Jump to content

RealM722's Trophy Cabinet


realm722

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, realm722 said:

spacer.png

Game: Aztech: Forgotten Gods (Limited World / Action (Simple))

 

Maaan I so wanted this game to be good...I LOVE Mesoamerican mythology-based videogames.

But then I saw the gameplay...and the choppiness...and the nonstop talking...and the poor reviews...and now this review 😅Guess I will sit this one out in the end.

 

An Aztec May Cry videogame would be so damn awesome though...

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Thanks for the shout-out! 🥰 And yup, I wear my Shape of the World "hater" badge with confidence. 😂

 

Another reason why I love when people have a game rankings list in their OP (or a link to it) is that it really helps determine where our tastes are similar and where they diverge. For example, I am so goddamn excited for Marvel's Spider-Man 2 to release in just a few days. I ranked the first game as a 9/10, and Miles Morales as a 7/10. If someone ranked the first game as something equivalent to a 5/10, their opinion is still totally valid! However, it means that the things I really enjoyed about the game probably did not click to the same extent for that person. Thus, were they to write a review for Marvel's Spider-Man 2 and score it as an 8/10, that would indicate to me that either the latest game removed a lot of pain points for that player which were things I really enjoyed, or it added in a lot of new stuff that may or may not resonate for me as well. And of course, if that person gave the newest game a 4/10 then I would mostly be interested to see if the newest game still shared a lot of the same pain points for that player, or if there were new pain points that I would also potentially dislike. So there is still the potential for me to gain valuable insights either way, and game rankings are a nice shorthand for how likely I am to agree or disagree with that person's perspective.

 

Beyond the usefulness of looking at "Game: The Sequel" reviews, a game rankings list is a nice, quick way to get a reference point for what types of games someone likes in general. I'm still going to want to read their reviews to see what they have to say. As you said, sometimes someone reviewing a game outside their preferred genres can provide valuable insight. That's one reason why I adore your Final Fantasy VII: Remake review - not only does it give me the perspective of someone who has never played the OG FFVII, it's the perspective of someone entirely new to that behemoth of a franchise. Your review helped me to know that it isn't just us diehard FFVII fans who loved the Remake, but that the game is accessible to newcomers as well. Another benefit to game rankings is the value when someone typically ranks a genre of games pretty high or low, and then there are a few specific games that they ranked completely opposite. 

 

One of my favorite things about everyone's personal threads here in Trophy Checklist Land is that I have discovered some fantastic games because they ranked so highly for people who tend to have more similar opinions to mine than differing opinions. There are some games that have been recommended to me by people here that I'm so excited to play when the time comes. The best thing is that this community is so chill, so even if I end up really disliking the game, I know that if someone were to post something about grabbing a torch and pitchfork, it would be said in a joking manner versus a serious one.

 

Finally, it's been interesting in recent years to watch general online discourse evolve in regard to gaming (and even TV/movie) reviews. I've seen people joke, "Oh this game was an unplayable mess of a dumpster fire, so IGN will of course rate it a 6/10". Independent online content creators might feel pressured to be less harsh on a game in order to maintain a positive relationship with devs or publishers so they can continue to get early access codes. Then there's the review-bombing phenomena, which can harnessed by a gaming community that feels slighted or taken advantage of by a game (ie, Overwatch 2) but can also be weaponized because of things like "Grrr how dare you put the LGBT romances in my game". Honestly, there's so much that can be unpacked and discussed in terms of how gaming journalism is no longer as centralized as it once was, for both good and bad. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, pelagia14 said:

For example, I am so goddamn excited for Marvel's Spider-Man 2 to release in just a few days. I ranked the first game as a 9/10, and Miles Morales as a 7/10. If someone ranked the first game as something equivalent to a 5/10, their opinion is still totally valid! However, it means that the things I really enjoyed about the game probably did not click to the same extent for that person. Thus, were they to write a review for Marvel's Spider-Man 2 and score it as an 8/10, that would indicate to me that either the latest game removed a lot of pain points for that player which were things I really enjoyed, or it added in a lot of new stuff that may or may not resonate for me as well. And of course, if that person gave the newest game a 4/10 then I would mostly be interested to see if the newest game still shared a lot of the same pain points for that player, or if there were new pain points that I would also potentially dislike. So there is still the potential for me to gain valuable insights either way, and game rankings are a nice shorthand for how likely I am to agree or disagree with that person's perspective.

