the full loop to see the new ending is welcome - after-all, Deathloop is a great game, and replaying it would be fun regardless of new content - but the fact is, when playing the full loop again, the actual nuts and bolts of that playthrough are almost identical to before. It is a great, variable game, but these small additional don't add a huge amount to that variability. I think for a new player, having the Golden Loop DLC installed is obviously a benefit - more content is always good - but as a way to draw players back, it offers scant additional incentive, beyond the simple attraction of replaying a good game. It's a few extra baubles on the Christmas tree, and a shinier (or, at least, different) star at the top... ...but if it weren't for the trophy list pointing them out, I'm not 100% sure a casual player would even notice what were the new decorations, and which were on the tree last year. Re-Ranking: As said, The Golden Loop is good content, but it is slight, and Deathloop was already highly ranked anyways. The Golden Loop additions certainly don't diminish the original game in any way - they are additive - but they are not so additive that they would warrant a re-ranking on the list. As such, Deathloop stays where it is... ...which is pretty damned high anyways! Edited December 6, 2022 by DrBloodmoney 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post DrBloodmoney Posted December 7, 2022 Author Popular Post Share Posted December 7, 2022 !!SCIENCE UPDATE!! The next (somewhat) randomly selected games to be submitted for scientific analysis shall be: Legacy Albedo: Eyes From Outer Space Knack Queen's Quest 2: Stories of Forgotten Past New Monster Slayers God of War: Ragnarok Subject(s) in RED marked for PRIORITY ASSIGNEMENT [Care of @JoesusHCrust ] (slight apology to @det_gittes here - you've had a priority request in for a while, I know! - I really am trying to get that Red Dead review done, but it's one that's taking a while to pull together! I want to get this batch out before the Super Scientific Awards, so I'm fully caught up with the new games, so despite having worked on it a bit, I'm leaving Red Dead until next time!) Can 'Current Most Awesome' game, Hitman 3, continue its glorious reign? Is gaming turdlet LA Cops ever going to lose the title of 'Least Awesome Game'? Let's find out, Science Chums! 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
det_gittes Posted December 7, 2022 Share Posted December 7, 2022 1 hour ago, DrBloodmoney said: (slight apology to @det_gittes here - you've had a priority request in for a while, I know! - I really am trying to get that Red Dead review done, but it's one that's taking a while to pull together! I want to get this batch out before the Super Scientific Awards, so I'm fully caught up with the new games, so despite having worked on it a bit, I'm leaving Red Dead until next time!) That's completely fine, no worries, and thanks for the heads-up! In the meantime, I can't wait to read with great interest your review of this underrated masterpiece, Albedo: Eyes from Outer Space ? I actually played it years ago, though from what I remember (which isn't much), I didn't pay much attention to the intricacies of the story... Let's see whether you've unearthed a hidden (well, at least to my eyes) layer of meaning & enjoyment in it ? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post DrBloodmoney Posted December 7, 2022 Author Popular Post Share Posted December 7, 2022 NEW SCIENTIFIC RESULTS ARE IN! Hello Science-Number Ones and Science-Counsellor Trois, as promised (and in some cases requested), here are the latest results of our great scientific endeavour! Albedo: Eyes From Outer Space Summary: A 2016 3D Narrative Adventure game from one-man developer Ivan Venturi, Albedo: Eyes from Outer Space is a game that - let us not kid ourselves - is notorious. Nowhere more so, that among the halls of PSNP! Prior to the onslaught of non-game software ushered in by such "developers" as Breakthrough Gaming Arcade, Smobile, Webnetics and Zakym, Aabs Animals probably held the hallowed title of "cheapest trophies"... but Albedo was crowned - rightly or wrongly - as arguably the king of the "bad game played for trophies". I say "rightly or wrongly" and actually, I do mean it. Mean what exactly? Rightly? Wrongly? ...well..sort of both? Let's be clear from the outset - Albedo: Eyes from Outer Space is a bad videogame. It is. This cannot possibly be argued against. We'll get into why shortly... ...but as to whether it really deserved the absolute firehose of condemnation and scorn heaped upon it? I actually don't think so. No wait! Come back! Bear with me here... Taking the role of a night custodian at a semi-decommissioned scientific research facility, the player has essentially one task to complete: get out. Albedo: Eyes from Outer Space isn't a game like Bioshock or Prey, where the object is to figure out what has gone on, what the nature of the science being conducted was, or to save the facility or its personnel - the task is, as in something more akin to SOMA, simply to escape. The way that is accomplished, is in true old-school adventure fashion, via collecting objects, combining and using them (often is oddly obtuse or counter-intuitive ways) and solving discrete, environmental puzzles as they proceed through the facility. Narratively, the game is very bare-bones, and to be honest, chalk full of some pretty ludicrous writing and monologuing from the central character... however, this brings us to the first major issue that really does need to be addressed, in understanding at least the aims of Albedo, before judging its success: The game's tone and inspiration. Albedo: Eyes from Outer Space is aping, very specifically, a particular style of Sci Fi, that is not often approached in gaming: 50's Era Sci Fi Pulp Schlock. Its inspirations are very much rooted in the kind of "Tales From Planet Terror" type comic publications of that era, and the "Plan 9 From Outer Space" / "Forbidden Planet" / "The Blob" style cinema. That is a fun and interesting angle for a videogame to dabble in. It is a relatively original (particularly in 2016) area to dabble in. It is also a dangerous area to dabble in. Why? Because aping a style of cult sci-fi like that, where bad production values, ludicrous dialogue, hammy acting and absurd plots are the bread and butter of the genre - is an incredibly difficult thing to get right. Deliberately "bad" acting, writing or visuals are virtually indistinguishable from actually bad acting, writing and visuals - and even when done perfectly, it takes a fairly ardent fan of the original source inspiration to even discern the difference. I am, as some Science Chums are probably aware, an ardent fan of some late 50's, early 60's sci-fi. I own two copies of Forbidden Planet. I've seen Plan 9 from Outer Space countless times. I've been to midnight screenings of the 1958 version of The Blob. I I count the original Twilight Zone and the original Outer Limits among my favourite television shows of all time... ...and even I can find it hard to see the lines between parody or homage to those films, and simple poor production. I vividly recall an episode of the 1980's revival of the Twilight Zone - the Wes Craven produced The New Twilight Zone - actually did an episode deliberately aping old 50's B-Movie Sci-Fi... and despite being a relatively good facsimile of that genre, it was widely panned as one of the worst ever episodes... primarily because its audience were either not well versed enough in the source material to understand, or not enamoured enough of it to care. Let's be clear about what that really says about that endeavour- we are talking about a show that is already a specific niche revival of a retro TV show, within an already niche contingent of sci-fi fans... and even that was not enough to garner an audience appreciation for a relatively well-crafted facsimile of 50's Sci Fi Schlock. One can only imagine the audience reaction to something like Albedo, which apes the same genre, but does it less well, for a far less forgiving audience... and also has a litany of genuine gameplay, mechanical and technical issues layered on top. The mystery of how this relatively poor, yet oddly ambitious and largely inoffensive indie adventure game, managed to become the by-word for "shit game" for years after the fact is becoming a little less mysterious, isn't it?! So... there are certain elements of Albedo: Eyes from Outer Space that are genuinely bad, there are elements that are deliberately bad, done successfully, and there are elements that are deliberately bad, but that miss the mark, and accidentally become actually bad. This one takes some unpicking! Visually, Albedo is mixed. On the one hand, for a one-man-developed game in 2016, and aping a genre that looks "bad" by modern standards, I actually think the game looks oddly good. The design of the aliens, the environments, even the lighting do a surprisingly good job of feeling eerie, yet retaining the "hammy" elements of 50's schlock. I am not naive - it is patently clear that the reason everything looks oddly dark, yet overly shiny, is partly to gloss over some roughness in the art design (everything looks better in the dark and the wet - why do you think Bladerunner looks so good?)