Breakingthegreen Posted April 28, 2023 Share Posted April 28, 2023 25 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said: I've genuinely get to see a good argument as to why Sly 4 was bad, that wouldn't, be default, apply doubly so so Sly 3, and triple so to Sly 2, TBH! I think it's mostly tone, with some fans talking about how much darker the original trilogy. But I've always viewed them as much goofier affairs than other people, their were dark moments yes, but that would be true of 4 as well in my eyes. One thing in number four I did dislike was how the ending treated Carmella, she got captured after a really gross scene then was the damsel in distress, but that doesn't get mentioned as much for reasons that I can only assume. 7 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said: The strong, black outline on characters gives a cell-shaded look, in much the way early "cell-shaded" games did, but here, it feels wholly stylistic and a plus, as opposed to the "by-necessity" nature that some early cell-shaded games tended to feel. Wanna see a non Cell-shaded Sly jumpscare? Spoiler 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeanolt Posted April 28, 2023 Share Posted April 28, 2023 (edited) I'm glad you enjoyed Two Point Campus! I played TP Hospital a few years ago and really liked it, the charm the series have is unmatched if we talk about this specific genre of games (is it called "management"? "simulation"), so I'm going to try Campus eventually. It's the kind of game that puts you on the edge to try other similar games, and ending up spending hours and hours without noticing. Since you didn't play Hospital, I'd say you're missing those Sonic decorations and need to catch up right now? Edited April 28, 2023 by Jeanoltt 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBloodmoney Posted April 28, 2023 Author Share Posted April 28, 2023 2 hours ago, Jeanoltt said: I'm glad you enjoyed Two Point Campus! I played TP Hospital a few years ago and really liked it, the charm the series have is unmatched if we talk about this specific genre of games (is it called "management"? "simulation"), so I'm going to try Campus eventually. It's the kind of game that puts you on the edge to try other similar games, and ending up spending hours and hours without noticing. Since you didn't play Hospital, I'd say you're missing those Sonic decorations and need to catch up right now? Thanks! Yeah, I did like Campus - I think that review was definitely one where it can come off as maybe more negative than it should, simply because I played Cities Skylines (again!) so recently - and to my mind, Cities is THE management sim, and all others are pretenders to the throne to some extent! ? Campus’s issues did stick out to me a bit more in that light… but I must admit, I’m still kind of looking forward to trying out Two Point Hospital - so that really says all it needs to about whether I’d still broadly recommend Two Point Campus! (Also, if you dig management sims, and haven’t tried out Cities yet - do yourself a favour, as it’s the absolute business! ??) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grayhammmer Posted May 6, 2023 Share Posted May 6, 2023 Hey Doc, I just saw you comment on a post about underloved platinums, and the only one you hadn't analyzed yet was Chime Sharp. I'm curious as to what it's like, so I'll put in a request for it and give you a reason to talk about it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBloodmoney Posted May 6, 2023 Author Share Posted May 6, 2023 17 hours ago, grayhammmer said: Hey Doc, I just saw you comment on a post about underloved platinums, and the only one you hadn't analyzed yet was Chime Sharp. I'm curious as to what it's like, so I'll put in a request for it and give you a reason to talk about it. Good point - that's one of the last of my "yo, this is under-appreciated" top 10 still not reviewed... ...added to the Priority List, with your name! ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slava Posted May 9, 2023 Share Posted May 9, 2023 (edited) Okay, I've finally read all five Sly reviews. One clear pattern I noticed is the difference between the 3D mascot platformer trilogies that changed the formula in their first sequel (which didn't work well) and the ones that kept it and focused on gradual improvements. I'd say Jak is in the first group, and Crash, Spyro, and Ratchet are in the second group. Jak's first game probably remains the strongest of the 3 (IMO at this point in time), while Crash, Spyro, and Ratchet all kept improving, so the first iteration of each became the weakest. According to science, Sly joins Jak's group, it looks like. Just like his long-eared friend, Sly peaked at his debut, made an unsuccessful attempt to change the formula, albeit not as radically, and spent the 3rd game fixing what can be fixed as the result. Interesting stuff, although it may sound as a sad lesson - "don't try to risk and experiment". Or maybe, if you narrow it down to the two cases like Jak and Sly - "Don't try to copy GTA's features randomly" ?. Of course, I still have to play Sly myself, but this is how I'll see it until then. Another pattern I noticed while reading about Sly's 4th installment - the fact that most of these 3D platformers tend to go towards time travel eventually ?. Crash did it in Warped, Ratchet - in A Crack in Time, Jak - in Jak 2, Sly - in Thieves in Time. Spyro seemingly escaped this trend, at least until the franchise changed the developer. I have no idea what the post-Insomniac games were about. Usually, the time travel brings the possibility of using cool new settings. As you can expect from the premise, Crash leaves his familiar tropical islands, ancient ruins, and futuristic labs to explore Egyptian tombs and medieval castles, meanwhile, his sister decides to ride a tiger on the Great Wall of China while it's being built. Time travel fits platformers well. Although other series used it differently: in Jak, it's a plot point that explains the radical change, in Ratchet, it's mostly used in the gameplay itself. Or they just don't need it, since a character like Spyro travels to interesting and unique looking worlds through portals anyway. One thing I wanted to ask, since Mario has been mentioned here, what's your Mario ranking or tierlist? And how many of them have you played? If you've talked about that, you can just give me a link to the post. I guess, Sunshine would be somewhere at the bottom of the tierlist based on what I read ?. Edited May 9, 2023 by Slava 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBloodmoney Posted May 9, 2023 Author Share Posted May 9, 2023 (edited) Quote One thing I wanted to ask, since Mario has been mentioned here, what's your Mario ranking or tierlist? And how many of them have you played? If you've talked about that, you can just give me a link to the post. I guess, Sunshine would be somewhere at the bottom of the tierlist based on what I read . Oh God, a Mario tier list would be insane if it covered everything, right? There has to be over a hundred Mario games, if you started including all the offshoots - the Karts and Parties and Tennises and Golfs and whatnots! TBH, I couldn't even begin to approach something like that (and am pretty unqualified given that I've touched a lot of them, but not finished even close to half of the ones I've played.) Of the ones I spent enough time to be relatively sure of myself though, I guess it'd look something like: Super Mario World Mario Maker Super Mario Bros 3 Mario Paint Paper Mario Dr Mario Mario Galaxy 2 Mario Galaxy Mario RPG Legend of the Seven Stars Super Mario Bros 2 (Doki Doki Panic) Super Mario Land Yoshi's Island Super Mario Bros New Super Mario Bros Mario 64 Mario Run Mario Sunshine Mario is Missing ... ...but there's probably like 20 games I played and I'm not remembering.... as well as like 1,000 that I haven't played ? Edited May 9, 2023 by DrBloodmoney 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kopite Posted May 9, 2023 Share Posted May 9, 2023 56 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said: Oh God, a Mario tier list would be insane if it covered everything, right? There has to be over a hundred Mario games, if you started including all the offshoots - the Karts and Parties and Tennises and Golfs and whatnots! TBH, I couldn't even begin to approach something like that (and am pretty unqualified given that I've touched a lot of them, but not finished even close to half of the ones I've played.) Of the ones I spent enough time to be relatively sure of myself though, I guess it'd look something like: Super Mario World Mario Maker Super Mario Bros 3 Mario Paint Paper Mario Dr Mario Mario Galaxy 2 Mario Galaxy Mario RPG Legend of the Seven Stars Super Mario Bros 2 (Doki Doki Panic) Super Mario Land Yoshi's Island Super Mario Bros New Super Mario Bros Mario 64 Mario Run Mario Sunshine Mario is Missing ... ...but there's probably like 20 games I played and I'm not remembering.... as well as like 1,000 that I haven't played ? You mean you haven't played...... Super Mario Galaxy Run 64 - The Legend of the Sunshine Paper Dr. Maker?! How dare you! lol Surely you must have played...... Yoshi's Paint Island - Mario Kart Land is Missing ~ Doki Doki Panic!!! C'mon Doc! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBloodmoney Posted May 9, 2023 Author Share Posted May 9, 2023 28 minutes ago, The_Kopite said: You mean you haven't played...... Super Mario Galaxy Run 64 - The Legend of the Sunshine Paper Dr. Maker?! How dare you! lol Surely you must have played...... Yoshi's Paint Island - Mario Kart Land is Missing ~ Doki Doki Panic!!! C'mon Doc! You know “Yoshi’s Paint Island” actually sounds so much like a real game, I’m surprised it hasn’t been one! ? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breakingthegreen Posted May 9, 2023 Share Posted May 9, 2023 8 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said: You know “Yoshi’s Paint Island” actually sounds so much like a real game, I’m surprised it hasn’t been one! Paper mario has already nabbed Paint: Checking nintendo franchises seem to have a whole lot of arts and crafts materials themed games (Paper) Mario: Paint Stickers Oragami Kirby: Yarn Modelling Clay Yoshi: Wool (x2) General Craft Chibi Robo Photo Craft Labo: Cardboard 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBloodmoney Posted May 9, 2023 Author Share Posted May 9, 2023 (edited) 15 minutes ago, breakingthegreen said: Checking nintendo franchises seem to have a whole lot of arts and crafts materials themed games Not to mention, of course, the mack daddy of them all: Mario Paint itself.... ...both my first electronic art package, and my first electronic music creator, in one outrageously awesome SNES game! I still remember the girl who used to child-mind me and my sister teaching me the fundamentals of a “twelve bar blues” structure, using those little Mario-heads on the stave in that music creator… …who says videogames didn’t teach us right!? ? Edited May 9, 2023 by DrBloodmoney 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post DrBloodmoney Posted May 15, 2023 Author Popular Post Share Posted May 15, 2023 (edited) !!SCIENCE UPDATE!! The next (not) randomly selected games to be submitted for scientific analysis shall be: New Season: A Letter to the Future A Monster's Expedition Through Puzzling Exhibitions The Last of Us: Part II That's right - no Legacy games this batch, and a shorter batch (at least in terms of games)... ...with good reason. My having not S-Ranked The Last of Us: Part II, and it's subsequent ineligibility for Ranking has been a running joke on this thread since there has been a thread for the joke to run on... ... so now that it's S-Ranked, and I've finally run out of excuses not to do it (and potentially invite the litany of controversy that surrounds it into my house! ?) ... ... I reckon it'll probably be a longer one, and needs a little space! As such, I'm going to do a truncated batch, just to catch up the new S-Ranks, and will return to 5-game batches after this one is done. 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! Edited May 15, 2023 by DrBloodmoney 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum_Vice Posted May 15, 2023 Share Posted May 15, 2023 If I was to pick three games from your not-yet-reviewed pile, I'd literally go with these three. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkenEngineer Posted May 15, 2023 Share Posted May 15, 2023 Very much looking forward to your coverage of TLoU2! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post DrBloodmoney Posted May 16, 2023 Author Popular Post Share Posted May 16, 2023 NEW SCIENTIFIC RESULTS ARE IN! Hello Science-Jakes and Science-Amys, as promised (and in some cases requested), here are the latest results of our great scientific endeavour! Season: A Letter to the Future Summary: An unusual, bicycling and scrapbooking exploratory game from Scavengers Studios, (and a hard left turn from their previous game - 2018's Free-to-Play, online Battle-Royale, The Darwin Project,) Season: A Letter to the Future sees the player take control of an unnamed, detached but curious young woman from an isolated village who, upon learning that the world she inhabits in on the cusp of a great change, endeavours to set out and document life in the greater valley surrounding her village for posterity, before that life is changed forever by the "changing of the season"... in the form of a dam breaking, flooding the valley. The world in which Season takes place is - as is made clear right from the outset, wherein the woman takes part in the ritualistic creation of a talisman with her mother - distinctly different from ours. There is some indication that the world is actually our, or some version of ours, but far in the future - after the "Age of Modernity" (our time?) has ended long ago; a great, lengthly and ultimately futile war has been fought; and the world has entered a period of relative tranquil... ... however, there are some specific flights of fancy that make it distinct from the world as we know it. This is a world where "memory" is not simply a conceptual thing, but a material one. "Memories" can be used and "traded" in a sort of karmic way, (the creation of the talisman of protection given to the player character is done by the "giving" of memories - in this case, from her mother - which imbues the talisman with its powers, at the cost of the memory itself,) and throughout the game, it becomes clear that the memories of past events are not simply something retained by people, but by places and things. There are natural elements - in the soil and in the plants, that retain memories of the past, independent of the people, and this is actually used to construct the metaphor, and therefore the central thesis of the narrative: That memory can be a blessing... and a burden. The valley is so steeped in memories of the past, and in the natural elements that retain and encourage the retention of memories, that it almost keeps the people living there in a state of inertia. Some factions of people, in fact, are deliberately mining these natural elements, trying to rid the valley of the burden of its memories, in order to allow it to move forwards, while other characters cling to their memories of the past - both for comfort, and in a way that can be detrimental to their present lives, and ability to move forward. By having the central gameplay mechanic of the game be both discovering the details of the valley life, and documenting them, the player is actively drawn into this debate over the benefits and burdens of memory, and the selection of what is best to remember, and what isn't. The main character lives in a village that is somewhat removed from the passage of these seasons - it seems relatively safe from the coming changes, sitting high above the valley, and not in danger from the coming flood, however, her village is also - likely as a result of being somewhat removed from the dangers of the seasonal changes, and as a result, being rather insular and removed from the larger world - rather obsessed with memory. They lament the changing of the seasons, and obsess over them, even while feeling detached from them. This is actually used as an interesting - yet a little messy and mis-handled - point: the idea that the less affected someone is by a large event, they might be more prone to curiosity about it, but become more detached from the understanding of its impact. Gameplay-wise, Season is fairly simple - the player explores the valley, photographs its various areas, records whatever snippets of it, and of life within it that the player sees fit, and enters them into slowly populating pages in the scrapbook. As they travel around, they are simultaneously learning about life within the valley, and the different forces that have left their influence on the current season... but even as they learn, they are also making choices about which elements to record for the future generations. Each area has a single double-sided page to be filled, and there is not a huge amount of available space. the player cannot record everything - they have to choose which elements they think are important, and focus on them. This idea of choosing what to remember - and what to forget - is the real theme of the whole game. The main character is a true "outside observer". She is documenting a place and people she has never really been connected to, outside of some snippets of information... and so is learning of a time and place, right on the cusp of it ending. Her "outsider" status helps us as the player - of course - since we are learning about this world alongside here, but more than that, it allows her to be "us" when encountering people in the valley. Various characters are encountered throughout - and each has a somewhat different angle to view this relationship between memory, pain and loss. An artist who feels she has wasted her life making meaningless art... yet is fascinated with the idea that her work - however dismissive she is of it - might be retained beyond the Season and hand in a museum as a result of the player's scrapbook. A widow who must leave the valley with her young son, and has to choose which artefacts of her life to bring with her - the things that remind her of her youth, or her late husband, or that might be most treasured by her son. Her child, who remembers his father mostly as an already fading memory, worried that he will not be able to hold onto his memory once he is removed from the places those memories live. A hippie monk, who never really completed his training, but is the last of his line left, and the only one who remembers that he might actually be a fraud. An organisation called the Grey Hands, who usher in progress, and want to cleanse the valley of painful memories, and are actually ushering in the new season, by purposefully blowing a crumbing dam - trying to create order from the chaos, by controlling the timing of the seasonal change. Each of these characters is used to look at the ways in which memory can be both a burden, and a blessing - and that leads to the final encounter. It becomes apparent during the story, that in this world, people's memories are actually wiped away with the renewal of the season... and this will affect the player character, due to some actions she has taken. She is no longer the "outsider"... she now has skin in the game. The scrapbook becomes something more interesting, as it is, therefore, the only "memories" the main character will actually retain once she is "wiped" of her memories... and so the specific elements of this world the player chooses to retain will form her entire personality post-season change. Some mental health issues - specifically PTSD and Post-Trauma issues - are treated - at the most basic level - by trying to allow the person to be able to remember the traumatic event, without re-living it. To remember the event, but not to carry the immediate and the emotional trauma of it with that memory. In some sense, that is exactly the thesis of the game - that emotional memories can be a burden as well as a blessing, and being able to be selective about what we choose to remember of something is not just about rose-tinting the past, but is a necessary part of moving forward into a future. That is an interesting avenue for the narrative of the game, and I think it is moderately successful, in the over-all, at approaching these issues, and having the player think about them... ...but not wholly. There are good elements here. Visually, the game is gorgeous. The village, the road to the Valley, the Valley itself - they are all distinct and interesting areas to explore, and filled with little details and interesting things to see, and to document. Because the game is fairly meditative, and the pace of exploration is entirely on the player, there is a really successful leaning in to the serene elements of the game. The scrapbooking element works well too - photos can be taken, sounds recorded, and notes placed on the pages, and care has been taken to allow the player to really "beautify" the scrapbook pages as they see fit. The game doesn't force the player's hand in terms of what to record - some elements are more "poignant" than other - and fill the "scrapbook meter" faster than others, but virtually every photo taken will fill it up, and there is a genuinely soothing element to both filling out the scrapbook, and to the simple actuations of exploring on the bicycle. Riding the bicycle around is fun and satisfying - the game uses really good haptic and force-feedback on the PS5 controller, making the rhythmic cycling feel really good, with the pedals (left on L2 and right on R2) feel correct, putting extra effort required on inclines, and loosening on declines etc. Because the valley is filled with things to see, and distinct, interesting, sometimes magical areas, simply exploring around is very satisfying, and the player WANTS to do it - if only to see the great, cell-shaded, Studio Ghibli-inspired designs of the place... and the characters within. This, however, leads to some of the negatives. The characters the player encounters, while interesting visually, and having interesting concepts around their individual stories... are not always particularly interesting to actually listen to. This is partly down to the writing, and partly down to the voice performances. The writing is often either too on-the-nose, hammering home the point it is trying to make too bluntly, or overly tangential and flowery, to the point of feeling like it is trying too hard to sound poetic. The effect is that characters somehow feel both over, and under-written at different times. That gets coupled with vocal performances that feel like they are taking their direction from the overall tone of the gameplay, and not the narrative. Characters who are - in the narrative - being forced to abandon their lives and their homes, and move on, have an oddly languid and unemotional delivery of lines, at a time when those characters should, by rights, be at the most emotional and heightened. This also combines with a bit of a mismatch between the exploratory elements of the curious and interesting world, and the developers reticence to allow the player to interpret anything. The game seems to take inspiration, in its world-building and lore, from more esoteric games - the Ico's, the Shadow of the Colossuses, Dear Esther's etc... however, what makes those games really curious and successful, is that a world is presented to the player, but little is directly explained to them. They are free to interpret elements and draw their own conclusions, which makes those curious worlds feel all the more real. There is a feeling on the player's part, that the dev has an explanation for things, but won't tell them. The world feels fully fledged, but not explained. This concept makes a lot of sense in a game where the player is choosing which elements they deem most "important" and is selecting what to document - and the free-form elements of the scrap-booking lean into that too... ...but the issue is that the main character seems drawn more from a different sort of game. Something like a Life is Strange. She comments on things a lot. She essentially tells the player what conclusions to draw when they find things, and so tends to lessen the awe and the wonder. A game that Season reminded me of on occasion - primarily due to the visual palate and the meditative nature of exploring it - was Proteus. However, Proteus has a sense of wonder involved, because nothing is explained to the player. They are presented with a world, and with things happening, and they interpret them themselves. That makes the narrative more universal, as the player is able to "map" it onto their own experiences, and connect to it. With Season: A Letter to the Future though, the player is pretty much told what conclusions to draw... which means that while it is still an interesting story, it doesn't really make sense for the player to have agency in what to document, since they are being specifically guided as to what is more or less important in any given situation or location. Audio is not super interesting here. The one real high point is the foley work - the ambient sounds of the valley sound really good, and really help to set the scene, and the sounds of the character navigating on her bicycle sound just right, and are very well done. The music is fine - it's a gentle, ambient score, and never detracts, but it also never really stands out... and that's a shame, because in this kind of game, where the pace is up to the player, and there is ample visual stimulation, a good score can be very additive, and can really flourish. Here, it's just okay, and not particularly noteworthy. Vocal performances though, as intimated above, are the real let down. The voice work is simply not there. The characters all talk in a maudlin, detached, rather docile tone, and while that might make sense for SOME characters, because it applies to all of them, it starts to drain any real emotional connect to the material. The writing is not always there, but better vocal performances would clearly have gone some way to papering over those cracks, but here, they only highlight them. Overall Season: A Letter to the Future is, unfortunately, something of a disappointment. It's a game that has an interesting and unique premise, some curious gameplay mechanics that do work, and a world that is genuinely interesting to explore... ...but the game trips up and fails to stick the landing on a lot of these elements, by failing to trust the player enough to allow them to interpret the more esoteric elements, and by failing to really capitalise on that world-building with good writing or character performances. It works well enough for the few hours it takes to complete - and the positives do outweigh the negatives for that time, however, unlike a lot of similar games, there is really very little scope for repeat play here, as by the time the player has reached the end, they will have seen mostly everything it has to offer, and will have had the narrative so specifically and single-sidedly explained, that the game loses its core, overriding point. It's a game that wants to make an interesting point: that each person should choose what is important to remember... ....but then spends that whole time grabbing the player by the shoulders, pointing at things and shouting "REMEMBER THAT!" The Ranking: Season: A Letter to the Future ended up being one of the easiest games I've ever ranked, because the placement is boxed into a corner already! I already mentioned Proteus - that curious, interesting little exploration game for the PS3, and while Season: A Letter to the Future certainly does look nicer, and has more gameplay to it, fundamentally, both those games are aiming to elicit a similar feeling in the player, and I think Proteus is much more successful, and therefore, has to rank higher. However, the game directly below Proteus on the current list - Ether One - is itself an interesting exploratory game, and one with an interesting premise too... ...but I think overall - partly owing to the technical issues Ether One has on console, and partly due to the fumbling of some narrative elements in Ether One, which drag it down a little, even as compared to Season: A Letter to the Future - I think Season: A Letter to the Future, despite its own flaws, still has to rank above it. That means that Season: A Letter to the Future finds its spot! A Monster's Expedition Through Puzzling Exhibitions Summary: A charming puzzle game from Draknek, developers of A Good Snowman is Hard to Find, and serving as something of a pseudo-sequel to that game, featuring, as it does, the same gentle, puzzle-solving monster as the player character (as well as featuring the same snowmen for hugging as the optional puzzle rewards,) A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions is one of those games that really shows what a game can do with a simple premise, when good puzzle designers sink their teeth in to it. The gameplay features a relatively simple concept - the eponymous monster visits the Museum of Humans - an archipelago of little islands, many of which feature exhibits showing various artefacts of humans, and the (usually amusingly incorrect) explanations of what they are - but actually traversing through this Exhibition is... well... puzzling.The