 

  Sequels are funny in that way. I think one of the best recent examples if Tears of the Kingdom. While a bunch of praise came out as expected, I've noticed a more frequent dissenting opinion from those who've played and loved the original believing that the game didn't improve in the ways they would have liked (exact same combat system, again no shrines, etc..) whereas I know a friend's kid who DIDN'T play the original and played the sequel and it is unquestionably their favorite game of All-Time. It's hard to recapture that mystique and awe on a second go-around. I know I wanna play the second Spider-Man but I gotta get around to that Miles Morales first... thankfully Sony actually puts their games on sale unlike Nintendo so hopefully I can snag MM for $15 and the 2nd Spider-Man months down the line when it first goes on sale.

 

9 hours ago, pelagia14 said:

That's one reason why I adore your Final Fantasy VII: Remake review - not only does it give me the perspective of someone who has never played the OG FFVII, it's the perspective of someone entirely new to that behemoth of a franchise. Your review helped me to know that it isn't just us diehard FFVII fans who loved the Remake, but that the game is accessible to newcomers as well. Another benefit to game rankings is the value when someone typically ranks a genre of games pretty high or low, and then there are a few specific games that they ranked completely opposite.

 

Thank you for the kind words. That FF7R review really marked a turning point in this thread... I had played many games I've loved before but so remarkably few that had the aura around it like FF7 does that it just came bursting out of me while writing. I have avoided all of the trailers when it comes to Rebirth. That is going to be one of my INSANELY rare Day 1 $70 purchases and I don't even doubt I'm going to love it just being with that cast and that juicy combat system again.

 

9 hours ago, pelagia14 said:

One of my favorite things about everyone's personal threads here in Trophy Checklist Land is that I have discovered some fantastic games because they ranked so highly for people who tend to have more similar opinions to mine than differing opinions. There are some games that have been recommended to me by people here that I'm so excited to play when the time comes. The best thing is that this community is so chill, so even if I end up really disliking the game, I know that if someone were to post something about grabbing a torch and pitchfork, it would be said in a joking manner versus a serious one.

 

It's my favorite part of this forum. I would have never played Shadow Tactics if Cassy hadn't reviewed it. I would have never touched Ash of Gods without Briste. I have plenty of fun unearthing gems of my own (Going Under, Tunche, Paradise Killer) but getting that itch to play someone because an avatar on a forum you're familiar with over the course of several years gets me giddy. It's also great for filtering a lot of titles that I was hesitant on and ended up not being worth the squeeze.

 

9 hours ago, pelagia14 said:

Finally, it's been interesting in recent years to watch general online discourse evolve in regard to gaming (and even TV/movie) reviews. I've seen people joke, "Oh this game was an unplayable mess of a dumpster fire, so IGN will of course rate it a 6/10". Independent online content creators might feel pressured to be less harsh on a game in order to maintain a positive relationship with devs or publishers so they can continue to get early access codes. Then there's the review-bombing phenomena, which can harnessed by a gaming community that feels slighted or taken advantage of by a game (ie, Overwatch 2) but can also be weaponized because of things like "Grrr how dare you put the LGBT romances in my game". Honestly, there's so much that can be unpacked and discussed in terms of how gaming journalism is no longer as centralized as it once was, for both good and bad. 