... however, that is hard to hold against a game aping 50's Sci Fi, as the majority of those films used similar methods to gloss over the constraints in their own budgets and effects. It may be a necessity for the developer here, but it is aping a genre for which necessity was the mother of invention, and the final result is fairly close to the intended effect. On the downside though, while this visual palate is arguably accurate and befitting the tone and genre, it does undeniably diminish the players ability to play the game. Puzzles involve finding things in the environment, and investigating them. Seeing them properly would be nice. In terms of plotting and dialogue, again, it is hopelessly silly and occasionally laughable... and therefore, arguably, perfect. I love 50s schlock, and I can attest, there has never been a naturally delivered line in a single one of the classics of that genre. On the downside though... this is a videogame. Dialogue in a videogame - especially a freeform Adventure-puzzle game such as Albedo - serves more than one purpose. It cannot simply be flavour - it is also clues. When the character in Albedo says (for the fiftieth time) "I see something" to indicate there is something of note here, it's not really useful, since there is no further indication of what he's talking about. While the general dialogue can be "bad" for flavour, but when it's contextual clues, it can't be "ironically bad". It can only be bad. In Albedo: Eyes from Outer Space, they get the "ironic bad" right at times... but also get a lot of just... bad. Aside from the vocals then, there is the audio. The score is minimal, and where used, does actually ape 50's sci-fi relatively well... but this is actually one of the least effective areas in this regard - and thats surprising, purely because one would think that score would be the easiest element to get right. Yes, it evokes the era approximately, but it never feels truly right. It feels more like the developer listened to other modern scores that are themselves aping 50's scores, and approximated those, than went to the source. It feels a little too removed from the original source - a copy of a copy of a copy, if you will. Sound effects are fine - they don't seem to really swing good or bad - they are simply there - and when they don't cut out completely (as can happen,) they are effective. That brings up the technical issues though - and this is where the game does fall down immensely. I am a fan of smaller indie games, and am willing to give them some latitude on the technical front. Even more so for one-man-band games. After all, indie devs don't have the massive QA departments of a "Triple A" developer (and Lord knows, even those "Triple A" devs have their share of issues at times!) however, Albedo: Eyes from Outer Space is riddled with issues to the level that they push that latitude to the limit. The puzzles themselves are often a little more complex than the visuals and graphics can deal with effectively, resulting in frustrating failures to solve even clearly obvious solutions. Menu UI can often glitch, resulting in either missing options, or odd, off-centre button inputs. The mechanical design of the menus is obtuse and unintuitive - combining objects, for example, involves a lengthly and clunky combination of button presses and menu navigations that really feels antiquated. The game has certain moments of mild action - such as enemy attacks, which can be executed with some weapons, however, melee weapons can be very fiddly. Hitting an enemy can knock it back, and if they do that far enough, the contextual action will change from "attack" to "Throw"... often resulting in accidentally throwing the weapon in hand away during a critical moment! Guns are not much better - reloading and aiming are clunky and fiddly, and never feel right. These issues are the kind of things that really hamper Albedo: Eyes from Outer Space. They make it feel like a chore to play. Does that make it the worst game of all time? - no, of course not. There have been many games with serious technical or mechanical issues that still manage to limp along on the strength of other factors (see Alpha Protocol, Tetragon, or - lets face it - Bethesda Studio's entire catalogue,) however, Albedo: Eyes from Outer Space is in the virtually unique position that all the things it does badly are bad... and all the things it does well are in service of making it approximate a genre that is, at least to some extent, deliberately, endearingly bad... and more than that - said genre tropes are only recognisable as a deliberately bad to a very small, niche element of the audience. The result, of course, is that to the vast, vast majority of players, the game is simply a complete disaster. Without the context - or the affection - for the 50's schlock sci-fi to counter the rough elements of the game, it all feel rough... and the parts that genuinely suck are indistinguishable from the parts that accurately pay homage to its source materials. Combine that with another very real issue to this site specifically - that a large concentration of this site's users, in 2016, were drawn to the small number of games offering "easy, quick" trophies (how quaint it is to think Albedo was once in that camp,) therefore filtering a host of exactly the wrong audience for Puzzle games, (a niche genre,) Adventure games, (an even more niche genre,) and 50's Sci-Fi (a niche genre of a niche genre.) The stage was set for some of the worst user reviews and comments I've ever seen levelled at a game! Is Albedo: Eyes from Outer Space a bad game? Yes. Is it a broken game? Yes. Is it the worst game ever made? Not even close. In the end, Albedo: Eyes from Outer Space is actually a curiously ambitious game. It's one that rather naively aims to thread a particularly difficult needle in terms of genre, and fails more often than it succeeds... but its tragedy is that even when it succeeds, it still fails in the eyes of 99% of the audience anyways. There is, I would imagine, very little chance of any game, no matter how accomplished, managing to do 50's Schlock Sci Fi perfectly. X-Com does it to some extent, Stories Untold did it to some extent... even Destroy all Humans does it to some extent... but those games know to give it a light touch - and they certainly don't try to do it in a 3D modern Adventure game. Albedo: Eyes from Outer Space doesn't do a light touch. It grabs that electrified third-rail with both hands... ...and not only lacks the creative chops to avoid the inevitable electrocution, but lacks the technical chops to disguise the burn marks it leaves. The Ranking: Albedo: Eyes from Outer Space is, despite the slack I personally give it in some areas, still a pretty awful experience to play. It is going to fall very low on the ranking - however - I will say, it falls in the "I wish this was better" category, rather than the "I feel insulted by this" pile. I do think its relative ambition, and heart-in-the-right-place-even-if-nothing-else-is elements of it guarantee it has to rank higher than truly cynical, woeful pieces of trash like LA Cops, Space Overlords... and even Lost at Sea... ...but despite seeing what it was aiming for, I can't in good conscience rank it any higher than the first game I come to on my way up the list that I think does interesting things, and does them in a more technically competent way. That game is weird, half-baked music visualiser .detuned. While there's more to say about Albedo - and more game there - the fact is, I would probably replay .detuned for a half hour of messing about, than replay Albedo for the same amount of time. As such, Albedo: Eyes from Outer Space finds its spot! Knack Summary: Released in 2013 as a lunch game for the PS4, and developed by Playstation's Japan Studios in collaboration with PS4 architect Mark Cerny, Knack was very much a game with its feet planted in two different eras - the nostalgic past, and the uncertain future. On the one hand, the game was somewhat forward facing, in the sense that it existed, at least in part, (and by some interpretations, entirely,) as a showcase for the power of the new console. Visually arresting, and absolutely laden - and in many cases actively built around - particle effects and physics-based graphical flourishes impossible on prior console tech, the "look at what the new console is capable of" factor of the game was arguably never more surfaced and apparent in a fully fledged product (until, of course, the PSVR and PS5, where Team Asobi fully leaned into the concept of the "tech Demo as game" with their AstroBot products.) On the other hand though, Knack felt in many ways antiquated when it released, as from a genre and gameplay point of view, it feels rooted in a genre that was largely dormant on Sony consoles by 2013 - the Mascot Action Platformer. In the PS1 / PS2 days, Sony's evolution (and the evolution of videogames generally) was still somewhat rooted in 16-bit era thinking - and the 16-Bit era was owned entirely by the "forever war" between Nintendo and Sega. The fact that both those powerhouse rivals played out their back and forth through Mascot games as much as anything (Sonic, Tails and his merry band, vs. Mario, Luigi, Kirby and Donkey Kong,) had a legacy that far outlasted the heydays of the Console Wars - and even outlasted the demise of Sega themselves as a hardware manufacturer. In many ways, Crash Bandicoot, Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank, Spyro, Sly Cooper, Gex - all of these cute, cuddly character-action games - have their original roots in aping Nintendo and Sega. 1st Party Mascot Games sold, and so 3rd Parties followed suit, to pretty good results at that time. By the time the PS3 came around, however, the era of the Mascot Game has somewhat dwindled. Ratchet and Clank (easily the strongest of the 3rd Party Mascots) were still going strong - adapting to the times in the way their enormous success and quality could allow, but for the most part, that genre began its twilight years, reappearing as "trilogy Packs" of remasters, and seeing modest success here and there, with marginal spin-offs and smaller scope games. They remained relevant, but more as nostalgia pieces than zeitgeist products. Nintendo did as it always has - continuing its (well deserved) reign as the "Walt Disney of Videogames" and appealing to the whole family, but the Xbox and Playstation entered its gritty phase. The Mascots of that era became Nathan Drake, Kratos, Ezio, Marcus Phoenix, Commander Shepherd, Chris Redfield, Master Chief... with only the odd Sackboy picking up the family-friendly end of things. The PS3 / Xbox 360 era was long too - probably the longest console generation on record. As such, by the time the PS4 came around, the notion of a Mascot Game being one of the tent-pole Sony releases felt quaint already - and the idea that it was a new one, with no previous history to draw on was risky. It made some sense on paper, I'd imagine - a new console is the natural "reset point", allowing a "new normal" to be offered, and Knack could be believed, in that sense, to be a genuine play for the return of the Mascot Game as a pillar of a hardware manufacturer's stable... ...but with so much industry and populist factors against it, such a game would have to really hit the ball out of the park. Knack... didn't. Operating as something of a "split-the-difference" between 3D Action Platformer and God of War-style brawler, Knack's gameplay hooks are remarkably and notably slight. Combat is pretty simplistic (and, given the intended family audience, curiously tricky and unforgiving.) Each level is a fixed-camera, relatively linear romp through an environment plagued with a smattering of enemy types, and Knack himself can grow and shrink depending on how many "relics" he collects - and how well he does in combat. Essentially, each level tends to follow a slightly Katamari-Damacy loop - Knack starts very small, and grows and grows as he traverses the level, thus making him more and more able to destroy bigger and bigger enemies, and traverse bigger and bigger sections of the level he is in. This does show off some pretty interesting level design - levels need to factor in scale, and be able to look good when Knack is at his smallest and biggest, and still allow for movement within them, as