monster needs to cross from one island to another as he moves through the exhibits, and doing so requires him to knock down trees, roll or flip them over and manoeuvre them around, in order to create a bridge (or a raft) to walk (or sail) to the next island. Trees can be two or one "square" long (indeed, the entire game is designed on a massive, single grid, complete with X-Y Co-ordinates visible for each island,) and logs either roll to the next interfering object (if pushed width-wise,) or "flip" up on their end and over, moving by a single square (if pushed long-wise.) It's a super simple concept (and, indeed, one that has formed the backbone of a lot of puzzle games, notably things like Cuboid, or Steven's Sausage Roll,) but, like most good puzzle concepts, it is one that is so fundamental and basic, that it allows for a huge amount of variation in the actual puzzle design. There are some specific nuances in play - for example, a tree cannot be "flipped" from its starting position, as the stump left will cause the monster to jump on to the log rather than push it - two logs laid in the same plane together will form a tied "raft", or a tree can only knock another tree over if it has already been pushed once to "loosen" it... ...but these additional concepts are introduced slowly as the player progresses, and considering the game has a huge number of possible paths, shortcuts, alternative routes and secret solutions, it's genuinely surprising just how well the developer manages to properly drip-feed these increasing levels of nuance and new concepts to the player. While the game looks, initially, to be quite a small, simple one, it is also of note just how much game there is in A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions. The game has somewhere in the region of 700 islands, and while a few of these are simply "spacing" islands, with no real puzzle involved in them as a singular entity, there is still something in the region of 400-500 individual, island-specific puzzles to be solved. This potion of the game - the "main path" as it were, is great. The puzzles are clever and varied - often challenging, but never truly fiendish, and pitched perfectly over the course of the game, in terms of increasing, slow-staggered challenge increase. Each one is satisfying to solve, and each one slowly teaches new, specific techniques, forcing the player to familiarise themselves with new concepts and tricks to look out for, before layering them smartly, and working towards a final section where they have the full breadth of techniques under their belt, and are solving quite difficult puzzles. These island-specific puzzles are particularly smart in how they layer information. Initially, it can feel like the actual parameters of the puzzles are difficult to define - exactly where the player is supposed to be creating a bridge or a raft can be difficult to discern, since the "fog-of-war" effect clouds the visibility of surrounding, un-walked islands, however, the game does do a pretty good job of revealing just enough information on the adjoining islands, to show the player roughly what they should be aiming for. There is also a neat "hint" mechanic, whereby the player can hold a button, and see what the "main-path" final position of the logs should look like, giving them the ability to at least see what they should be aiming for, should they really be at a loss. The game at this point is a relatively challenging, but sedate and perfectly pitched one. The issue with the game, however, comes once the Monster has made it through this lengthly "main path", seen credits, and is dropped back into the Museum, with the goal of solving the optional additional puzzles - to access the remaining undiscovered islands, and find the hidden collectible - in this case, "friends" in the form of snowmen. These optional puzzles are, quite frankly, some of the most obtuse and difficult ones I have encountered in games! The issue is, that unlike the main puzzles, they almost all involve moving logs between islands. Islands in this game can be "reset" at any point. This immediately "respawns" all trees on that island. In the main game, this is used primarily as a "start over" mechanic - it is there to let the player have another go a the puzzle. However, in these later puzzles, it serves as a new mechanic - as logs on an island, but not native to that island, don't reset. As such, the solutions to a lot of these puzzles involve moving a log from one island, onto another island, resetting that second island, then moving that log to ANOTHER island, resetting THAT island, then returning to the first island... and, well, you get the picture. The problem is that aside from the rough indication of an undiscovered island's broad direction (based on the lack of cleared "fog of war", and a very rough "hint" indication of a broad area to consider revisiting... there is no indication of what these puzzles are. There is not really any kind of guidance as to where the puzzle resides, where to start it, or what the final "goal" of it is. Because some involve multiple resets and manipulations of multiple islands multiple times, I struggle to imagine anyone managing to solve them all, without either simply stumbling into half a solution, (enough to see there is something there, and pick up a loose trail,)... or getting hints as to which island they need to start on, and which island they are trying to get to. In my case, it was generally the latter. I enjoy puzzle games, and am relatively good at them... however, something that does irk me, is when puzzle games fail to adequately set the parameters of a puzzle, to the extent that the player is reliant on simply stumbling into them via perseverance and/or blind luck. The curious thing about A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions, is that while the "main path" of the game never once relies on this kind of design in its puzzles, in the optional, post-game, it almost exclusively relies on it. The specific issue with this game is, that the optional puzzles generally involve "breaking" the original solutions to the islands. In order to stumble upon one of the optional puzzles, or try something out, the player will need to destroy the solutions they have already created... and if they then fail to solve that puzzle - or were simply wrong about it being a secondary puzzle at all - they will likely have broken their path to other islands, and will often need to repeat the original solutions, just to afford themselves the ability to go ant try somewhere else. This means that the post-game tends to feel like busy-work: the player is constantly re-doing solutions they already did, as a matter of course. While there was some fun to be had early on in the post-game, simply stumbling around, trying things, as there are so many optional puzzles still unsolved, that happening into one is still possible, even a patient player like myself was soon simply forced to concede that looking up hints as to which island to begin at least looking for puzzle was a virtual necessity. That is, of course, problematic, because the issue with looking on the internet for partial help, it's difficult to avoid accidentally seeing the full solution... so multiple times I found myself coyly trying to half-read, or half-look - to establish the location of a puzzle, without accidentally seeing the solution to it. In some ways, A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions actually reminded me of another puzzle game I played relatively recently - Manifold Garden. Both have brilliant, very smart and very well pitched challenges in their main game, but both house "secret" optional solutions that are SO esoteric and obtuse, as to smash their own difficulty gradient to smithereens... and which I would wager the vast, vast majority of players end up simply googling. I'm in two minds as to which of those two games ends up being the more egregious example - Manifold Garden has a single, long-form, game-spanning 0% run, whereas A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions has 60 brutal, individual esoteric solutions, but the end result (and frustration) is similar. In the end, I'd probably argue A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions is the lesser evil - after all, at least some of these 60 optional solutions can be reasonably worked out by the average player (more so towards the end of the challenge, as once there are fewer undiscovered islands, it becomes more simple to evaluate at least where to begin to look for the solutions,)... but neither is particularly welcome. Both, also, could have been made much more palatable by the inclusion of a little more indication of the puzzle parameters. There is nothing wrong with having some very difficult puzzles in a game - in fact, it shows real puzzle-game design skill to mask so many additional, higher-level puzzles disguised within the regular ones - but puzzles are only puzzles if one knows it is there to be solved. The parameters of the puzzle need to be more clearly defined, to allow the player to know they are trying to solve it... and to get satisfaction from solving it. If they are so well hidden, that the player has to simply bang their head against every wall in the area, and stumble into a solution eventually, that is not really satisfying... it's just a relief when it's done. That post-game silliness aside though, A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions is a game with a lot going for it. It is charming as all hell. The monster is a cool, cute looking dude, with his no-face and his backpack, and he moves around nicely, in a jaunty skipping stride that is a tonne of fun. The puzzle concepts and designs are fantastic, and the game looks great - there is a pastel colour palate to the game that has a somewhat iOS iPad flavour, and it looks really nice. The rewards for traversing the main islands - the exhibits - are good too. The descriptions of human items, misinterpreted by "monster archeologists" are often good jokes, and the game is filled with humour that works more often than it doesn't. Describing an stationary bike as "a human-powered laundry hanger, which the human would re-power twice a year by clearing off the laundry, and pedalling furiously for 10 minutes" is the kind of "seagull from The Little Mermaid" style joke most of the exhibits fall into, and they work well - adding incentive to the puzzle solving, without interrupting it. Audio is fine - it's not stand-out, but the breezy, pleasant score is what is needed for this kind of relaxing puzzler, and it works. The sound design around the moving of logs, falling of trees etc is basic, but works fine, and adds without subtracting or becoming grating. Overall, A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions is a pretty damned good puzzle game. It is fun, smart, simple in concept, yet clever in execution, and the main path through the game is fun and challenging without being brutal. It is filled with good humour and relaxing, satisfying puzzling. For the trophy-hungry, I do have to warn though - the final act of the game, in the post-game, optional section - is brutally difficult to the extent of being simply obtuse, and even for a puzzle-game kind of guys, I ended up having no qualms about looking up some help, because even finding the puzzles can be an accidental puzzle in itself... ...and those are nowhere near as fun or satisfying as the deliberate ones! The Ranking: Writing the summary of A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions brought up Manifold Garden, and so that seemed the natural first comparison point. Both games have an issue with the obtusity of their optional content... but I think those issues cancel each-other out for them most part, and it comes down to elements. I think that while there is certainly a lot in A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions, it can't reasonably rank higher than Manifold Garden. There are more puzzles in A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions, for sure, but as good as they are, they aren't as original or individual and Manifold Garden's puzzles are. It also looks nice... but Manifold Garden looks so nice, that it literally won my "Eye Candy" Award for best looking game last year, so it wins that one handily! In the end, Manifold Garden awed me, whereas A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions simply entertained me, so Manifold Garden keeps its spot. The next non-arcade puzzle games down from Manifold Garden are The Last Campfire, Hitman Go, and Shady Part of Me. I had a think about which of those A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions would outrank, and while on pure puzzles, I suspect it would beat all of them, as a complete package, including all elements, I think Shady Part of Me ranks lower, as does Hitman Go... and the closest fight is The Last Campfire. The Last Campfire and A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions have the opposite problems in a way - The Last Campfire is too easy generally, and A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions is too frustrating in the optional content... ...but A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions is pitched very well in the main game. It doesn't look as good as The Last Campfire, but there is a huge amount more of it, and I think on balance it has to come out on top. There's only a handful of games between The Last Campfire and Manifold Garden, but I have trouble seeing A Monster’s Expedition through Puzzling Exhibitions move above Puyo Puyo Tetris... ...so I think it finds its spot just below it! The Last of Us: Part II ☢️☢️SCIENTIFIC NOTE☢️☢️ This one will have spoilers. It pretty much has to. The Last of Us: Part II is not only a game where the narrative is paramount, but it is also (for better or for worse) a game that is still - even 3 years after release - considered "controversial"... for reasons that are wholly narrative in nature. I won't be getting into any real discussion of that "controversy" - I find that debate to be, more often than not, completely asinine... ... but I can't completely ignore the fact that that "controversy" is rooted in the story, and therefore, discussion of the merits of the game have to address that story - at least to the extent of discussing it in a little more depth than I might usually do. I'll keep things as "broad-strokes" as I can, but there are aspects that simply can't not be referenced here, so proceed with some caution if that kind of thing worries you. Summary: I don't think it's a coincidence that the 2020 sequel to 2013's The Last of Us is called "The Last of Us: Part II", and not "The Last of Us 2." Saying "Part