 

IGN and any of the major gaming outlets at this point just serve as a piñata for gamers. The people dunking on them or Kotaku at this point don't actually consume their content. They just see a headline of "IGN scored X game X" and type away. Another one I love is: "you do this just for clicks". I don't doubt those writers exist. But the way it's used as a crutch for anybody who disagrees with a nonconventional opinion is pretty funny. Sports fans with ESPN are the same way. "It's sad to see how far it's declined." Buddy. ESPN is gigantic. It's a buffet. Ignore the stuff you don't like. Enjoy the stuff you do like. It ain't that complicated. As for the review-bombing... yea... I dunno the solution for that. I don't engage with any review aggregate website (Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, etc..) so it's not something I confront often. I imagine some website inevitably in the future will create a requirement for a minimum word count, filtered reviews by moderators, and a minimum account age of say like 3+ months"... that actually doesn't sound like a terrible idea. They just need a catchy name for it. Something like... "The Casual Critiquer".

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2023 at 5:07 PM, realm722 said:

(Gee, anybody reading this who has a thread and doesn't have something like this in their OP should really make one. Do it. Just for me. I promise you I'll look at it. I love this crap).

 

Shiiiiit... I could try😂

 

Great read as usual, my dude! I also do the lowest rated review thing... not to hate but I just get this paranoid sense of "but what's the REAL shit goin on here..." cuz a lot of positive reviews, especially for the type of game I might not immediately be attracted to, can get me wary.

 

We are not a normal bunch😂

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever since I first saw the game's gorgeous art in your signature, I've been eagerly awaiting this review to see how the game itself holds up!

 

3 hours ago, realm722 said:

I believe this game has been overlooked enough for how creative it is that it has earned a 9.0-worthy deep dive, even if I don't QUITE adore the game to those levels. I want to get into the nitty gritty super specific game details that may as well read lie a foreign language if you've never played the title just because I want to savior it for posterity. This game now joins the ranks alongside Paradise Killer & The Banner Saga of ridiculously niche titles that I will recommend at every turn to other players just so they can play something DIFFERENT. I hope you understand. Without further ado, away we go!

 

I was excited when you talked about the hilariously chaotic situations and trophy list encouraging different playstyles, but the above paragraph is when I really started to be sold! Since I don't have personal income right now I need to be conservative about when I purchase new games - my husband recently bought AC Mirage and Spider-Man 2, though, so this is a high contender for something to treat myself with! (Ironically, another one on the list is also a story-driven adventure with a unique art style from a German studio, so maybe I'll be bad and get them both! 😂)

 

3 hours ago, realm722 said:

More Ambition In This Genre of Game - I think part of the reason I enjoyed this game so much is because it felt so refreshingly different. They didn't decide to go down the exact same route of so many other games and make a real-time combat focused roguelite that's in the mold of so many other titles. They tried to create a world and scenario and that's so unique. Playing as an explorer. Unventured lands. Trying to make sense of everything and survive in the process regardles of what difficulties the player may face. I think the key to making this game bigger and better is just making MORE of it. Adding even more encounter possibilities. Making sure that there's a certain counter to "meta" tactics to ensure the player stays on their toes and freshly engaged as opposd to resorting to the same old methods. I would absolutely love to see these developers get a 3rd crack at this sort of game. The original Curious Expedition is also available on PS4. I didn't decide to scoop it up since the art seemed paltry to this one by comparison, and the majestic artwork of this game is what prompted me to give it some run in the first place. Could you imagine what these folks could do with a 3rd game? I just don't know if the game has received the necessary love toe ven make that possible.

 

I love games that truly go out and do something different instead of sticking to "tried and true" video game formulas! Speaking of Paradise Island that you brought up, I played the game a few weeks ago and was blown away by how confidently unique it was. Just like you go on to say in your recommendation section, it doesn't matter to me if a game is a 10/10 'perfect' game if it provides a solid, unique experience.