well as form linearly traversable path, however, it does tend to make the already quite one-directional feeling levels feel even more constructing - just in a different way than normal. It engrains some of the feeling of a Metroidvania - in this case, seeing elements that could be interacted with if Knack was a certain size, rather than if he had a specific item or power - but that feeling isn't as fun or engaging as a standard Metroidvania, because the answer is always the same - get bigger. Since the player knows they always will (and that even when they do, they will be small again in the next level, because of some narrative justification,) the feeling of progression only ever applies to one level at a time. All levels feel discrete, and there is no real sense of power-progress. The other major issue with the game from a mechanical stand-point is movement. Knack moves slowly. Oddly slowly, actually. It's hard to pinpoint exactly why, as the game doesn't really move much slower than many games in its genre, but there is something of a dissonance between how Knack looks when moving, and the speed he actually covers ground. It's as if he is moving on a treadmill, and never quite covering the distance his gait would suggest. This can be a little odd feeling in general traversal, but becomes a genuine problem in combat. Combat is melee for the most part, and the number of times when a punch from Knack will swing and whiff, because he isn't quite close enough to the enemy is immeasurable. I make no claim to be good at videogames generally, but this game in particular saw this issue arise constantly, in a way it does in very few others. Fundamentally, the visual indication of how fast Knack can cover ground does not marry up correctly to the actual ground covered, and so there is a constant inability for the player to rely on what the game seems to be telling them about positioning in a high-stress moment. The other parts of the game are made up of some minor stealth sections, which work fairly well, though again, feel rooted in a by-gone era, with instant fail and brutal punishment the gameplay de jour. There are traversal sections with some light puzzles, and these are the most successful sections, working pretty well. The puzzles are never particularly difficult (think Uncharted, or modern, Norse God of War level,) but they are varied and fun to solve. In terms of narrative, Knack is a curious one. The story of the game is distinctly simply - deliberately and appropriately so, given the audience - however, it does suffer a little from a slightly odd tonal issue. There are good guys (Knack, his creator Vargas, Vargas' nephew Lucas, et al,) and there are bad guys - Goblins, of a rather Warcraft-meets-Pixar visual style... however, while we are TOLD the Goblins are the bad guys, we see a lot more of the "good guys" being expansionist, xenophobic, totalitarian and - in a few cases - actively cruel, than we ever see of the "Bad Guys" being so. The game does a reasonable attempt at family-friendly characterisation of the "good guys" - they are fun, and bumbling at times, and Lucas is typically smart and precotious and always loving and right - but there is a slightly sinister element to the humans that is introduced that feels oddly right-wing and a little dark, as family fare goes. That might feel like nit-picking (and in some cases, it is,) but it is undeniable that multiple time while playing, I got the distinct impression that the game was gearing up for a twist, in which the humans are revealed to be the bad guys... but having completed it I don't think this was ever intentional. At least, it never really follows up on it in any meaningful way. Fundamentally, I think the narrative suffers more from the fact that while it takes cue from a lot of popular family fare, and certainly aspires to be like them - and look and sound like them - the developers never quite manage to evoke the charm of those them. This same issue is evident in the visuals too, actually. Knack looks - for its era, but even now, almost a decade after the fact - gorgeous. The visuals are lovingly rendered, smooth as silk, pastel-shaded and genuinely Pixar-adjacent. It is very obvious that part of the design ethos of Knack was to lean into the tired old "It looks like a Pixar Movie!" term wantonly flung around in the mid PS2 era (without sufficient basis at the time.) In this case, it is actually true - Knack does look like a Pixar movie in terms of quality - but there is a lack of the personality, charm, affection and specificity that Pixar movies have in spades. It feels like a look (and, indeed, a narrative,) created by feeding all the Pixar movies into a computer, and generating a new one by algorithm, without any human intervention or emotional element for oversight. In terms of audio, the game sounds fine - the score is again, like a score for one of the great Character Action games of the PS2 era, but lacking any real personality or hooks. Voice work is well done - there's a stellar cast of voice-talent, including Laura Bailey and Jennifer Hale among others - but no character ever feels really exciting or full of life. They feel like approximations of Pixar-style characters, built by robots. (That is, to be clear, a fault of writing, not of acting - which is generally good, if never great, here.) The fundamental issue with Knack, really, is the same for almost every element of it - it feels like all the basic building blocks of a great family-friendly game, but without the glue to hold it together, or the personality to propel it. It's one of those rare games that clearly justify why videogame review outlets have mostly stopped assigning scores to games based on the sums of parts. If someone were to list out game elements - graphics, music, narrative, gameplay - Knack would likely score middling to high scores in every one... ...but the overall score would never feel right, as it is all the indefinable, X-Factor elements that let it down, by their absence. It is a game that feels... tired. Able to muster all the parts of a great game, but none of the moxie of one. All the bricks, but none of the mortar. It feels like a copy-of-a-copy-of-a-copy of a game, rather than a game in and of itself. A game that would be playing on a TV screen in the background of another, better videogame. It has solid bones... but ends up wasting them, by having all the personality of a wet envelope. Overall, a rough one really - Knack wanted to be the revival of the Mascot Action game, but instead, served to send the genre back to the wastelands for several more years. A textbook example of a company trying to force a Mascot into existence, rather than allowing one to assume that mantle organically - and failing to understand the good things about the games that they use as inspiration. As a tech demo, it worked and served its purpose, but that purpose was primarily as a demo screen on a sales kiosk. As a game, despite looking, sounding and acting like a great one... ....it never, for one second, feels like one. The Ranking: This one became an absolutely easy ranking - as it's one of those game where a placement jumped out as completely obvious, by virtue of two game - in this case, Sly 2: Band of Thieves, and The Bradwell Conspiracy. Because Knack is a character action game, comparison to Sly Cooper is obviously appropriate, and while I intensely disliked Sly 2 for many reasons, I cannot deny that there is more personality and fun gameplay in even Sly Coopers weakest outing - Sly 2 - than Knack can hope to muster. However, the game directly below Sly 2 - The Bradwell Conspiracy - is just too riddled with issues, and unable to capitalise on its premise to possibly rank above even a personality-free-but-technically-competent game like Knack... ...and so its placement is cemented! Queen's Quest 2: Stories of Forgotten Past Summary: Another of Artifex Mundi's catalogue of adventure-lite, mild puzzle games, Queen's Quest 2: Stories of Forgotten Past is the second entry in the Queen's Quest series, though curiously, the first one available on PSN.Queen's Quest is one of AM's older, longer running series, with 5 entries available currently, the first one still trapped eternally on Android, and unavailable to console gamers. (The fifth has yet to wander Playstation's way too, apparently, though I'd expect we will see it soon enough.) A relatively meat-and-potatoes series for AM, Queen's Quest, is arguably the most "baseline" of their fantasy series, for better and for worse. The art is nice - there is a pretty good variety of locations here - but while it does have the vibrancy and colour that high fantasy allows for, it can feel a little indistinct, in comparison to some of the more specifically themed series. In a way, Queen's Quest suffers a little from its proximity to the Eventide, Grim Legends and Lost Grimoires franchises - all three of those series' are also somewhat dabbling in High Fantasy, so benefit from the art styles that affords, but each also has a distinct personality on top of that. Queen's Quest doesn't really - it is more the "generic" high fantasy series, that the other series riff on with their own spins. Puzzle-wise, there is a decent, if not outstanding mix here - again, it's a good collection of the staples, but few unique variants. Queen's Quest 2: Stories of Forgotten Past does, however, have some pretty good hidden object scenes - good art, really helps these to work. There's a fairly good story to Queen's Quest 2: Stories of Forgotten Past as Artifex Mundi goes - it's nowhere near as interesting or fun as some of their best series (Enigmatis) and nothing as unique as the more bespoke entires (Clockwork Tales, or Modern Tales,) but it works for the most part, and keeps the player propelled forward for a few hours. There is actually a boss fight in this one (not usually a good thing in AM games) but here, it's actually a decent implementation, and serves essentially as simply another puzzle, rather than a frustration. There is also a fairly short, but still decent Bonus chapter. While being a relatively average-to-good entry in the Artifex Mundi canon, Queen's Quest 2: Stories of Forgotten Past does suffer a little, simple for lack of personality of tone. The narrative and puzzles are fine, as is the art, but it's tough to really make a memorable game, when the franchise it is in is essentially the baseline upon which other franchises of similar game type riff.Queen's Quest is white bread upon which other, more distinct franchises spread their jam - and so, even good white bread tends to look a little dull when served plain. It takes a really good example of the baseline to stand tall under those circumstances... and while Queen's Quest 2: Stories of Forgotten Past is fine... it isn't really doing anything that stands it