II" means something. "Part II" suggests less a new story in a timeline, and more a continuation of the previous story - an expanding, rather than a rebirth and renewal. Uncharted 2 is a second story starring Nathan Drake. The Last of Us: Part II, is the deepening of the story from The Last of Us. Using "Part II" also - particularly appended to a game as renowned and high quality as The Last of Us - evokes a very specific connotation, to a specific film... The Godfather: Part II. I think that's no accident either. In fact, I suspect Naughty Dog knew exactly what they were doing with that evocation, and, in fact, took cues from that filmic work. Structurally, the game works in the same way that film did. Throughout the original Godfather film, we, as an audience are firmly in Michael Corleone's camp. While the relative morality of characters within that world may be suspect, within the "code" of the world in which the characters exist, Michael is the "good guy" whom we root for to succeed. In The Last of Us, we have Joel serving the same purpose. Whether he is morally ambiguous in an absolute sense is unquestionable - in both cases, the characters themselves acknowledge this fact - but within the world that they exist, they are the shining knights. Whatever bad things they do, they are in service of "good" as we see it... ...until the very end. The Godfather is a relatively simple, point-to-point narrative, throughout which we follow Michael and root for him. Over the course of that simple narrative, Michael pushes further and further into "the dark side" doing more and more questionable things, but we as the audience are still pulled along with him. It is only in the very, very final scene, that we are made to see him finally take a step too far from us - when he finally tells a bald-faced lie to the one "pure" character - Kay - and takes his place as the Don, closing the door on Kay... and us. The original Last of Us is also a relatively simple narrative. Indeed, I think it is a brilliant game, and a great story, but what makes it stand out is not the structure or complexity of it, but rather, the quality and care with which it is told. There is nothing groundbreaking in the narrative itself, it is in the way it is told that ground is broken. Like Micheal, Joel is known to have complexities, and grey areas to his character, but we root for him anyways, as even his questionable actions are in service of a subjective "good" so we follow him also, being pulled further and further into the darkness. Even when he makes his final, extremely personal and selfish decision, we are still, largely, on his side. The game also ends with a final scene much like The Godfather did... when Joel finally tells a bald-faced, out-and-out lie to our one "pure" character... and the game smashes to black, in one of the most interesting endings game narratives have presented. In both The Godfather: Part II, and The Last of Us: Part II, the sequel is less a new chapter, and more like the next concentric circle - the next ripple out in the lake, caused by the object dropped in it in the first game. Both continuations add more story, and draw in new characters, but both are firmly rooted, not in telling a new tale, as much as discussing and dissecting the ramifications of, and the complexities of, the original tale. They are not new stories designed for us, as an audience, to fall in love with characters again, but a chance for us to question and examine the love we had for those characters in the originals... and question that myopic perspective, when presented with other perspectives on the same actions. Every monster is, after all, a hero in their own story, and every situation looks the way it does because of the perspective from which it is presented. A hero, viewed from the point of view of his villain, is as much of a villain as his villains were to him. The Last of Us: Part II sheds the sleek, tight narrative structure, and what "black and white", "good guy vs bad guy" dichotomy the original still clung to, and instead, delves into a Rashomon-inspired, "everyone is flawed" discussion of the futile nature of seeing oneself as the hero... ...and simply seeks to show the smallness in insignificance of petty squabbles, when viewed from all angles and all sides. It is a game where everyone wants vengeance, yet no one comes out with a clean conscience or clean hands... and no one is given any solace whatsoever by their own desire for it, or achievement of it. The fractured, less linear and more complex narrative really feeds into the game well. The original Last of Us was, as said, a very well told story - rich, interesting and driven by characters who felt real - but as a pure narrative path, it was relatively simple, and not particularly original. The "post-apocalyptic trip from A to B" and the "two characters forced together, bonding through shared strife" angles are well worn territory in media - from novels to films to games. The way The Last of Us stood out from the crowd narratively was not through originality of premise, but simply through being a very high quality and well told version of a simple, fairly universal tale. The Last of Us: Part II is a little different. While the actual beats of the narrative - when broken down analytically - are not hugely more original or less well-tilled ground, the fact that the game uses a non-linear framework, and deals in "the same beats from different perspectives" territory, means that even what is, on paper, a simple tale of vengeance - of sowing the wind, and reaping the whirlwind - becomes more dynamic and more complex, simply in the telling. Where the original game felt like the player was along for a ride, this time, the player feels like they are being directly involved - and responsible, culpable, and to blame. They are being forced, they are being pushed - at times, they are being tortured or tricked, or toyed with. They have seemingly more - and, at times, less - agency in the characters actions, depending on the desires of the developers, and those developers are therefore given a greater toolset to turn the screws on that player. The structure of the game is such that the player is forced to reckon with the destructive power vengeance, and will inevitably - at different points, depending on the specific player, but eventually nonetheless - be forced to push past the point where they themselves see that destructive power for the poison that it is. Where they want that cycle to stop, before it lets them stop. Just like the characters experience. At the outset of the game, after the initial instigating calamity, the player is - of course - firmly on the side of Ellie. We are Ellie. Abby (the other main character in this two-hander story) is a stranger, and her actions are as incomprehensible as they are despicable at that point. Joel is someone we love, despite whatever we thought of his decisions in the original game. Whether we agreed with them or not, we understood them. We could justify them. Abby is, at that point, no-one - a monster, who accepts help, then bites the hand that fed her in a most brutal and unforgivable way. Over the course of the game though, that point of view is first tested, then bent, then altogether broken. After the initial scene-and-plot setting introductory hours, in which the instigating catalyst is played out, the game settles into a three-day structure. We play, first, 3 days in Seattle as Ellie, pursuing Abby, via her group of WLF (the Seattle paramilitary faction to which she belongs) compadres. While we remain firmly in Ellie's camp during this time, and with her on her quest for justified vengeance, we start to see the toll it takes and the destructive nature of it - on both her, and the people around her. Ellie suffers unimaginably during this three day quest, endures further losses, does things even she abhors (and would have baulked at in the original game,) and becomes someone more brutal, more broken, and more dangerous than Joel ever was. That is "step one" in the developers meta-contextual breaking down of our myopic viewpoint on the characters, and the first step in holding up their mirror, and forcing the player to have a reckoning with their own relationship to that original game. Once this section concludes, we then play the whole 3 day game again... this time from the point of view of Abby. Over the course of those three days, the player is forced to reckon with Joel's action in the original game, from the point of view of the outside. The other side. Abby is, of course, just as justified, if not more justified in her quest for vengeance as Ellie is. Were the original game one where we, the player, had played as Abby and her father, Joel would likely have been the monster we see Abby as at the outset of this game. The only real difference - we come to understand - is the perspective: the particular shard of the prism we were looking through. Over the course of that second act, the trail of decimation Ellie, (and Tommy, - Joel's brother, here, a largely unseen NPC) are leaving in their wake. Their quest for vengeance no longer seems like righteous vengeance, but like monsterous destruction - like un-directed, misplaced calamity, visited upon people no more evil and no more monsterous than they themselves are. That is "Step two." Step 3, is where the game turns the screw though. The game does an interesting thing: It gives everyone a chance to get off the train. The game enters its final act, with scenes from Ellie's point of view, where she is - in spite of all the horror she has witnessed, has experienced, and has visited upon others - allowed to rest. She is given the closest thing to a real chance at happiness and contentment that the broken world still has to offer. She has a life, a love, a child, and the makings of a happy home. She is wracked with guilt and insecurity, and is suffering the after effects in the form of acute PTSD... ...but she is coping, somewhat. Dena and her child provide the kind of comfort and love that rational people know is the only real anti-venom to the poison that she has ingested, and while the road to happiness will clearly be a difficult one, and a life-long struggle, there is a sense, in these scenes, of the "green shoots" that the original game had in its ending. Curiously though, these scenes, while ostensibly taking place in the spring, with newborn lambs around, have a distinctly autumnal colour palette - suggesting Ellie's internal emotions are distinctly rooted in this being an "ending" rather the beginning of a new era... ...and the reappearance of Tommy, with a possible lead on Abby's whereabouts, acts as the incitement to a terrible choice. Ellie is, in some sense, given the same choice as Adam and Eve - to remain within the garden of Eden, or to bite into the apple, and forgo happiness for knowledge... and continual vengeance and destruction. Tommy is, at this point, the serpent. The player - no matter how vengeful they might have felt at the outset - is virtually guaranteed to hope Ellie makes the positive choice. The player is tired. The game has already run a long time, and the farmhouse scenes feel like an ending. We feel we can finally rest. After all, any player that was lustful for vengeance against Abby at the outset, was likely feeling so, because of an innate love of Joel and Ellie. They wanted those characters to survive, and they wanted them to be happy. Ellie is finally given the chance of a path to that... ...so when she rejects it, in favour of continual destruction, it is a crushing moment. Say what you want about Joel and his decisions... but every player knows what advice Joel would have given to Ellie in that moment. It is her misplaced ideas of how to manage her PTSD, her guilt, and Tommy's selfish desire to set Ellie out as his "attack dog" - to do what he no longer can - that poisons her to the extent that she simply cannot set aside the cycle of violence. When the game then opens back up to gameplay, with Ellie in California, continuing to pursue Abby, the game's narrative becomes like a descent into hell. Abby and Ellie's continual, destructive battle is shown to be as small as it is, when both are swept up in the localised issues on a complete new area of the broken world. The battle between the WLF and the Seraphites - what feels like a major conflict in Seattle - is nothing here. The quest for vengeance between two broken women, even less so. California has its own problems - a slaver group known as the "Rattlers" are the dominant force, and the squabbles of two unrelated forces in Seattle are of no consequence. (The game, of course, is using this to highlight the most painful of lessons that most post-apocalyptic fiction does: that when society is broken into splinters, and there is not enough scraps to go around, petty squabbles and raging storms-in-tea-cups become the norm. Two factions will wage ceaseless war over tiny crops of land that mean nothing in the larger scheme of things, and people die for what amounts to two parts of fuck-all.) As Ellie descends deeper and deeper into this new conflict, there is a real - deliberate - sense of exhaustion on the part of the player. They wanted this to be over - it had a chance to be over - and Ellie blew it. As she continues on her path, heading into what feels like the insurmountable, inescapable jaws of hell, even the most nonchalant player will find themselves continually wishing she would turn back. That she would stop this. End it. The game finally culminated in a scene that is genuinely interesting in terms of videogame fiction. Ellie does, after a hellish fight, and after being swept along in a conflict she barely understands or cares about, find Abby. A broken, nearly dead Abby, who has clearly - visibly - been through hell. Cutting her down from the stake where she has been left to die, the contrast between the two similar women is brought into focus. Ellie is clearly appalled by how Abby looks, and what she has gone through, but while Abby no longer cares for anything but escape, and saving her new ward, Lev... Ellie cannot let go. Abby simply struggles to get Lev to a boat - and, in fact, even tells Abby where the boats are, having completely divested herself of their path of destruction. Ellie still though, even after all both women have suffered, forces a fistfight between them. Even in a foreign land, where both women have lost so much, and where no one is left to even care about their original malice, she will not release her grip on her vengeance... because it's all she's got left. The final moment though, is genuinely curious. Throughout the game, whenever Ellie is facing a choice of continuing her destruction, or setting it aside, she was