 

The first Curious Expedition has a free online demo that you can check out, if at some point you feel curious but want to first see if it's worth paying for. Apparently the game was made entirely in HTML5 (or at least the demo), which blows my mind either way. The developers also wrote a really interesting case study about the success of their first game over the course of 8 years, and while the developers are not rich the game itself was profitable. They seem to have a strong PC base, since it took over 5 years before the first game ended early access and was brought to consoles, so we might be fortunate enough to see what they can do with a third game!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, realm722 said:

Would I recommend Minute of Islands? Absolutely not.


Thanks for taking the bullet on this one. I had been looking at it. Graphics remind me of Adventure Time, which is probably what caught my eye, but I was holding off until I heard more about the game. I think I’ve heard enough. Game selection is too big these to settle for mediocrity.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Curious expedition 2 sounds like a must play, great review - I won't get to it this side of Xmas but next year I certainly will. Thank you for both taking the plunge and then lovingly and compellingly relaying it to all those that lurk in these caverns of yours so that we might get to experience it too!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I agree that not showing the award for Best Music was a huge miss. They go to the effort of having the symphonic orchestra play a medley of the GOTY nominees (which I always look forward to) right before announcing the winner, so they understand that music is important... but screw the award, I guess. I did love how Flute Guy™️ was jamming again this year.

 

While the "Oscar music to end a speech" joke with Chris Judge was funny, I was very frustrated that there seemed to be a precise 30-second timer or something for the award speeches. I watch the Game Awards for the World Premiers and the celebration of creatives in the industry, and last night was terrible for the latter. Heck, if I just wanted to watch World Premiers I could just find them online today to watch.

 

One thing I think is completely unnecessary is having people like Kojima or Sean Murray on stage to introduce/explain their 'big reveals'. That's better suited to E3, in my opinion, and the minutes gained by removing these on-stage speeches could go to things like the Best Music award. That kind of dovetails into my frustration at the focus towards shoe-horning in Hollywood actors into the award show. This isn't the early oughts when the videogame industry was widely looked down upon - now, anyone who has looked at the industry for more than five minutes can see how much creativity there is to celebrate. We don't need the shiny Hollywood celebs to bring viewership to the show, that's what the world premiers are for. 

 

For example, Al Pacino was such a weird choice last year. He wasn't a part of any videogames made in the previous year, and even if the previous year's winner (Maggie Robertson for Lady Dimitrescu) was unavailable to present the award, they could have found a previous nominee or something to present it. Timothee Chalamet in comparison has at least played videogames, but he wasn't super effusive about it on stage, so I was left wondering if his presence was some sort of subtle marketing promo to remind people about Dune 2 and Wonka coming out in a few months. The only Hollywood celebs I want to see at TGA are those who were actually involved in video games through stuff like mo-cap or voice work, like Simu Liu last night. 

 

Finally, I completely agree that GOTY should be presented by well-known industry veterans. Sure a lot of casual gamers might not recognize these individuals, but Geoff usually introduces each presenter anyway, and the audience for this show isn't solely aimed at casual gamers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/8/2023 at 2:28 PM, pelagia14 said:

While the "Oscar music to end a speech" joke with Chris Judge was funny, I was very frustrated that there seemed to be a precise 30-second timer or something for the award speeches. I watch the Game Awards for the World Premiers and the celebration of creatives in the industry, and last night was terrible for the latter. Heck, if I just wanted to watch World Premiers I could just find them online today to watch.

 

Yea... the counter you'll always be hit with if they removed the World Premieres is: "nobody would watch then!" which like... were people watching this the first few years back when huge game studios weren't announcing their brand new games? I feel like despite how incredibly tacky the show was with MTV sponsorship and ads up the wahzoo, people still held out because they enjoyed this thing. I think the show could definitely slice back on the CONSTANT advertisements and give the Award winners more room to breathe and it'd still retain a solid audience. I dunno. It's up to Geoff ultimately and he's gotta organize this thing and get funding on board so hey.