up tall enough. The Ranking: In terms of ranking, I think Queen's Quest 2: Stories of Forgotten Past falls - in the Artifex Mundi canon - somewhere in the middle of the pack, and looking through those currently ranked, I'd place is under lesser Lost Grimoires entry Lost Grimoires 2: Shard of Mystery, but above the slightly disappointing Persian Nights: Sands of Wonders. There's only a couple of games between them - Moons of Madness, and the rather lacklustre Access Denied - both games I would pass over if given the choice between replaying them, or replaying Queen's Quest 2: Stories of Forgotten Past... ...so it finds its spot, right below Lost Grimoires 2: Shard of Mystery. Monster Slayers Summary: A rogue-like Deck-building game from GameMaker, Monster Slayers is a deck-builder game through and through. It takes a pretty simplistic and rudimentary approach to the tertiary elements - its art design, visuals, audio etc. and as a result, can almost fool the player starting out playing it that the game is a quick, throwaway product, but what it lacks in visual or auditory flair, it arguably makes up for in its variety, moderate depth... and deceptively crushing difficulty! I'll do this review a little topsy-turvy from my usual method, by talking about the audio and visuals first, and the gameplay after... frankly, because it's best to get those less important or focus-pulling elements out of the way. As said, the visuals of the game are very simplistic. The player controls a randomly generated (or, if they wish, specifically designed,) character from an initial pool of 6 character classes - Rogue, Ranger, Wizard, Knight, Barbarian, Cleric - each of which tend to fall in the same cheebie style. There is some variety in terms of gender, hair colour etc. and some further variation in terms of equipment (each character can wear two accessories, an armour, and a weapon - all of which have specific buffs and effects) and these are mostly seen on that character - though in terms of poses they are fairly limited, and since all characters are seen only in 2D flat-plane, and all movements / actions are ore symbolic than actually animated, those visuals are not really the focus. Enemy design is simple too - there is a decent variety of enemy types, and each one is quite nicely designed and distinct, but again, animations are indicative, and so there is n real interaction between characters. The actual levels are always flat plane backgrounds moving in parallax behind the characters, and look fine, but never more than that, and variety really only exists between different biomes, rather than different fights. Deck Builders do not need astounding visuals to shine, of course. I've played a few very good ones so far - Griftlands certainly benefits from its amazing art-style, but Slay the Spire, for example, looks very, very rudimentary. It is still a fantastic game regardless, purely playing on its mechanics. Still though - make no mistake, Monster Slayers makes Slay the Spire look like Horizon Zero Dawn by comparison! The one area where visuals really do matter in a Deck Builder, is in the design of the cards. They need to be distinct enough, and obviously identifiable enough for the player who is familiar with the game to identify them quickly and easily - and in Monster Slayers, that is more of a concern than in any other, due to one particularly bizarre mechanical element where cards must be read astonishingly quickly, as enemy incoming cards seem to fire past at a ridiculous speed, making following what an enemy is doing in a multi-card hand very tough! For the most part, the game does a reasonably good job with this. Cards are not gorgeous to look at (in no way is the card art in Monster Slayers comparable to Griftlands, Voice of Cards or Slay the Spire) - the art is simple and workman-like... but they are identifiable and distinct, and work well in that regard. It's essentially a situation where the visuals are basic, but look fine - there just isn't a huge variety of them. That same thing can be said of the score too - it's a rousing, if relatively unremarkable score, which work, serves its purpose, but never really varies or changes enough to stand out, or to remain a point of note throughout the long playtime required for the S-Rank. On the audio however, there is a significant negative aspect that the visuals don't have - the voice work. There is voice-over in the game, basically small audio cue "stings" that the player character will make when finishing or starting a fight, and these are... not good. In fact, they are very, very annoying. Like the "modular" design of the player characters, there are a (quite admirable) number of different voices that can be added as a variable... however, they tend to be simply varying degrees of annoying. Personally, I found myself always hitting the "randomise" button enough times to ensure a female character, as those tended to be the least annoying of the bunch... but to be honest, that is only a relative statement. Fundamentally, what the characters are saying is not of value, (it doesn't seem to reflect any actual gameplay metric, and is purely a selection of generic statements, that are pulled at random,)... and in some ways almost seem to devalue the game. They make it feel more throwaway than it really is. If anyone reading this is a parent of a young child, they will likely be familiar with some of the very basic, educational games for toddlers that exist on iPad. These games are often well made, good educational tools - the BBC, for example, put a lot of admirable work into their ones - but specifically, parents are probably over-familiar with the incessantly annoying, overly-chirpy voices that will say the same things over and over and over again in these games. "Press here, to move the block!" "Press here, to move the block!" "Press here, to move the block!" "Press here, to..." Good Lord, Mr Tumble, we GET IT! Unfortunately, because of the rogue-like nature of Monster Slayers, its difficulty, and the huge number of runs required for the S-Rank, the vocal stings in this game start to feel grating in exactly the same ways... and because the visuals are, to be honest, not a million miles away from the simplistic visuals of those iOS educational games, the effect is a cheapening of a game. That "cheapening" is as unfortunate as it is irrefutable, of course - because actually, Monster Slayers is not a mechanically simple, throwaway, (or short) game once the player gets past those elements. The game has 14 different character classes - each of which makes use of a substantial set of unique cards, or specific mechanics, on top of a basic "one-size-fits-all" set of fundamental cards. There classes do play wildly differently too. Some are obvious - mages make use of Mana builds, while Barbarians and brutes focus on big, vicious melee cards, rogues and rangers operate on "DPS" style multi-card combos - however, some of the more specific classes are more fundamental in their eccentricities. Merchants, for example, focus on amassing gold. That is a tertiary system used to purchase new cards / equipment for all other classes, but with the merchant, they can bribe enemies with it, pay for single attacks, and have access to cards form a large variety of other character's deck - with the caveat that they must be paid for. Dragons and Monks are unable to equip weapons and armour - hampering their ability to add buffs and bonuses, but make up for it with unique elemental or combination card manoeuvres. Beastmasters are unable to bring allies with them (another "buffing" mechanic available to most classes,) however, they have a "pet" wolf, that can absorb damage and use its own set of cards - but must be kept alive to be useful. Add to this pretty stunning level of variety, a set of RNG and player-choice systems, such as equipment purchasing and equipping, an RNG-set variation to the final boss, RNG set available biomes, and RNG set paths through each of those biomes, plus the randomising elements inherent to each individual encounter that Deck Builders maintain, and the result is that a relatively short, simple game involving battling through three areas of increasing punishment, to face a final boss becomes very variable, and able to support a pretty lengthly S-Rank journey. (For reference, I clocked around 120 hours in pursuit on the platinum!) This variety, however, is both Monster Slayers biggest strength, and its greatest weakness. As compared to some of the other Deck Builders I have played - Slay the Spire / Inscryption / Griftlands - Monster Slayers has a magnitude more starting classes, and that is impressive that it works at all - however, it also gives a pretty good demonstration of why most Deck Builders don't have this many - and shows the pitfalls that can happen if they did. In a word - Balancing. Because Monster Slayers needs to work for such a vast swathe of different starting classes and builds, the enemies cannot be particularly tailored to any one class. They need to work for all. As a result, the enemies are varied in their own decks, and operate not on a "let's make this enemy encounter a clever challenge for THIS class" but rather a "this enemy will be a cake-walk for these classes... and a living nightmare for these ones!" Almost all classes have some enemy types that are incredibly easy to beat, and a few that are incredibly difficult or dangerous, simply due to the nature of their decks. Magic using character like Wraiths, for example, work on a "building up power to unleash" mechanics. For classes that can shut down an enemy fast, those are simple - practically free XP. For classes that work on multi-turn combos though, a Wraith can easily one-shot the player if the two RNG deck-shuffles fall the wrong way - and there's no real possibility of avoiding it. This kind of issue isn't so much a failure of balancing - in fact, if anything, Monster Slayers is actually incredibly balanced - more so than is always fun to play. On paper, the idea that the enemies have a deck - and the CPU plays just as well as the player with that deck, and has an equal chance as the player for victory - sounds fine. In reality, however, where the player has to fight 30-40 of these enemies to win, and healing between battles is not simple or easy, and luck is a factor in deck-shuffling, it tends to result in some serious frustration. While the "balancing" may technically be right - when the result is a late-game enemy gets the first turn, and through a combination of good luck and deck-strength, is able to play a near infinite card-loop, whittling a full-health player down to death in their first turn, without that player even getting to play a card, let alone do any damage - the knowledge that "well, it was technically balanced" is scant comfort! Deck Builders (and rogue-likes) both engrain a certain "oh well, them's the breaks" attitude in the player - to some extent, players of these games know what they are in for, and expect a certain level of "well, that fucked me... next run!"