plagued by flashbacks of Joels brutal death at Abby's hand. Her PTSD and guilt forced her hand, and set her on the path of destruction. However, in the final fight, when she finally gains the upper hand, and is in the position to finally have her vengeance, she has a flashback... ...this time, not to Joel's death, but to his life. She sees an image of Joel sitting peacefully on his Wyoming porch, and the power of that is enough to stay her hand at the final moment. She releases Abby, and allows her to take Lev, and escape. It's a powerful moment, and one that raises some interesting questions. The game continues though. We see Ellie return to the home she had shared with Dina - now not a home, but simply a house. Dina is gone (possibly moved back to the greater Wyoming compound, possibly much worse,) and Ellie sits in the abandoned house, alone. She picks up her guitar - her last connection to Joel - and is unable even to play the song he taught her, as her quest for vengeance has resulted n her missing her fret-fingers. Even that has been destroyed in the journey that led her to this empty facsimile of a life. There is another interesting scene shown in flashback here. During the main course of the game, flashbacks to events proceeding the original game, but prior to Joel dying have been peppered in, and during these, Ellie and Joels relationship is shown to have frayed to the point of fracture, as Ellie came to understand Joels actions at the end of the original game. These tend to intimate and justify Ellie's extreme guilt - that Joel died before she ever had a chance to forgive him. The final flashback though - ostensibly taking place mere hours before Joel would be killed - is of a scene that somewhat mitigates that. It is one in which Ellie offers something of an olive branch - a path to potential forgiveness, and shows Joel some of the reciprocated love he craved. What is questionable, is whether this scene actually happened. Is it actually a flashback... or simply Ellie's projection? The main game would suggest it likely did not happen. After all, Ellie's guilt and her actions throughout most of the game suggest she never got a chance to say any of those things to Joel. She wanted to - she meant to at some point - but never got the chance. She missed it. Is it possible that Ellie, at this point - alone, broken, destroyed, and far beyond the point of redemption or happiness - simply has to create that scene in her mind, to finally allow herself to let go of her vengeance? That her mind has concocted this scene, as personal justification, and an attempt to paper over her own guilt - misplaced though it may be? It's this moment that provides the equivalent ambiguity that the powerful ending of the original game had - albeit via different means. My personal opinion is that the scene is a false memory - an aberration born of mental anguish, and a necessary lie Ellie tells herself. If that is the case, then it becomes questionable if she is even aware of that. That she is telling herself a comforting lie or not... ...but it remains up to the player to interpret, as all good ambiguous endings are. What makes The Last of Us: Part II work so well, is that every element of the game is used to tell that story. It is not - like most cinematic, narrative games - a case of "narrative in cut-scenes, with gameplay in-between." The collectibles tell the story. The gameplay tells the story. The environment design, the combat design, the outfits of NPC, the shops and the streets and the buildings tell the story. Even the weather tells the story. Weather is actually used in a direct fashion, in some ways to show the stark different in tone between the original game and the sequel. While the original game is also a bleak, unforgiving and harsh game in terms of tone, even despite the dire consequences of Joel's final actions, the weather cycle offers some green shoots of a future in the finale. Joel lies to Ellie, yes - and whether she fully believes him, wants to believe him, or simply cannot face the ramifications of NOT believing him is debatable - but there is a nod to a potential future of hope in the actual scene... primarily because of where, and when, it takes place. The original game is primarily focussed - narratively - on the power (both constructive, and destructive,) of love. Joel's love of Ellie as his adopted-daughter, his loss of Sarah - the daughter he loved, and the destructive power of that loss - and to some extent, the entire game and Joel's whole narrative arc is determined by that. Love is a complicated and relentless force, but it can do good AND bad things. It is chaos. It has ups AND downs. As such, the game operates with both. It is a complete cycle, as it were - a reaping and a renewal. After the pair have travelled the country, been through all they go through, seen all that they see, and suffer through a harsh summer, a bleak autumn and a bitter winter, the final scene takes place in a lush, unspoiled green space, in a verdant spring, right on the cusp of a new summer. There is a palpable sense of renewal in that setting - the hint of the beginning of something. The game ends on a "new dawn", so to speak. The second game, however, is focussed on a different force: Not love, but vengeance. Vengeance, unlike Love, is not an "agent of chaos"... it is a poison. It is a force that only leads to destruction. It is the toxic offshoot - the diseased cousin - of love. Love, broken from the outside, can fester, and turn to vengeance... and that is a fire that burns everything in its path. As such, the structure of the second game is different. There is no real "cycle" to the game - it is a one-way path. Instead of showing a reaping and a renewal, it simply goes from the cold, bitter winter at the outset, in the Wyoming sections, and slowly gets drier, hotter, and more scorched... until the finale in the California heat, where the world has robbed both principal characters of everything, and left them both to die... and one of them still, even then, struggles to step off that one-way street. It is a structure that is not completely original - indeed, stories of unquenchable revenge have certainly use this structure before (as an example, the rather underrated western Seraphim Falls - a similar tale of two enemies locked in an endless quest for vengeance also starts in the snowy hills, and ends in the scorching desert, and I think is arguably one of the influences on The Last of Us: Part II,) - but it is no less effective here, primarily because it is never overtly called attention to. It simply sets the tone in a broad way, that feeds into the overall arc. Okay... ...whew. I'm keenly aware that a lot of the discussion of the game so far has been solely around narrative and story-telling. That was always going to be the case, of course - that is absolutely the most important element in The Last of Us: Part II - and in particular, since there is such a contingent of people who seem unwilling or unable to accept a narrative that deliberately throws into question their love of the original game's characters... ...but that narrative would only work the way it does, and to the extent to which it does, if the gameplay held up its end of the bargain too. Thankfully, it absolutely does. First off, visually. The game looks fantastic. I played through the game in 2023, three years after release, and playing it now, it is genuinely jarring how well the visuals of this PS4 game compare to those of native PS5 games of this year. Characters animate really well and there is a real attention to detail on character models. the infected models are grotesque and horrid, of course, but they move and shuffle in really interesting ways, and there is enough different models, and different types, with enough distinct remnants of the people they were before, to really hammer home the sad nature of what the world has become. The outfits, the few tattered remnants of clothing still stuck and peeling off the side of long-term infected like clickers is barely noticeable during hectic fights, but adds a lot to the richness of the game when noticed. Given that both central characters - Ellie and Abby - are young women, and are variously shown at different points in their lives over a period covering 4 years (via flashbacks), there is obvious changes in their character models to account for that, but even within the shorter timeframe of the game proper, there are alterations to those models that feed into narrative changes. When, for example Abby is seen some months after the main thrust of the game, in Santa Barbara with Lev, she is visibly different - her removal from the "gym obsessed" WLF stadium homestead means she has lost some muscle mass, and is visibly leaner. Of course, this is used to much more dramatic effect in the true finale - taking place several months after that again, and after she has endured what she has, her character model is so different, that it almost takes a double take to recognise her. The extent to which design and attention to detail in environments has been taken is both extreme, unusual, and particularly of note given the significant increase in length and scope as compared to the original game. One of the most notable and laudable aspects of the original The Last of Us was the high quality and bespoke art design to the surroundings. Each area was distinct, and every location - from shops, to homes, to parks, to areas of cities not only looked good, and functioned as a gameplay puzzle or a combat encounter, but told a story. The player could tell not only what the place was originally, prior to the outbreak, but could trace details of what happened during that outbreak, what happened in the ensuing years, and how the space had either festered, or been repurposed since, purely based on the art design. The Last of Us: Part II continues this meticulous attention to detail - one that rivals even genres like Immersive Sims, which use environmental storytelling as one of the primary arrows in their quiver - and not only ups the ante (which is impressive enough,) but does it across a significantly increased scope. Indeed, The Last of Us: Part II is one of the few single-player games I have played, where MsBloodmoney watched the entire game as simply a viewer, and the ability for us to have constant conversations about what transpired in the specific locations we visit - main path areas, side locations, and even small sections where the only real gameplay elements is simply passing through - is pretty mind blowing as compared to other games in the genre. Every area - even ones that have no significant gameplay - are filled with bespoke, never-seen-elsewhere visual elements, and not only tell the story of their original purpose, but of how they have been repurposed, then repurposed again, then repurposed again. Who came there. What happened to them. Why they are abandoned now.... or why they are not. The game also does a better job than any game I have played, of disguising its walls and the extents of its playfield. While any gamer worth his or her salt playing The Last of Us: Part II will obviously be keenly aware that they cannot, in fact, explore the entire city of Seattle, or all of Santa Barbara, or all of the Wyoming homestead, The Last of Us: Part II manages, though excellent environmental design, and even better use of lighting, camera swings, additional, slightly-off-the-path optional areas, and smart design of the deterioration of the environments, make the game feel much larger than it is. While the player is, of course, constantly being kept on the right path as they move through the game's environments, it's very, very rare for that guidance to ever make itself felt. The game's areas are so well honed and designed, that simply exploring them, checking doors and windows, finding rubble that can be scaled, sneaking around enemies etc. feels like it somehow just "magically" results in the player always going the right way. They almost never feel like they are stopped by an invisible wall, or find a spot where the game mechanics should let them pass, but the game can't or won't. Audio is excellent throughout - The Last of Us had a pretty incredible score, and The Last of Us: Part II keeps up that tradition, offering a bleak, stark orchestral soundtrack peppered with soulful guitar, and heightening moody ambiance. The vocal performances are of extreme high quality - indeed the acting and motion capture performances are of a level rarely seen in games, and almost never seen at this volume. Foley work and sound design is excellent, and the whole soundscape is rich and textured and layered. Combat is designed, much like it was in the original, to be absolutely brutal and violent in the extreme. The Last of Us: Part II, like The Last of Us, has a combat model that is relatively loose, and is specifically and deliberately designed so that even when a player is doing very well, the combat feels sloppy and frenetic and frantic. Deaths - both player deaths, and the deaths they dole out - are, quite frankly, disgusting... often sickening to see, and struggles between characters feel fraught and panicked. The game is rooted in "survival" rather than "domination", and the general lack of resources are designed to force the player to really evaluate whether it is worth engaging an enemy, or simply trying to sneak past them. Avoiding combat is as tense and sweaty an experience as engaging with it, and because the player is often counting bullets or shivs at their disposal on one hand, the game manages to really wring a lot of narrative tension out of each area. The player might have enough bullets to shoot their way through an area, but given that an unavoidable tyrant might be lurking just around the corner, and they might be forced to fight down to their last bomb or bullet at any moment, resource management becomes a major component of the dread the game instills. Violence is - as said - deliberately sickening and foul - each death is often alarmingly grotesque, and the world jarringly indifferent to it... and so the emotional toll it takes on the characters themselves feels justified in a way few games even attempt. Indeed, some of the most memorable cut-scenes in the game are not those featuring the violence itself - as exhilarating and exciting as those scenes might be - but the quiet, maudlin scenes in which the toll that violence takes on the purveyors of it is shown. One scene in particular, where Ellie, having brutally tortured a girl no older than herself (offscreen,) to gain some information, returns to her makeshift base, and is being cleaned up by Dina, attempting to comfort her, is mesmerising in its almost silent portrayal of the horror Ellie now has to