 

On 12/8/2023 at 2:28 PM, pelagia14 said:

One thing I think is completely unnecessary is having people like Kojima or Sean Murray on stage to introduce/explain their 'big reveals'. That's better suited to E3, in my opinion, and the minutes gained by removing these on-stage speeches could go to things like the Best Music award. That kind of dovetails into my frustration at the focus towards shoe-horning in Hollywood actors into the award show. This isn't the early oughts when the videogame industry was widely looked down upon - now, anyone who has looked at the industry for more than five minutes can see how much creativity there is to celebrate. We don't need the shiny Hollywood celebs to bring viewership to the show, that's what the world premiers are for.

 

See... while I complained about it in my post, I'm actually OKAY with having Kojima & Murray up there. I just wish it wasn't so egregious the time disparity between their segments and that of the Award speeches. I actually think it's pretty cool Kojima is celebrated as one of the premier GUYS in the industry. The man is 60 YEARS OLD and out here still making games and has a passion for his work. In another 20 years or so, I think it's going to be pretty awesome to say we celebrated him when we got the chance, even if it this pretty awkward "hey this is an Award show but announce your new thing". Same thing with Murray. The only way you get gamers familiar with faces behind the names is putting them on stage... maybe... in the year 2040, The Game Awards won't ask X Gen Z actor to announce Game of the Year Award, but rather, Sean Murray, all because he was featured on stage and audiences may actually know who he is.

 

E3 is also dead dead so that's no longer a viability.

 

It's an interesting conundrum. The more I thought about the post after making it is that there's so much more the show could be. There could be years with themes celebrating old consoles. Celebrate the Dreamcast. Have a "Lifetime Achievement" award for a guy like Toru Iwatani who literally made PAC-MAN & Libble Rabble. Take advantage of the fact this industry is so young and almost everybody relevant who made all these pillars of the industry are STILL ALIVE and you can have them in the public eye before it's too late. Have a segment dedicated to the importance of Game Preservation with all the eyeballs on your event. Maybe Geoff avoids this stuff since he doesn't want to step on any toes. Maybe the big suits in the shadows don't care about any of it and just want to see money number get bigger. I cannot fathom the time and organization it must take to pull the event off in the first place and it's easy to criticize from afar but yea... maybe next year will be better. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, realm722 said:

Yea... the counter you'll always be hit with if they removed the World Premieres is: "nobody would watch then!" which like... were people watching this the first few years back when huge game studios weren't announcing their brand new games? I feel like despite how incredibly tacky the show was with MTV sponsorship and ads up the wahzoo, people still held out because they enjoyed this thing. I think the show could definitely slice back on the CONSTANT advertisements and give the Award winners more room to breathe and it'd still retain a solid audience. I dunno. It's up to Geoff ultimately and he's gotta organize this thing and get funding on board so hey.

 

I agree that the World Premiers are needed - even if it's just to convince advertisers that their paid ads during the show will get eyeballs. My point was more that if the show isn't going to *also* properly celebrate the incredible minds in the industry... then why should I tune in? 

 

I know there were a decent amount of ads in the show, but since I was multitasking I honestly didn't notice a lot of them. 😅 And while there are a lot of ads in order to pay for the show, at least they are tailored to gaming, so it doesn't feel as much like cable TV when you get random commercial breaks of totally unrelated stuff.

 

3 hours ago, realm722 said:

See... while I complained about it in my post, I'm actually OKAY with having Kojima & Murray up there. I just wish it wasn't so egregious the time disparity between their segments and that of the Award speeches. I actually think it's pretty cool Kojima is celebrated as one of the premier GUYS in the industry. The man is 60 YEARS OLD and out here still making games and has a passion for his work. In another 20 years or so, I think it's going to be pretty awesome to say we celebrated him when we got the chance, even if it this pretty awkward "hey this is an Award show but announce your new thing". Same thing with Murray. The only way you get gamers familiar with faces behind the names is putting them on stage... maybe... in the year 2040, The Game Awards won't ask X Gen Z actor to announce Game of the Year Award, but rather, Sean Murray, all because he was featured on stage and audiences may actually know who he is.

 

E3 is also dead dead so that's no longer a viability.