... however, even I - a person enamoured of both genres, and with ample patience to spare - did find myself yelling "Oh COME ON!" more during games of Monster Slayers, than I have in my last 20 games combined! On balancing though, there is one element that Monster Slayers has that I think is of significant note, that is really quite a brilliant...and deviously nefarious! Namely, its post-boss final boss. The game has a higher-difficulty mode, called "Legendary Mode". This mode must be completed with - at a minimum - 12 of the 14 character classes in pursuit of the S-Rank. In Legendary Mode, virtually all elements of the game remain the same - it's the same player-chosen 3 biomes to traverse, the same RNG variable final boss (the Harbinger) to beat... however, this mode adds a brilliant final "Fuck You" Boss after The Harbinger - a previous player. If the player defeats Legendary mode with any class, that character - including their deck, thier stats, their equipment and their accessories - are added to a pool... and that character can them show up as the final boss in the next classes Legendary run! This adds a strange, compounding, anxiety-inducing element to the S-Rank journey. If, for example, the player crafts an absolutely amazing character... say, a completely over-powered, fantastically kitted out mage, (as I did) they might beat Legendary Mode with ease... (as I did.) However, the elation and joy that comes with beating that mode is almost immediately tempered, by the realisation (as I had)... that now, every future character may need to beat that character and deck to be able to win! It's a mechanic that I think is incredibly cool in concept - and, frankly in execution. It seems so elegant and smart, and of course, is something that can only really work in a Deck-Builder, since the CPU control of the character is set by the deck. Some games have, of course, had the "now you must battle yourself" mechanics - Zelda has done it, certainly some JRPGs have done it - however, they never really feel quite like fighting yourself, because the CPU is still in control of the direct movement etc. In a Deck-Builder though, it is purely the strength of the deck that counts. The CPU could make a mistake in play - but to be honest, if a deck is well crafted, that wouldn't happen generally... and in Monster Slayers, where the CPU is a vicious bugger who doesn't care one whit for the player, it certainly doesn't! Essentially, the result in Monster Slayers is that there player must craft a great deck - one capable of beating Legendary Mode... but must always be conscious to leave at least one weakness in it, that they can handle when playing as that character... but can exploit when fighting them. (I will note, my ultra-super-dooper-mage character had none. She became a complete nightmare in my playthroughs, and any time I saw her, it basically spelled my doom, as I had not planned effectively!) I will also make one significant note in this review, as something of a warning to players. Monster Slayers has technical issues. The game crashes. It crashed quite often, actually. Not even in a nice, pretty, crash to OS kind of way... but in a truly ugly, "I'm seeing all the code errors on screen, Good God, what is going on?" kind of way. In fairness, it almost always crashes immediately upon entering a Biome - and that is always directly after a save, so no progress is lost, and the game takes virtually no time to load back in, so it is not crippling to the experience, but it is a major flaw. There is also another, somehow more egregious issue with the game - control of the UI. The game is controlled via either the D-Pad or the Analogue Stick - and when selecting icons on screen, it can be incredibly frustrating and annoying to try and highlight specific ones. The Biome maps are random, and the next location is chosen by clicking on it, and it is clearly designed with a mouse / iPad touch-screen in mind. In some cases, I literally stopped even trying. There is one Biome - The Swamp - that is positioned in such a way that it is so tricky to navigate to via a controller, that I simply ignored it. I have yet to see what the Swamp Area looks like, or if there are unique enemies there! Highlighting the wrong icon is a constant issue - and one who's anxiety-inducement is magnified tenfold by the fact that the "Abandon Run" buttons... and indeed the nuclear "Delete This Save" buttons, are ever-present on the screen. Twice I actually FULLY DELETED my 100-hour-odd save, simply by highlighting the wrong box, and hitting the buttons I thought were the "go here" buttons. Thank goodness for Cloud-Save-backup... but still, having these options on screen, and not buried in a deep menu is unforgivable, when there is such issues with selecting the correct icons via a controller. Overall, Monster Slayers is a strange little game. Its visuals and presentation betray it, suggesting a throwaway, simple or shovel-ware level product, which is a shame, because hidden within that rudimentary look is a game with a lot of depth, and one that has some good ideas. It's a game that doesn't really measure up to the better Deck Builders out there, and clearly bit off more than it could chew in terms of balancing... but it is a compulsive game, and one where the "just one more run before bed" pull is incredibly strong. It's a game riddled with faults - any recommendation has to come with a toilet-roll-length list of caveats... ...but on the other hand, the fact that that recommendation does come at all is testament to it - and for Deck Building fans, I do think it's worth a look. Just know what you are getting in for - and accept that sometimes, you're gonna get stomped - be it by the enemies, the balancing... or the technical issues. The Ranking: So, ranking Monster Slayers is not the easiest, as the most obvious comparisons should of course be other deck-builders... but the only other deck-builders on the current list are Slay the Spire, Griftlands and Inscryption, and let us not be silly! While Monster Slayers has some cool elements, and a surprisingly deep pool of compulsive gameplay to draw on, it is not anywhere close to competing with any of those games. The only other card-related game for comparison would be Voice of Cards: The Isle Dragon Roars, but frankly, that comparison is pretty spurious - and immaterial, as Voice of Cards is still a game with much more going for it. What Monster Slayers really is, is a game with more faults than strengths - however, the strengths it has are surprisingly strong, and do a sterling job of propelling a player past the faults. Not enough to ignore them, but enough to tolerate them. As such, I took that (rather wishy-washy) description, and looked for other games on the list for which the same could be said - and came up with two that could help: DotNods "Life-is-Strange-alike-but-not-really," Twin Mirror, and bizarre, oddly winning, yet deeply flawed swamp noire narrative game Knee Deep. I think on balance, Twin Mirror has to edge out Monster Slayers - there just isn't enough done in the visuals, music and certainly technical front to comfortable see it out rank Twin Mirror (despite the admittedly Twin-Mirror-dwarfing time I spent with the game.) Twin Mirror has issues, but it looks great, sounds good, is still somewhat compelling, and has no real technical issues. Knee Deep, however, is a game I was (and am) strangely fond of - but I cannot deny its myriad flaws, and genuine technical issues. It doesn't look great, and while it has some really cool ideas (in its case, narratively,) I think Monster Slayers beats it handily on its original concepts. Gameplay wise, Monster Slayers just stomps all over Knee Deep too - so it has to take the win. There's only three games in between, and while I'm happy with Monster Slayers placing above slightly disappointing metroidvania Carrion, even despite its technical difficulties, primarily on the strength of its compulsive gameplay (something Carrion lacked,) I can't see it placing above Bejeweled 2, which is a simple, but also wildly compulsive game - and one that still looks and sounds better than Monster Slayers does. As such, Monster Slayers finds its spot! God of War: Ragnarok Summary: The sequel to the almost unanimously praised God of War soft reboot in 2018 - in which long-time series protagonist, professional God-disliker, compulsive head-smasher, and FHM's "Angry Bald Man of the Year" 18-years-running, Kratos finally somewhat repented for his prior misdeeds, got to know his son, learned what "cold" was... and still got mad angry, but this time in a more satisfyingly narrative way - God of War: Ragnarok picks up essentially where the last game left off... ...in pretty spectacular style. With Odin pissed off, Thor pissed off, Freya really really pissed off... and Kratos and Atreus gloomily preparing for the end of days, that both expect, both are preparing for, and neither has any real notion of what to do about. When Atreus - now a little older, a little wiser, and a little less of teenage dirtbag Giant God - while keeping a few secrets of his own, leads to Thor and Odin himself darkening their doorstep, the ball is set rolling for a calamitous stand-off between Kratos, Asgard and the force of Ragnarok... ...and so the two set out to find a way to defeat their prophesised fate. Either stop it, survive it... or at least understand it. Let's start with the most obvious, and immediate element of note with Ragnarok: It looks great. Character models and environments top notch, though the actual art-style set by the first game is something of a double edged sword - and a petard upon which the developer hoists themselves. On the one hand, it really helps to create a coherent, aesthetic through-line, and an interesting take on the Norse mythology, by imagining it as somewhat "pedestrian". Having gods and mythical figures like Thor, Odin, Tir and Freya resemble "regular people" to a large extent, rather than cartoonishly or ethereal deities, God of War gives itself a distinct personality within that canon. It really works - very, very well - however, the problem that particular style has, is that once the impact and novelty of it becomes a known quantity, it quickly becomes less impactful. The moments where seeing these creatures and characters of mythology represented as they are in God of War was interesting and impressive, all happened in the previous game. What is inherited here is a design aesthetic that is excellent - but because it is almost deliberately not grandiose or awe-inspiring, it makes the advancements in visuals between