live with. It's a scene that shows a particularly - and in videogames, unusual - level of maturity in the handling of story. Ellie is, as that point, topless, with Dina - her lover - embracing her, but the scene could not possibly be less titilating. It is a horrible scene to watch, and the implied nudity only serves to cement that horror.It's not the only scene of that nature either. A Scene between Abby and Owen later in the game actually features both brief toplessness, and sex, yet the nature of the story and the scene completely divorces it from any kind of gratuitousness or titilation. It is a violent, and actually, rather sad scene, punctuating a brutal, sad story, and it's rare for games to elevate their narratives to the level where that kind of scene is possible without eliciting giggles. We all know what usually happens when games try for "serious" sex scenes... just ask Mass Effect or Heavy Rain. It can often be difficult to decide whether to laugh, or cover one's eyes. Here, these scenes work - and that is a testament to the narrative in and of itself. Back on combat then, The Last of Us: Part II retains the smart focus on stealth, but with a focus on the viability of "going loud". In many stealth focussed games, the tendency can be for combat to be so stacked against the player, that simply restarting when seen becomes the go-to. Even some great games like Hitman can struggle to find the balance there, but The Last of Us: Part II, like its predecessor, never really creates these situations. Because all combat - even stealth takedowns - feel brutal and "messy", when things go wrong, and suddenly a sneaky situation goes "full combat" it manages to always feel possible, but never easy. That stops the player wanting to simply restart, and gives the game a more free-form, emergent feel. While the combat model is largely inherited from the previous game, that "emergent" feel is where The Last of Us: Part II stands a cut above its predecessor. Enemy AI is significantly stepped up in The Last of Us: Part II - human enemies will flank and move in much more realistic ways, and will use tactical methods of attacking the player that they never did before. The viability of treating The Last of Us: Part II as a simple "cover-shooter" is largely mitigated - even on the easier settings, where resources are relatively abundant - because the infected enemies are too fast, and the human enemies too clever to simply stick their heads up like a game of whack-a-mole. Instead, the player is rewarded not for extreme accuracy, but for smart thinking, and quick ability to improvise. In some ways, this - and the significant increase in larger, more open and free-form combat areas - actually goes some way to making larger combat situations feel more akin to the original game's multiplayer Factions mode, than the original game's single-player encounters. The AI is smart enough to need some thinking applied to outsmarting them, rather than simply a good eye, and a stack of health packs. That might get you through... but not every time. Traversal puzzles in the game are - it should be stated - pretty rudimentary, even as compared to something like Uncharted. Realistically, they are barely puzzles really - and are more narrative beats. The extent to which the player has to work out how to get from one place to another is never more than it would be in a "real" situation when moving through a collapsed or derelict space. It does ground the game further in realism, of course, (despite what I might want, "real life" is seldom designed like a neat, complex puzzle!)... but it does pretty much reduce the nature of these "puzzles" to simply furthering the narrative concept of the world having been repurposed and become more challenging to traverse for the characters, than actively challenging the game-brains of the players. There are sections of the game where the gameplay simply amounts to walking from A to B, but these almost always have such rich narrative elements, or environmental details, that they never really feel like "down-time". Indeed, a story this long has to ebb and flow - it simply wouldn't work as a constant barrage of action, and would make no sense as such anyways - but that element, reaching crescendos of action or tension, then allowing the player to rest a while as narrative plays out, then smashing them back into action - is played pretty much perfectly throughout. There are - arguably - points where it becomes almost relentless for too long - where the player is desperate for some release of tension, or for the game to take over of a moment, to let them catch their breath, or sections where the game feigns an ending, then just keeps going... ... but these never really feel like gameplay or structural errors. Instead, they feel like they are being deliberately used to further service the plot and the emotional content. When the player is thinking "Oh my God, please, just stop"... that is generally the exact feeling the developer wants them to have, to service the narrative beats that are coming. There is one gameplay element distinctly absent from The Last of Us: Part II as compared to the original game, alluded to above... the Multiplayer. The Last of Us had a rich, fully featured online competitive multiplayer element, and it was fantastic. Indeed, The Last of Us multiplayer (along with Assassin's Creed Brotherhood, and perhaps Bioshock 2's curiously well made multiplayer,) are generally cited as the go-to counter-answers when the PS3 era's penchant for "tacked-on" multiplayer modes are lamented. While all three were, inarguably, born out of that era - the same era that gave us such dismal multiplayers as Resident Evil 5 and 6, Singularity, Dead Space 2, and a litany of other poor, unwelcome additions to primarily single-player games - those ones stood out as making really good lemonade from that era's lemons. The Last of Us's multiplayer mode was almost certainly the most well crafted, popular and enduring of those "tacked-on" modes, and was excellent across the board. The Last of Us: Part II does not feature any multiplayer. (Indeed, it has long been rumoured that it was originally intended to, but the "Factions" mode grew arms and legs, and will see light of day at some point as a stand-alone product... but it's 2023 at this point, and I'll believe it when I see it!) The lack of a follow up to that multiplayer mode is a disappointment in some ways here, however, it is difficult to really hold it against The Last of Us: Part II. Firstly, because as good as Factions was, it was not the primary element of the original The Last of Us, nor was it the most memorable part. As good as it was by comparison to other MP games, The Last of Us was, first and foremost, a single player narrative game, and virtually all the ways in which it stood above the pack was on those single-player elements. Secondly, because The Last of Us: Part II is so much bigger in its single player than The Last of Us was. The game is easily twice the length of the original game, and is sprawling and complex in a way that original wasn't. The Last of Us felt like a big, long single-player game at the time (and in some cases, it still feels that way...) but in comparison to The Last of Us: Part II, it feels distinctly compact and simple. Between the single player and multiplayer modes, I spent 83 hours getting the S-Rank for The Last of Us Remastered. The Last of Us: Part II S-Rank clocked in at 113 hours, even without a multiplayer component... so any argument I could make about a lack of gameplay due to a multiplayer drought would be rather specious! Overall, The Last of Us: Part II is, quite simply, a masterpiece. It is, at its gameplay core, simply a stealth action / traversal game, but it is elevated so far beyond that by the care and attention paid to it. The gameplay is arresting and variable, tense and unnerving and varied. The visuals are sublime, and the care and attention paid to design - both visual, gameplay, location and combat encounter are virtually unparalleled. The narrative is rich and interesting, un-pandering and complex, both telling an interesting story, and wrestling with morality and ambiguity and perspective in a way that few games do - even drawing in the audience's affection and connection to the previous game and holding an uncomfortable mirror up to it, forcing them to wrestle with their own culpability and enablement. Dialogue is written beautifully and acted to an extremely high level, and all the tertiary elements - the score, the audio, the lighting and the balancing of narrative, traversal, action and stealth are masterfully balanced, and toned to within an inch of their lives. It may me simply a narrative action game - arguably the most rote of all videogame genres in the modern era... ...but there is something to be said for being the pinnacle of a genre.The Last of Us: Part II is the pinnacle of that one. There is (and likely always will be) heated and emotional debate about with is the better game - The Last of Us, or The Last of Us: Part II - and I think, bringing it back to my original point, that debate mirrors the same one around which is the better film: The Godfather, or The Godfather: Part II... for exactly the same reasons. There are folks who think the purity and simple nature of the single story in The Godfather is unimpeachable, and feel that elevates it above the more complex, more emotionally sticky The Godfather: Part II. I love both, but I fall firmly on the side of feeling The Godfather: Part II is the better film. It is more sweeping, more complex, more "grey-area" and more emotionally and cerebrally challenging as a film, and its characters and situations so dark and challenging, that no one can argue that any character is the "good guy". It is a film that is as concerned with challenging the viewer, as it is with entertaining them, and has much more meat on its bone for discussion of character motivations and plot, than simple discussion of great film making. The original Last of Us is a game where great discussion can be had around the quality of the game... but the actual narrative has less there for debate, aside from the ending. The Last of Us: Part II, on the other hand, is the nastier, darker, bleaker, more challenging narrative - one where there is complexity and meat for discussion in every facet of it, and one that never panders to our wants as players. It is easy to imagine a different sequel to The Last of Us. It could have been one that would give us players purely what we thought we wanted - another adventure with Joel and Ellie, where they face more adversity together, then come out alright in the end. One where we, as players, are emotionally coddled, rather than emotionally challenged, and it might have been great. It probably would have been... ...but that would have been "The Last of Us 2". We didn't get "The Last of Us 2". We got "The Last of Us: Part II." Thank goodness. The Ranking: While there are some primarily narrative games that sit pretty high on the current ranking, it's interesting that the very top of the list is largely absent of them. Games like Dishonoured 2, Mass Effect 2, Person 5 and Portal 2 certainly trade on their narratives as a major component, but arguably, all those games in the highest echelon of the ranking established those placements via gameplay first, and narrative second. Indeed, aside possibly from This War of Mine, and certainly Norco, the highest ranked current game on the list where narrative is the most important element in that ranking, is, in fact, the original The Last of Us. The Last of Us: Part II is a better game than The Last of Us. It is better looking, of course, longer, more complex, more interesting, and all the gameplay elements are vastly improved - even from the already very high bar set by the original game. Yes, it lacks the multiplayer mode - and that is a minor slight against it - but to pretend The Last of Us established its current placement based on Factions mode would be silly. Even without Factions mode, it would likely have roughly the same placement. That pushes The Last of Us: Part II above its predecessor, and into the real heavy hitters... and makes placement difficult in direct one-on-one match ups. All those games at that level trade on different elements as their most important ones. Hitman's variability and sheer size, Elden Ring's size, scope and design, Outer Wilds and The Witness's unique relationships with their players... these are all factors that are different, and impossible to directly compare. The Last of Us: Part II has a really interesting relationship with the player - an almost antagonistic one at times - but it works so well. How does that compare to the uplifting, sad, hopeful, strange relationship Outer Wilds has with its players? Thats difficult to quantify. The Last of Us: Part II has excellent gameplay... is its combat as varied or interesting as Hitman 3's? No, it isn't... but it is much, much closer than most narrative games get. Is its world as large as Elden Ring's? No, of course not... but it is massive compared to other narrative games... and that narrative is better and rendered to a quality much higher than virtually all other narrative games. In the end, The Last of Us: Part II is, narratively, one of the best, and because all other elements - combat, art, variability, environmental design, sound, acting, dialogue - are all of a very very high level, even when it would lose out to another game on any individual one of those elements, its overall package tends to pull it higher anyways. It is a game with extreme high quality in most areas, and unsurpassed quality in a few, so virtually any game with any single flaw starts to sink below it. In the end, it comes down to feel, and to asking "does the overall package of this other game have enough to hold up against The Last of Us: Part II?" For a lot of the games above the original The Last of Us, the answer comes back to me "I love this game, but no"... ...but the first game where the answer is finally a "yes"... ...is Portal 2. There are titanic games that I absolutely adore below that, but when I simply stack what The Last of Us: Part II does in the over-all, it simply can't not move above them. Portal 2, however, does manage to just beat out The Last of Us: Part II. Its story may not be as emotionally interesting, but it is excellent, well told, cleverly implemented and weaved into the fabric of the game. The gameplay is fantastic, it is long and interesting, acted superbly, has great sound and visuals... it is the whole package. Portal 2 would probably lose as many fights as it won in individual element match-ups with The Last of Us: Part II, but at this level, it really comes down to the overall... and overall, I do think Portal 2 takes the slight edge. As such, The Last of Us: Part II finds its deservedly high spot! (Man, that was a long one!) So there we have it folks! 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...