 

I suppose my big issue with Kojima and Murray was the time disparity compared to the award speeches, which you identified much better than me. At the same time, Geoff now runs the Summer Games Fest which I feel is more suited to the "announce your thing" if The Game Awards is going to have a dozen world premiers alongside the actual awards. When it's trying to do all three things (plus ads to pay for the show), things like Award for Best Music and speech length are the things that get sacrificed first. Try doing too many things and then you end up doing nothing well. 

 

3 hours ago, realm722 said:

It's an interesting conundrum. The more I thought about the post after making it is that there's so much more the show could be. There could be years with themes celebrating old consoles. Celebrate the Dreamcast. Have a "Lifetime Achievement" award for a guy like Toru Iwatani who literally made PAC-MAN & Libble Rabble. Take advantage of the fact this industry is so young and almost everybody relevant who made all these pillars of the industry are STILL ALIVE and you can have them in the public eye before it's too late. Have a segment dedicated to the importance of Game Preservation with all the eyeballs on your event. Maybe Geoff avoids this stuff since he doesn't want to step on any toes. Maybe the big suits in the shadows don't care about any of it and just want to see money number get bigger. I cannot fathom the time and organization it must take to pull the event off in the first place and it's easy to criticize from afar but yea... maybe next year will be better. 

 

There truly is so much that could be done to celebrate the industry. I think about how the Oscars will often pick one 'trade' of the film industry to highlight in a short segment, like costume making or set design. One year you could have a 2-minute video that shows the audience a fragment of what goes into sound engineering, right before you announce Award for Best Sound. The next year could be a 3-minute video on all the work that goes into being a Game Director followed by the Award for Best Game Direction. Segments on game preservation, lifetime achievement awards... It would even be fun to have a 1-2 minute video that highlights some of the biggest games that came out 20 then 15 then 10 then 5 years ago, perhaps as a segue into game preservation.

 

These are the kinds of things that could be brought to TGA if they prioritized celebrating the videogame industry, and perhaps having a max cap of 8 world premiers or something. Focusing more on the awards probably means that there is less advertising money to fund TGA, but maybe you could have the 3 minute industry snippets sponsored by big brands like Coca-Cola, so Geoff mentions the brand in the intro to the segment (and, as much as I would hate this, maybe their "sponsored by [logo]" shows on screen for 1-2 seconds before the segment starts).

 

I definitely agree that it's important for us to keep in mind that criticizing an event is infinitely easier than planning, organizing, and running and event. At the same time, I want TGA to be a must-see event that is all about celebrating the industry, so that is always where my criticism comes from. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

949b03cb83695ee5d2c70611ff204c3b8627fd58

Game: Toem (Mosey Adventure / Puzzle)

 

Analysis: I did not buy Toem. Rather, I got it for free along with many other PS+ Users during the month of September 2022.

 

Why Toem? My decision to finally play Toem after having it sit in my backlog for well over a year was fairly straightforward. I've completed 49 different games during the course of 2023 and wanted a simple one to wrap up the catalog so I could end with a perfectly round 50 before getting to my end-of-year awards post. While I had a few other games that I could have dabbled with, Toem's sweet simple aesthetic appealed to me and I figured I'd take a gander to see what all the fuss was about given it received a 10/10 rating on Steam!

 

A Simple Game About Taking Photos - The game's structure is extremely simple to explain. You play as a wee boy and have a camera. Take photos of interesting things, animals, and people while you help them solve their various woes. This can include photographing specific things they have requested or figuring out simple puzzles with the use a few mechanics such as a honk and splash that you'll receive over the course of your play-time. Do this around 4-5 times across different zones and before you know it, the journey will be over! That's honestly all there is to it. I find the game to be... fine. It's cute. There are a ton of animals to photograph and occasionally you'll come across a humorous NPC but I'm just a tiny bit perplexed by the overwhelming praise the game has received. When I think of another "cozy" title such as Unpacking, I can understand why that game would be beloved by somebody despite its simple mechanics. Toem is just kinda... less unique? It's fun to take photos. You can even add filters and the game is appreciatively brisk not wasting much of the player's time with confusing quests or puzzles but I just thought it was decent and didn't find it to be particularly memorable.