the two games less noticeable. Is God of War: Ragnarok a technical, graphical step-up from God of War 2018? Absolutely. Does it have the same impact on the audience God of War 2018 had? Not even close... ...and the reason, is that all the elements God of War 2018 introduced and that made it distinct and stand out from its predecessors, actively work against Ragnarok's ability to stand out from its predecessor. That's not to say the game doesn't look fantastic, of course - quite the opposite. God of War: Ragnarok does look fantastic. It is an absolute technical marvel - in terms of "technical graphics" I suspect it is the best game I have every played on console (I have not yet sampled Horizon: Forbidden West, which seems to be the one game realistically capable of competing on that front.) Environments look lush and verdant, or dusty and harsh, or snowy and bitterly cold as required, and elements like lighting and glinting on Kratos's weaponry or armour are fantastic. Every little detail of how the characters interact with their environment or each-other, too, looks great. Kratos and Atreus climb in believable ways. They move through snow, leaving believable tracks in their wake. Oars dip into gorgeous water, and ripple and move it with an uncanny level of verisimilitude. The visceral way in which Kratos smashed axes into enemies, cuts them in half, or rips the jaw off wolves is both effective, and stomach-churningly violent, in the best way possible. Motion capture and performance capture are great too - they were in 2018, and seem even more confident and well implemented here - but arguably the biggest step up from 2018 is the facial capture / animation. There is a lot of dialogue in God of War: Ragnarok - almost too much at times (particularly when the player is solving a puzzle, and the NPC companions just WILL NOT STOP TELLING YOU THE ANSWERS!)... but oddly, most of the very best performances and moments in the game, come not from dialogue, but from the silent moments. The ability of the game to convey subtle, multiple, or contradictory and complex emotional content through mere facial expression and "acting" is truly a step forward in gaming. Prior to Ragnarok, I'd have placed Life is Strange: True Colours, The Last of Us: Part II, and its predecessor, and God of War 2018 as the pinnacle examples of that "in game acting" - and all three of those pale in comparison to the subtle threats, or silent horror, or pained emotion that is able to be conveyed by characters in this game, with no more than a look. A large part of that ability - of course - is the performances. They are uniformly excellent - Christopher Judge reprises Kratos, with his voice like old oak, and his excellent, world-weary mannerisms. Sunny Suljic as Atreus, Danielle Bisutti, Robert Craighead and Adam Harrington and Brok and Sindri, and newcomer Laya Hayes as Angrboda all do fantastic work. Alistair Duncan is back as Mimir - providing both the levity and the background on virtually everything, and his performance is really fantastic. His Scottish conversational and likeable tone is the glue holding the entire game together, and is a constant source of information and amusement, without every becoming cloying or grating. Even Ben Prendergast's performance as Tir (the Norse God of War) - while I think it is the weakest element of the characterisation by a long way, and see his "God of War as sad-surfer-dude" casting as an unusual mis-casting - is still a well done performance. What is interesting though, is that even while all these performances are as good, if not better, than any in the previous games, they are all eclipsed by one performance: that of Richard Schiff, as Odin. Make no mistake - not only is Odin the best performance of a character in this game... it is arguably vying for the title of best performance of a character in any game. Oden is the best thing in Ragnarok. In terms of writing, he is already interesting - and very smartly implemented. Rather than going for the previous God of War's "more-is-more" style, where Zeus, the principle God of the Greek pantheon was portrayed as a hulking, muscled equal to Kratos: big, dumb, vengeful and powerful - Odin is written with "less-is-more" as the ethos. He is portrayed as something of a slip of a man - more a put-upon senior mafioso of a sprawling, powerful, yet often inept crime family. He does not play into his power, showing off his ability - he doesn't need to. He is powerful, he doesn't have to act like it. The fear people have of him is real, and justified, and played by them, but his mannerisms are that of a slightly annoyed, cynical, sometimes likeable, sometime misanthropic grandfather. The writers of Ragnarok did a smart thing is choosing to play against type and franchise style with Odin - but the smartest thing they did, was in casting Schiff. Anyone familiar with Richard Schiff's body of acting work, (most notably, as Toby Ziegler on The West Wing,) knows he is one of those actors who "goes big, by going small." He is an actor who is able to convey menace, or seriousness, or humour with an almost disarming softness... yet be incredibly engaging, and have real weight behind those soft-spoken words. Schiff is not known for videogame work - indeed, I believe this is his only acting job in the genre - and often times, that can be a hinderance to actors. Games "stunt casting" Hollywood actors often results in half-assed or mediocre performances, as the actor either is not comfortable enough with the medium, or not bought-in enough to the idea, that the performance suffers, and Hollywood actors almost never give performances equal to more video-game savvy or experienced actors... however, Schiff clearly did what few of those Hollywood actors do - he treated it like any other movie or TV role... and it shines through. Odin does not have the most screen time in the game - particularly early on. He is fairly prominent in the later game, but at the outset, he has really only one scene, and is not seen again for over 10 hours of gameplay... yet that one scene is so electric and so interesting, and his performance so menacing, disarming, curious and engaging, that his presence is felt throughout all that long absence. Ragnarok is longer than God of War 2018 - which was itself already significantly longer than any previous God of War game - by a fairly wide margin. Ragnarok is also much more open and loose - in terms of core narrative, and gameplay loop. The narrative is curiously structured, in that while all previous God of War games have been structured more or less like films - with a continuous upping of the ante across the 3 act structure - Ragnarok is much more analogous to the 10-part prestige TV format than a filmic one. Rather than having a distinct 3 act structure, with Kratos as the principle character and all tertiary elements feeding into his core journey, in Ragnarok, the much monger game length is broken down into distinct episodic sections - with the events of Ragnarok themselves forming the structural spine, and Kratos just one of the ensemble cast, this time at best equal, and often, in fact, less less critical to the plotting than the characters around him. That structure allows for an overall through-line (the "series arc" if you will,) but also gives far more latitude for "one-off" or "bottle episodes", where another character is the focus, and Kratos himself is either playing second fiddle (as is the case for some of the Freya-central sections,) or absent entirely (as happens with some of the Atreus sections.) In fact, contrary to all other God of War games, Kratos essentially does not have a journey in this game - it's those around him who do. In God of War 2018, Kratos himself was the most interesting element of the game. Having spent the better part of 6 previous games being a rage-filled, angry dickhead, there was a lot of meat in the duel character arcs he had throughout that game. Both his John Rambo / John Wick arc, (first hiding from his shameful past, then being forced to call on those skills again,) and his Road to Perdition / Lone Wolf and Cub arc, (protecting his child, and shielding him from his own past, then realising that by doing so, he has effectively denied his child a father,) were well worked out, and interesting journeys to watch. In Ragnarok though, Kratos is different. He has (finally, after 7 mainline games,) genuinely learned things from a previous journey, and appears now to have found some sort of internal peace. He is no longer hiding from his past, but is also no longer consumed by it. He feels shame, of course (as he should,) and anger, and fear and hope... but none of those feelings are a crutch - he genuinely appears to have become a better man, and harbour a genuine desire to continue to better himself. As a result, Ragnarok flips the God of War dynamic on its head somewhat. Kratos, now, is more often than not, the voice of reason, opposing other characters' flights of rage, or hopelessness or folly. That makes for a dynamic that is arguably much more interesting a direction in terms of the overall Kratos saga - players who have played every game will likely see it as a welcome relief that the same old Kratos tropes are changed up... however, it can feel a little at odds with the primary tone of the franchise, and the gameplay itself. Kratos is, still, ripping enemies and Gods apart in grotesquely - almost comically - brutal ways. He is still roaring like an earthquake when he plows his axe into someones head, and still ripping jaw off left, right and centre. God of War Ragnarok never approaches the Uncharted or GTAIV levels of narrative dissonance, where a likeable-within-the-cut-scenes protagonist is clearly a sadistic mass-murdered outside of them... but there can be some pretty odd moments, where Kratos rips thorough 20 enemies with Mortal Kombat level violence... then immediately launches into a soliloquy to Atreus on the importance of not giving in to rage. This is probably the best spot to quickly address sound in the game - and here, performance and foley are king. As said, performances are very good - and occasionally outstanding - and the voice work is unimpeachable. On sound effect too, Ragnarok is a titan - the game sound scape is fantastic - from footfalls, to environmental sounds and wildlife, to the visceral, thunderous sounds of combat. The "Shiiiiiiinnk" sound of Kratos whipping his magic axe back into his hand, then the thumping, crushing impact of him smashing it through an enemy is second to none - and in fact, all combat sounds (which are a huge part of the game) are excellent. What is oddly, notably weaker, however, is the score. It's never bad - it feels both tonally and thematically appropriate, but it is oddly mixed down, and strangely un-memorable or interesting. When you