pelagia14 Posted May 16, 2023 Share Posted May 16, 2023 Wow. Your write-up of The Last of Us: Part 2 was beautiful, incisive, intellectual... what an amazing read, seriously. I must confess that I haven't seen The Godfather trilogy (yet), but I was absolutely fascinated to read your comparison of how both The Godfather: Part II and The Last of Us: Part II seem deliberately aimed to challenge the audience's perception of the first movie/game. I've always planned to watch The Godfather trilogy because it is such a cultural milestone in cinema with some famous performances, but now I also want to watch it for its artistic/philosophical merits. Finally, I love how you described the difference between a [Title 2] being a new story at a [Title: Part 2] being a continuation/deepening of an existing story. I also want to thank you for this review of TLOU: Part 2. I deeply love the first game for how well it told its story, and was dismayed to watch how toxic the Part 2 discussion started out due to the massive, out-of-context spoiler that was leaked a week or two(?) before the game's release. Once the game was finally released the toxicity was of course still quite pervasive in discussions - though there was then a second, smaller controversy over how many "haters" held on to these views without actually experiencing the game itself. It was all quite exhausting, even for someone who was not an active member of TLOU fandom. As a result, I've procrastinated getting and playing the game for many years. I've come across several reviews that discussed how the controversial narrative decisions of TLOU: Part 2 were deliberate choices in service of the theme of vengeance, so I knew the game wasn't just gratuitous violence and torture porn. But those reviews didn't jolt that part of my brain that would make me want to play the game myself, they didn't hint strongly enough at the "benefits" I would get from the experience. While I was initially dismayed to learn of The Thing that Abby does at the beginning of the game, I grew to understand that the game provided a good justification for it, so I was never an Abby-hater. (Also, I heard that the visceral, aggressive nature of her combat style was fantastically done.) I'm sure I'm not going to articulate this well, but your review finally outlined the benefit of playing the game for me. You provided a very vague roadmap (which is appreciated!) of the emotional journey that players will experience with this game. Not only that, you detailed how thoughtfully well-crafted the experience is, while only providing a small number of spoilers. I know now that I can play this game and while it will be a bitter(sweet?) experience, I will be able to admire the nuance and deft with which Naughty Dog provoked those emotions in me. (Also - I love that you brought up how the weather/environment is a subtle way in which the theme of vengeance is expressed, since I loved how TLOU's changing seasons tied into its narrative and themes.) 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBloodmoney Posted May 16, 2023 Author Share Posted May 16, 2023 1 hour ago, pelagia14 said: Wow. Your write-up of The Last of Us: Part 2 was beautiful, incisive, intellectual... what an amazing read, seriously. I must confess that I haven't seen The Godfather trilogy (yet), but I was absolutely fascinated to read your comparison of how both The Godfather: Part II and The Last of Us: Part II seem deliberately aimed to challenge the audience's perception of the first movie/game. I've always planned to watch The Godfather trilogy because it is such a cultural milestone in cinema with some famous performances, but now I also want to watch it for its artistic/philosophical merits. Finally, I love how you described the difference between a [Title 2] being a new story at a [Title: Part 2] being a continuation/deepening of an existing story. I also want to thank you for this review of TLOU: Part 2. I deeply love the first game for how well it told its story, and was dismayed to watch how toxic the Part 2 discussion started out due to the massive, out-of-context spoiler that was leaked a week or two(?) before the game's release. Once the game was finally released the toxicity was of course still quite pervasive in discussions - though there was then a second, smaller controversy over how many "haters" held on to these views without actually experiencing the game itself. It was all quite exhausting, even for someone who was not an active member of TLOU fandom. As a result, I've procrastinated getting and playing the game for many years. I've come across several reviews that discussed how the controversial narrative decisions of TLOU: Part 2 were deliberate choices in service of the theme of vengeance, so I knew the game wasn't just gratuitous violence and torture porn. But those reviews didn't jolt that part of my brain that would make me want to play the game myself, they didn't hint strongly enough at the "benefits" I would get from the experience. While I was initially dismayed to learn of The Thing that Abby does at the beginning of the game, I grew to understand that the game provided a good justification for it, so I was never an Abby-hater. (Also, I heard that the visceral, aggressive nature of her combat style was fantastically done.) I'm sure I'm not going to articulate this well, but your review finally outlined the benefit of playing the game for me. You provided a very vague roadmap (which is appreciated!) of the emotional journey that players will experience with this game. Not only that, you detailed how thoughtfully well-crafted the experience is, while only providing a small number of spoilers. I know now that I can play this game and while it will be a bitter(sweet?) experience, I will be able to admire the nuance and deft with which Naughty Dog provoked those emotions in me. (Also - I love that you brought up how the weather/environment is a subtle way in which the theme of vengeance is expressed, since I loved how TLOU's changing seasons tied into its narrative and themes.) Thank you mate, that means a lot! I know what you mean about the discourse around the game upon release - it was dismaying, if for no other reason than that I think there is genuine, interesting debate to be had about the relative merits of both games, but it all just got drowned out in a sea of voices shouting about nonsense that had nothing to do with actual dissection of the game, and everything to do with either bigoted rubbish, or “I want my happy ending!” whining nonsense - ignoring any kind of real discussion what the game was trying to do. I’m really happy if my little write up encouraged you to pull the trigger on playing the game - it’s a heck of an experience, and one that I’m certain you will take some strong feelings from - I won’t say “enjoy”, as that’s not exactly the word… but whatever the emotions are that you draw from it…I suspect they’ll be powerful ones - good and bad! ? Really appreciate the kind words too - and happy someone made it through that whole thing, cause, boy… …that one ran on a bit! ?? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum_Vice Posted May 17, 2023 Share Posted May 17, 2023 Probably your best review yet. I really took my time with it to extract out as much as I could so that I could meet you with an intelligent perspective. Thank you for putting the time in to make this. 20 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said: What is questionable, is whether this scene actually happened. Is it actually a flashback... or simply Ellie's projection? The main game would suggest it likely did not happen. I didn't pick up on this. It is a very plausible theory. My initial reaction to this was to take it further: are all of the flashbacks dreams? Ellie's birthday is stunningly "perfect." It is what she could imagine to be the best day of her life. Structurally, as it is presented directly after Day 1 and before Day 2, that could be a dream. 12 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said: Where they [players] want that cycle to stop, before it lets them stop. Just like the characters experience. 12 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said: The player - no matter how vengeful they might have felt at the outset - is virtually guaranteed to hope Ellie makes the positive choice. The player is tired. The game has already run a long time, and the farmhouse scenes feel like an ending. We feel we can finally rest. Absolutely. Love the game, hate the game, or have a nuanced opinion, this is absolutely true, and that is true art. As you repeatedly point out in your review, TLOU II is a go-to example of a game using the strengths of its medium (*gameplay within visual storytelling*) to express art. 12 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said: When the game then opens back up to gameplay, with Ellie in California, continuing to pursue Abby, the game's narrative becomes like a descent into hell. Abby and Ellie's continual, destructive battle is shown to be as small as it is, when both are swept up in the localised issues on a complete new area of the broken world. Agreed and I like that you attribute this to Naughty Dog as a positive. I saw the extended epilogue as a tacked on experience that negated what seemed to me to be narrative and gameplay for DLC. Your faith in Naughty Dog provides a counterpoint that holds water. Interesting... I must let that one sit for a while. ________ I expected a higher placement on the end ranking. We agree on the various high-end components to this game. As I see it, the only aspect that players and critics could debate is what you and I have done elsewhere: the narrative and character development. All other elements of TLOU II are masterfully realised. As you know, I didn't like the antagonistic relationship that the game had with me as a player (I wanted other things for Joel, Ellie and Tommy), but it is undeniable that it was the planned goal for Naughty Dog to create THAT journey and that it was emergent through gameplay. Considering how much you DO like the narrative and how it was told, I had predicted a number 2 placement below Hitman 3 and above Elden Ring. Thanks again for the food for thought. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBloodmoney Posted May 17, 2023 Author Share Posted May 17, 2023 7 minutes ago, Platinum_Vice said: I didn't pick up on this. It is a very plausible theory. My initial reaction to this was to take it further: are all of the flashbacks dreams? Ellie's birthday is stunningly "perfect." It is what she could imagine to be the best day of her life. Structurally, as it is presented directly after Day 1 and before Day 2, that could be a dream. That's actually a good point - I hadn't considered that, but you're right - it's such a perfect day from her point of view, that it's easy to imagine that it's idealisation - maybe the day did happen, but the actual memory of it has been coloured in and idealised in the memory... it happened something like that, but not quite as perfectly as it is presented to us. 7 minutes ago, Platinum_Vice said: Absolutely. Love the game, hate the game, or have a nuanced opinion, this is absolutely true, and that is true art. As you repeatedly point out in your review, TLOU II is a go-to example of a game using the strengths of its medium (*gameplay within visual storytelling*) to express art. Agreed and I like that you attribute this to Naughty Dog as a positive. I saw the extended epilogue as a tacked on experience that negated what seemed to me to be narrative and gameplay for DLC. Your faith in Naughty Dog provides a counterpoint that holds water. Interesting... I must let that one sit for a while. Oh, I definitely think that the exhaustion and the "wait, there's more now?" feeling in that section is deliberate - and to be honest, folks who see it as "tacked on" are not really feeling anything different than I am... the only difference is, I think it's an important narrative beat that I am being made to feel that way. The feeling is the same - its just the narrative perspective on that feeling that is interpreted differently ? 7 minutes ago, Platinum_Vice said: ________ I expected a higher placement on the end ranking. We agree on the various high-end components to this game. As I see it, the only aspect that players and critics could debate is what you and I have done elsewhere: the narrative and character development. All other elements of TLOU II are masterfully realised. As you know, I didn't like the antagonistic relationship that the game had with me as a player (I wanted other things for Joel, Ellie and Tommy), but it is undeniable that it was the planned goal for Naughty Dog to create THAT journey and that it was emergent through gameplay. Considering how much you DO like the narrative and how it was told, I had predicted a number 2 placement below Hitman 3 and above Elden Ring. ha - man, I struggled with that placement - and where you predicted was considered quite a bit! In the end, I had to see The Witness and Portal 2 as placing higher in the end, simple because I think as much as I appreciate the relationship TLOUPII has with the player, I feel like The Witness and Outer Wilds have even more (even though those relationships may be less universal, and more personal to me)... and as much as I love the overall package of TLoUPII, Portal 2 has a lot of the same elements (though, comedic rather than horrific)... and while the impact of horror and drama is certainly more visceral, I don't want to do the "Oscars" mistake, of forgetting that often, comedy is even harder to get right than drama. TLoUPII, I think, is probably the pinnacle of "drama storytelling" in games... but getting comedy right in games is even rarer - plus, there's a personal taste aspect too - fundamentally, I do think keeping a puzzle game going for that long, and telling a dramatic story, and being as good overall is even more difficult than sustaining a story like TLoUPII. At a certain point though, it's pretty much semantics - I'd say that any game falling in the top 25-30 of the list now, I'm basically saying "this is unimpeachable" - they are all winners in my eyes ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post DrBloodmoney Posted May 27, 2023 Author Popular Post Share Posted May 27, 2023 SCIENTIFIC RE-CERTIFICATION? A slightly odd one this time! Usually these Mini-Reviews are reserved for games where DLC is added to a game, removing the S-Rank, and