consider some of the thumping, rousing, blood-pumping music present in other grandiose scored games - Elden Ring, Skyrim... hell, previous God of War games - most people can recall those themes for years after they play. I finished Ragnarok 6 days ago, and I could not hum a tune from it if my life depended on it. There's nothing about the score that actively pulls one out of the experience - as I say, it feels tonally correct - but it just doesn't have the impact that virtually every other aspect of the game does. In terms of gameplay though, that is where we need to focus. The game is much looser than previous entires in the franchise - and this is sometimes a benefit... and sometimes a hinderance. There are significantly more RPG elements - some of which work, but a lot of which feel overly complex, and don't gel particularly well with the game's other elements. The much larger focus on speccing and upgrading certainly feels fleshed out, however, because Ragnarok is not a "true" RPG, and still follows a relatively set path in terms of narrative and story and location gating, a lot of the time, it can feel superfluous. In an RPG, where exploration and grinding can be used to bolster levelling of characters, that level of intricate upgrading and material gathering makes sense. In a game like God of War: Ragnarok, where availability of upgrade materials will be largely tied to narrative progression anyways, the actual ability of the player to affect these builds is far more limited. Yes, Kratos, his Axe, his armour, his trinkets and powers, his skills, his companion abilities, his companion weapons, and every other aspect of his arsenal can be individually levelled and customised... ...but since finding the materials to do so is entirely contingent on progressing through a linear narrative, with little side content freedom until the very late-game / post-game, the question has to be asked... "why?" Really, there is no more freedom to upgrade Kratos and his equipment than there ever was in any previous God of War game, where the only collectible elements were story-gated weapons, and rage / health upgrades... the only difference here, is that once every hour or so, the player is required to access an overly complicated and unintuitive menu system, and "plug in" all the materials they have picked up along the way into the plethora of equipments that need them. Once the novelty of being able to customise such equipment (and look at it all, of course - the stuff looks great,) the savvy player will likely realise that there is little here beyond what could easily be accomplished with a simply "XP / level-up" system... except a lot of menu-based busy-work. There are some areas where the RPG elements feel like a good thing - certainly, they allow the game to breathe, and for side content to be fleshed out, but again, it has a tendency to feel only skin deep. An RPG, for example, allows the player to visit towns and get lots of lore from NPC characters. Ragnarok does not really do this - there is one town that Atreus visits... but he doesn't really. He meets a single character (of no real consequence), for some cut-scene dialogue, and views some other people from afar. When Kratos and Atreus visit a dwarven village, a rather ham-fisted "everyone is afraid of you" line is used to excuse the complete lack of NPCs visible... and so the world tends to feel oddly empty. It's this stuff that hurts Ragnarok's attempt to come off like an RPG - in a pure action romp, like God of War previously was, it never felt like a negative that Kratos essentially only ever encountered enemies, or story-significant characters. Here though, the game tries to have its cake and eat it too - it wants to evoke the idea of a populated world... without actually showing it. Multiple times throughout the game, Kratos and his merry band of Anti-Asgardians refer to wanting to "save" the Nine realms for their inhabitants... but because Kratos can visit all these realms, and each appears to contain about 5 NPCs each, it becomes a little difficult to lend that plot point any weight. "For whom?" is the obvious question. The only realm we see any significant population dwelling in is the one realm they want to destroy - Asgard. Everywhere else, is a nice looking wasteland... hame to a curious abundance of chests and puzzles, some nice boat-rides, a lot of monsters... and not much else! The RPG element, as said, helps and hurts Ragnarok, but in the end, I tend to feel like it does more damage than it does polish the gameplay. It certainly fleshes out the length, and grants a certain additional freedom to the gameplay - but I tend to think that the extent to which God of War 2018 introduced some hints of this gameplay shift was the perfect balance. That game introduced a mild "RPG-ification" and it helped to extend the gameplay, and introduce enough freedom to tell a more complex and winding story, but it never felt like it was over-extending the length or introducing "gameplay flab". In Ragnarok, sometimes, the further leaning onto this style does work - there is a greater feeling of freedom, and some of the side content is much more interesting than what 2018 did - but the seams are visible, and the lack of cohesion of the RPG style with the action, narrative genre starts to show in places. Some sections, for example, a late game trip to a new area of Vanaheim - the Crater - is far, far too long, and really begins to feel like the game treading water, and drag more than just the gameplay. The RPG, "mission-based" elements start to feel narratively dissonant. Kratos is, even now, post-character growth and epiphany, still a man of singular action. Him dotting around, doing side-quests for ghosts, and trying to give closure to them feels counter to his ethos - even allowing for the changes he has been through. Another genuine issue with the game, is the marrying of the much monger, much more RPG-esque open nature, with one of the most impressive and unique elements of God of War 2018 - the "single camera, no-cuts" design ethos. The previous game made much hay out of its ability to never show the player a cut or a loading screen. All traversal, changes of realm etc. were handled in real-time, with loading hidden behind mechanical movements or operations of mechanisms etc. From the first moment the player took control of Kratos, to the finale, the game appeared as virtually one continuous camera shot. It was a good novelty, and impressive - but here, sticking to that feels unnecessarily limiting. Because Ragnarok focusses far more on collecting objects, giving the player freedom to explore other realms or to complete optional objectives - particularly towards the later game, or post-game, the fact that Kratos has no "fast-travel" does become irksome. When in "collectible clean-up" mode, it can be very time consuming and feel needlessly onerous to travel around. Having to find a mystic gate, select a realm, walk through the "realm between realms" for a while while the other realm loads, then exit in the new realm at the fixed point, realise you chose the wrong gate, repeat, etc. becomes quickly frustrating - and the devs refusal to simply include a "fast-travel" system, allowing any gate to be selected - at least post-game, where "clean-up" is the entire raison d'etre - would have been no real sacrifice in terms of narrative engagement, and would certainly have made the whole process less laborious. Combat is a primary element, and there, Ragnarok takes a few steps forwards - and a couple back. One of the primary (few) complaints about God of War 2018 was the lack of variety in enemy types - and specifically bosses. While there were some great specific fights against Gods or Demi-Gods, most sub-bosses were variants of the same Troll enemy. Ragnarok certainly addresses this concern - there are far, far more enemy types, and combat is much more of a "combat puzzle" variant, owing to the increased focus on elemental attack types, where switching weapons on the fly is key to success - however, the game doesn't really have a correlating combat-style change, to accompany this increase in complexity. Far more often than in God of War 2018, in Ragnarok enemies can feel like they are flanking and attacking from far off-screen, and fights can feel a little too chaotic and frenetic for Kratos' lumbering frame to handle. The game feels like it added all the complexity, without modifying the camera movement and Kratos himself to compensate. Adding to the mix the RPG-esque element of fights being extremely dependent on Kratos level vs. enemy level - where an enemy that is one level lower than Kratos will fold like paper, and enemies a few levels above will seem completely impenetrable - and the combat can feel a little wearying at times. It can often fall into that gulf that recent Assassin's Creed games have - where all fights are either a complete cake-walk, or virtually impossible... with very little delta in between. Most Bosses are actually pretty fun to fight, but there are a few that tend to show up the game's slight inconsistency with its core concepts too. Kratos has a parry and dodge, which are balanced such that doing so is supposed to "interrupt" enemy attacks, but certain bosses seem immune to these effects in ways they shouldn't be - and haven't been balanced for. One boss in particular - The Maven -I recall having a particularly withering triple attack, where even parrying the first one simply leaves Kratos open to the next two. There is also a "shield bash" interrupt - designed to be used on enemies who display a blue circle... but there is little consistency to when this appears, and often times, it will happen when the enemy is fairly far from the player. As a result, doing exactly what the game tells you to do - use the shield-bash - will see Kratos run towards the enemy, but fail to get there in time, resulting in him actively running into the attack, and taking more damage. Now, I will say - the overall read of this review probably comes off far more negative that the actual experience of the game was. The reason is much the same reason why the visuals of Ragnarok did not blow me away in they way they probably should have - namely the previous game. There is A lot to love in the gameplay of Ragnarok, a lot of which I've not really touched on in any depth here, and the reason is, almost all of that is inherited from God of War 2018. The fact is, Ragnarok is mostly very good, with a few let downs, but all those let downs are also almost all the additions made post-God of War 2018. God of War 2018 had pretty excellent gameplay, combat and loop. Ragnarok inherits all of that good stuff, and where it keeps it mostly unchanged, it remains excellent, but where it changes it, it is generally not for the better. As such, this review can tend to read like a list of complaints - because those complaints are also the parts that are new, and need to be discussed. All the good elements - of which there are a great many - are known quantities. In the end, Ragnarok is a good narrative sequel to a great narrative game. It is an interesting continuation of very good gameplay... but it just doesn't quite know where to go, from the God of War 2018. That game did things very well, with a few minor drawbacks. In Ragnarok, the developer clearly is aware of those minor drawbacks, corrects them... but in trying to "up the ante" they introduce a bunch of additional elements, all of which are good - or at least interesting - avenues to explore, but none of which really feel additive in the final product. In the end, they were probably stuck between a rock and a hard place. To add nothing, would be seen as a let down, but because God of War 2018 worked so well, and was such a tightly wound, well balanced and singular game, any change, even a good intentioned one, has a tendency to unravel that tightness a little... ...and doing so in too many areas, simply results in a game that has all the good elements of its predecessor, but just doesn't quite hold together as tightly. It's a very good game - and in many places, a great game... but it's just not quite the game its predecessor was. When it is at its best, it is when it sticks to what God of War 2018 did best. When it deviates, it never falls over... ...but it does stumble more often than it should. The Ranking: God of War: Ragnarok is not the game God of War 2018 was. It has elements that are as good as it, and occasional elements that are superior (mostly named Odin,) but it while it is still a good game, it introduces issues God of War as a franchise never suffered from before - most notably, flab, and packing. It's probably abundantly clear from the above review, that God of War: Ragnarok is not touching God of War 2018 in terms of placement, but the more interesting ponder I had was with the next God of War game down the list - God of War II. The fact is, I think the Norse version of God of War IS superior to his Greek outings. Kratos was an uninteresting character in those games - stand out only in that he was curiously unlikable, at a time when likeable protagonists were the most in-vogue, and the games, while excellent, are of course, much older, so don't come close to competing on the graphical front. They are, though, let's not kid ourselves, no only different generations of game - they are virtually different genres. God of War II is a PS2 3D brawler, Ragnarok is a PS5 Narrative Action RPG - so really, the comparison is more of a loose "franchise entry" one, than a pure, 1-2-1 comparison of elements. The argument essentially becomes: "does the best of the old God of War games merit higher placement than the lesser of the new ones?" I thought hard, but in the end, I think the answer is yes. While God of War: Ragnarok obviously is more impressive now, I'm not sure it's more impressive than God of War II was at the end of the PS2 life-cycle. Not to mention, I think within their genre's God of War II is the winner... it is a better example of the 3D Brawler, than Ragnarok is of the Action RPG hybrid. I do not, however, think it is a resounding win - both games are quite evenly matched in my head, so I looked at the games immediately below God of War II. Frankly, as much as I like Matterfall and Darksiders, I think Ragnarok has to place higher than both... ...and that cement's its place on the list! So there we have it folks! Thanks to @JoesusHCrust for putting in a request! 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! 12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visighost Posted December 7, 2022 Share Posted December 7, 2022 As always, thanks for writing those - always pleasure to read, especially since our opinions usually appear to line up! Random thoughts: -I recall Unravel having some pro-union, working class type back story as well, but that might have been me overthinking. I agree it is a gorgeous game, one I recommend to everyone. That being said, I haven’t found anyone to try and challenge the sequel’s platinum with me (i.e. the kids aren’t into it), but it certainly looks just as good! -Albedo is just one up from the bottom of my list (occupied by Zeus Quest). I don’t even recall all that much of it, except a weird irritation when I see its name… I think I might have blocked it off due to PTSD. -I tried not to read too much of your comments on Tunic as I want to go in blind, but happy you enjoyed it! Looking forward to your rankings! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman_Spinksy1 Posted December 7, 2022 Share Posted December 7, 2022 I really enjoyed the read on Ragnarok. So much more in depth than my review but I agree 100% with everything you say. A brilliant game just not mind blowing the whole way through and failed to live up to 2018 as something new and fresh 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBloodmoney Posted December 7, 2022 Author Share Posted December 7, 2022 3 minutes ago, visighost said: As always, thanks for writing those - always pleasure to read, especially since our opinions usually appear to line up! Thanks dude! 3 minutes ago, visighost said: Random thoughts: -I recall Unravel having some pro-union, working class type back story as well, but that might have been me overthinking. I agree it is a gorgeous game, one I recommend to everyone. That being said, I haven’t found anyone to try and challenge the sequel’s platinum with me (i.e. the kids aren’t into it), but it certainly looks just as good! Yeah - odd one with Unravel 2 - I was totally up for it, but for whatever reason, MsBloodmoney wasn’t much enamoured of the first one, and with it being co-op, I ended up kind of side-lining it as a result… …a pity, but with co-op focussed games, you really need both people to be enthusiastic, or it could end up being a chore! 3 minutes ago, visighost said: -Albedo is just one up from the bottom of my list (occupied by Zeus Quest). I don’t even recall all that much of it, except a weird irritation when I see its name… I think I might have blocked it off due to PTSD. Ha - man, a part of me really wants to defend Albedo, since I really do like some of the things it was aiming to do… but good lord, did it miss the mark on a lot of them! ? 3 minutes ago, visighost said: -I tried not to read too much of your comments on Tunic as I want to go in blind, but happy you enjoyed it! Oh - definitely go in blind if it’s already a game in your crosshairs - it’s a hell of a game, and I definitely benefitted from knowing nothing when I played it! 3 minutes ago, Hitman_Spinksy1 said: I really enjoyed the read on Ragnarok. So much more in depth than my review but I agree 100% with everything you say. A brilliant game just not mind blowing the whole way through and failed to live up to 2018 as something new and fresh Cheers dude! Yeah, still a fantastic game, of course, but just not quite able to catch lightning in a bottle a second time around! That’s a tall order though - and I still cannot say enough good things about those Odin, Mimir and Freya performances! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post CelestialRequiem Posted December 7, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted December 7, 2022 (edited) A white label company was my prior employer, and we leased some of our artists for Ragnarok. Can't claim exactly which piece or models we worked on as I was only overseeing various imagery toward the tailed of its development. Technically impressive. Not much interest in the game on a personal level, but professionally, SSM was very kind toward our team. Before my departure, there was no doubt that we would be contracted again for their next thing, whatever that may be. My involvement was minimal and brief, for full transparency. ...Still going on my résumé though, lol. Edited December 8, 2022 by CelestialRequiem White, not "while", you fucking dope. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serrated-banner9 Posted December 8, 2022 Share Posted December 8, 2022 18 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said: Knack Summary: Released in 2013 as a lunch game for the PS4, 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! i didn't know Knack was a game the ps4 had for lunch, i thought it was just a mediocre launch title joking aside i notimate never ending nightmares because it has 4 trophies lol https://psnprofiles.com/trophies/4691-neverending-nightmares/DrBloodmoney 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zizimonster Posted December 8, 2022 Share Posted December 8, 2022 5 minutes ago, serrated-banner9 said: i didn't know Knack was a game the ps4 had for lunch The PS4 can have gears for breakfast, then. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kopite Posted December 8, 2022 Share Posted December 8, 2022 On 11/10/2022 at 11:34 AM, DrBloodmoney said: Overall, Lovers in a Dangerous Spacetime is a smart, fun, well put together and endlessly charming little co-op chaos simulator, that has settings for all levels, caters to all combinations of players, and has entertainment for all, without wearing out its welcome. Think that is an extremely reasonable assessment of the game. ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBloodmoney Posted December 8, 2022 Author Share Posted December 8, 2022 55 minutes ago, serrated-banner9 said: i didn't know Knack was a game the ps4 had for lunch, i thought it was just a mediocre launch title ? Well, there's always going to be some spelling errors in these - but that is a good one. The perils of writing in batches of this size, is the forum software won't let you edit it afterwards. 55 minutes ago, serrated-banner9 said: i notimate never ending nightmares because it has 4 trophies lol https://psnprofiles.com/trophies/4691-neverending-nightmares/DrBloodmoney Already on the list - at current Number 287, reviewed in Batch 15. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBloodmoney Posted December 19, 2022 Author Share Posted December 19, 2022 With The Entropy Centre now S-Ranked, and no more possible S-Ranks feasible before the December 20th cut-off, The Super Scientific Awards are free and clear to be completed! Now the hard part... ...actually doing it! ? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serrated-banner9 Posted December 19, 2022 Share Posted December 19, 2022 2 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said: With The Entropy Centre now S-Ranked, and no more possible S-Ranks feasible before the December 20th cut-off, The Super Scientific Awards are free and clear to be completed! unless you speedrun a short game like @Cassylvania Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now