where I've earned it back. However, This War of Mine is an unusual case. The original PS4 version, "This War of Mine: The Little Ones," was a complete package, comprising the original PC game, plus the expansive "The Little Ones" expansion, sold as a complete thing on Playstation. That game had no further DLC added to it, however, the PS5 version, titled "The War of Mine: Final Cut" features everything in the original release (including The Little Ones DLC,) but also adds several new expansions into the mix. It felt against the spirit of the list to include both games - this isn't a full remake situation, and the difference is entirely DLC based. Had both games been complete at the time I created the Super Scientific Checklist, The Final Cut version would have been the only inclusion, encompassing the Little Ones release. As such, I'll treat this release as if it is DLC for the original game... and will change the name of the game in the list, to reflect the Final Cut version. (Note - I won't particularly discuss The Little Ones DLC content, as that was present already in the previously reviewed version... HERE.) This War of Mine: Final Cut - Father's Promise / The Last Broadcast / Fading Embers Summary: All three of the "named" DLC packs, essentially repurpose the core gameplay of This War of Mine into different new scenarios. In each, the player is given set characters and situations, with some new element added to the gameplay, feeding into a more streamlined, "cinematic" narrative. Father's Promise In Father's Promise, the player controls Adam, who's child, Amelia, is terribly sick at the outset. The first few days use the game mechanics cleverly to show the hopelessness of his situation - because there are only two of them, Adam cannot be sent to scavenge, and must guard all night, but needs to take care of her during the day. The result, is an inevitable, unavoidable decline - they are slowly running out of food, he has no medicine and no way to get any, and is slowly becoming exhausted. The usual game mechanic kicks in eventually - Adam passed out from exhaustion... and when he wakes, Amelia is gone. Not dead, but vanished. At this point, the game becomes something of a detective story - the player plays a single character, playing somewhat as normal, however, while scavenging locations, he is also asking people about Amelia, and searching for clues, piecing together a genuinely compelling mystery. It's a cool idea - telling a more "single character narrative" within the framework of This War of Mine, and it works very well. The mystery allows the developers to show even more of the horrors that happen in a city under siege, and we do feel for Adam. Because there is only one character, it also allows for some interesting narrative elements relating to memory, and unreliable narrators. Since there is no other character there to help him, he seems to be declining into mental illness... ...and the ending of the story is as soul-crushing and harrowing as any story I've played in a game in quite some time! The Last Broadcast The Last Broadcast is a cool scenario too. In this one, Two characters - Malik and Esma - are surviving together. Malik was a radio host before the war, and is running a pirate radio station, telling people the truth about the war. He is also disabled. As such not only the only is he unable to scavenge... he is also confined to one floor of the dwelling. He is able to listen to the radio for information, and is able to broadcast information Esma brings back from the outside... but can only do things on the floor he has access to. Esma has to cook for him and give him food, and she has to do most of the construction of household items of survival. The gameplay loop boils down to Esma scavenging - and learning things about the war - and telling Malik, who broadcasts it. The wrinkle is, Esma often finds out things that would be extremely damaging to the army were they publicised, and liable to result in them cracking down on the two, and endangering their lives. There is a mechanic where, when Esma finds particularly damaging information, she can choose to tell Malik the truth, or lie to protect him... and both scenarios result in different, interesting paths for the narrative to take. Again, it's a smart repurposing of the core gameplay of This War of Mine. The basic functions of the game remain - the day/night cycle, the struggle for survival, the core elements of doing so - but by adding the additional elements of Malik's disability, that gives a whole different feel to the game mechanically, and the radio broadcasting , information gathering and decision whether to tell the truth and risk a death-squad, or lie, and fail in your duties gives a different feel narratively. Fading Embers The final one of the "stories" DLC additions is arguably the best, and most cinematic in terms of narrative beats. The player initially controls Anja - the granddaughter of a now dead local painter and art collector, living in a very run down home, into which Ruben - a local actor - stumbles, near death from wounds and sickness. She nurses him to health (no mean feat in this game, due to the bitter cold - the entirety of Fading Embers being set in "harsh Winter" conditions,) and is essentially recruited / given shelter by a local museum curator. In exchange for helping secure the museum pieces, her grandfather's collection will also be saved, and she (and Ruben, if he makes it,) can move into the museum. Essentially what Fading Embers does, is look at another facet of war - the destruction of culture and artworks - and layer the plight of those who strive to preserve them, on top of the base game mechanics. The game is, as said, set entirely in the harshest winter cold, and as such, firewood and keeping the dwellings warm is of paramount importance. This is smart, because it allows for a really difficult decision for the player - they are tasked with preserving, boxing up and finding a way to preserve the artworks... but in the absence of firewood, they may be forced to burn some of the priceless art as firewood, to stay alive. This scenario story is excellent. Not only does it layer an "investigation" element onto the scavenging (this time, in trying to find a way to secure the museum pieces before the museum collapses or is bombed,) and flip up some of the basic survival elements by making food less of a concern, and heat much more valuable than it usually is, and add new mechanics in the clearing and cataloguing of artwork and the finding of pieces in other locations... ...but it also adds a lot of different narrative elements, to a much greater degree than the other two DLC scenarios do, and does it with a lot of style, and with multiple possible paths to success or failure. Final Cut The "Final Cut" is also, itself, an expansion on its own, extending the base game. While the core gameplay remains the same, what Final Cut does, is essentially massively expand the variability of that base game. It adds all additional locations from all 3 of the "story" DLCs into the mix, allowing for far more variation between runs, as different locations are cycled in and out. It also adds an interesting new character - Livia. Livia adds a wrinkle to any household she is in... as she is pregnant. That means, practically, she has some drawbacks. She cannot scavenge at night, moves relatively slowly, and has some specific concerns the player needs to keep in mind when playing her. In terms of player engagement, she adds a lot. A player feels, naturally, very protective of a pregnant woman. She is vulnerable. If she sustains an injury, or gets sick, it really puts the screws to the player to do something about it, and fast! Additionally, the Final Cut DLC adds another new avenue to the base game - the ability to flee the war, rather than outlast it. That sounds, of course, like the easy option - it is, after all, a "win condition" that does not require the player to survive as long... however, it is not without its difficulties. Buying passage for the characters on a boat requires a very high cost... paid in jewellery - the most rare and difficult to find items scavenged item in the game. While is a "regular" game, a player might easily be able to manage happiness in a household relatively simply - by simply scavenging carefully, and not stealing/killing NPCs, but may have trouble keeping people fed and healthy as a result, the "Escape" option essentially flips this on it's head. Jewellery is not only very rare... it is almost exclusively able to be collected by stealing it, or by killing people and/or getting in very dangerous situations. As such, if a player decides to go for the "Escape" route, the whole dichotomy of the game changes. They are no longer trying to squirrel away enough supplies to last the war out... they are trying to manage the characters so they don't become depressed and "broken" as a result of the actions they might have to take to amass the payments... and woe betide a household where the only good scavenger becomes mentally broken and unable to function! It's a really cool concept, and one I like quite a lot. Having played This War of Mine a good number of times, I always tended not to need to worry too much about happiness. Being forced to make the characters push their moral boundaries too far, and deal with the consequences was an interesting new avenue - and forced me to really engage with areas of the game I had largely been able to sideline. Overall, the original release of This War of Mine - the PS4 version - was already a fantastic game, and the locations and number of characters and locations allowed for a huge amount of randomised variety every time a new run was launched. The Final Cut not only adds significantly to this, adding a lot of new characters and locations (as said, all characters and locations from all the DLC "stories" are playable in the main game,) but also adds the three stories themselves - each offering new insight into different aspects of War from the civilian side, and each adding special wrinkles to the gameplay. The complete package of This War of Mine: The Final Cut is easily the best version of the game on console, and succeeds in doing what should really be possible - it makes the original release, which already felt fully fledged and "complete" feel positively anaemic by comparison! Re-Ranking: This War of Mine: The Little Ones is already very highly ranked - and deservedly so. That placement is primarily not a mechanical one - I thin the game is very well worked out and balanced mechanically, however, the thing that really pushed it as high on the rankings as it is, is the ways in which those mechanics are used, along with randomisation, photos, realistic stories, character and situations to tell variable and interesting stories of the horror of surviving war... or not surviving it. In The Final Cut version, this is doubled down on. The mechanics are made better by the increase on variability and scenarios, and the takes on war are expanded to include areas - like broadcasting and radio, or preservation / desecration of culture, in really smart and interesting ways. As such, I think the overall game is so expanded, that the game does actually move up from its position. The expansion is such that, even something like Norco, with it's amazing writing, soundtrack and pixel art, and Transistor, with it's astoundingly finessed combat and amazing visuals and audio, are simply overwhelmed by the sheer size, scope, variation... and moral necessity of a game like This War of Mine. While I simply can't see This War of Mine: The Final Cut moving higher than Tetris Effect, (it's pure gameplay and style are simply too much!)... ... I do think it has to outpace Transistor and Norco now... ...and make no mistake... I fucking love Transistor and Norco! 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serrated-banner9 Posted June 2, 2023 Share Posted June 2, 2023 Doc, i remember you did lot's of reviews for games that didn't need or deserve a big review a couple of moths back and i just realised you never did a review for Linger in Shadows despite it being essantity a glorifed tech demo for the PS3 (at least i think so anyway from what i have heard), so i will request that please and before you see you won't rank because it isn't really a game then i will say that you have .detuned in your list so i don't see why linger in showdews shoudn't 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thornhorn7 Posted June 2, 2023 Share Posted June 2, 2023 Very happy to see Outer Wilds so high on the list ? That game does not get enough recognition. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBloodmoney Posted June 2, 2023 Author Share Posted June 2, 2023 57 minutes ago, serrated-banner9 said: and before you see you won't rank because it isn't really a game then i will say that you have .detuned in your list so i don't see why linger in showdews shoudn't I never say that - all S-Ranked games are to be ranked, and Linger in Shadows is as much a game as any! I’ll add it to the Priority list with your name… …might still be a while though, as we’re in the busy time for me in my work / personal life, so I have enough trouble keeping up with the new reviews, let alone the Legacy ones! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serrated-banner9 Posted June 3, 2023 Share Posted June 3, 2023 14 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said: I never say that - all S-Ranked games are to be ranked, and Linger in Shadows is as much a game as any! I’ll add it to the Priority list with your name… …might still be a while though, as we’re in the busy time for me in my work / personal life, so I have enough trouble keeping up with the new reviews, let alone the Legacy ones! true but i was saying it just in case you did, i still surprised that you didn't do it with the other smaller games reviews you did a couple of months back. Also, off topic, but have you ever heard of the youtuber The Stupendium? he makes good songs based on video games and i'm going to use his song fro Evil Genius 2 because it's a fantasic songs based on a awesome game (Which you should play, i recommend it) he also did a hitman 3 song 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBloodmoney Posted June 11, 2023 Author Share Posted June 11, 2023 !!SCIENCE UPDATE!! The next (somewhat) randomly selected games to be submitted for scientific analysis shall be: Legacy 3D Dot Game Heroes Chime Sharp New Humanity Metal: Hellsinger Alan Wake: Remastered Subject(s) in RED marked for PRIORITY ASSIGNEMENT [Care of @Copanele & @grayhammmer ] 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! 4 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