 

My Own Enjoyment with Photography - What the game did spark in me was a desire to talk a bit about photography in general. There's a line I somewhat frequently think about from Scarlett Johansson's character from Lost in Translation. "Every girl goes through a photography phase." I'm not a girl. Nor do I think my appreciation for photography is a phase. Rather, I enjoy taking photos of people above all else. But not posed photos. Candid ones. (Of friends, not strangers). Not when they look ridiculous either or trying to catch somebody in a bad light. I think there's a very special, evasive quality that simply cannot be captured about somebody who they know they're being photographed. It's that genuineness I try to capture. I don't do it creepily. (Then again, I guess that's not really for me to decide?) I don't publicize these photos anywhere. I keep them for myself. Sometimes I make fun miniature movies out of them with my amateur video editing skills. They're typically a pretty huge hit. This has on one hand garnered me the reputation of somebody you have to be wary of in case I catch you in a slipping. But as they know it's all in good fun, I've never had anybody form too much of a fuss over it. Here are my photo/video-taking rules. #1. Always shoot horizontally. Shooting vertically is disgusting. I always frame my pictures for a big-screen TV, not somebody's phone. #2. Get in and get out. Don't linger. You can take multiples if necessary but spending an eternity for a specific, perfect shot is chasing futility in the wind. #3. Never put filters on people in your photos. People have pores. Let people exist in truth of themselves.

 

My Journey to the Platinum - Didn't mean to get so sidetracked from the game there. Honestly, this is a super straightforward platinum. I believe there are just a handful of trophies you'd save yourself some trouble and look up the requirements/recommendations beforehand so the road to completion is as simple as it should be. If you're somebody who prefers a visual aid, this guide by The Welsh Hunter on YouTube is sublime. Seriously, I've used this guy for other games and he's fantastic. He stays with the player throughout the course of the experience providing some commentary that can keep you mildly entertained even as he dips into some of the same pockets humor just a tad much for my liking. The game also comes with a free "Bastos" DLC which is just some more of what you already completed in the main game. My favorite part of it was the carnival where you can play a few mini-games such as a rhythm one, firing range, and match-the-face. All in all, I earned the 64.77% rarity platinum in 4 days and 1 hour. That marks my 39th and final platinum of 2023!

 

Would I recommend Toem? I honestly think you can pass on this one. If you're purely looking for games that offer cozy experiences, I think you can do better than Toem. That being said, spending only 3 hours or so to get a platinum will likely be enough intrigue for most to dabble in it and I don't think it's a regrettable time either. While I don't think I finished my 2023 Year in Gaming on a triumphant note, it's not a wet fart either. All in all, I think I've had a pretty decent year in games and I think that'll be reflected in the Awards ceremony. Aside from that, I'm still recuperating from the Monday Night implosion the Dolphins suffered. Though I'm optimistic we'll get back on track against the Jets this Sunday. I'm up to 196 movies watched in the year. I'll get 4 more in the bag to get the nice round 200. 50 video games played and 200 movies seen in a year ain't bad, eh?

 

Panda Score: 6.2 / 10

Panda Difficulty: 1.7 / 10

Panda Time to Platinum: 4 Hours

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

nba_preview-clairvoyant_bill_slide.jpg

How Accurate Were My Metacritic Predictions for the Biggest Games in 2023?

 

  Back in February of this year, I decided to give myself the little challenge of trying to predict the Metacritic score for all the biggest releases of 2023. 2023 has largely come and gone. It's now time to see how accurate my "vibes" meter was for how I thought a title would ultimately be scored. This is of course focusing on the Critic score, not the User score, and depending on the game I will clarify for which platform it was released. As a treat, I also have the predictions of @Platinum_Vice and @serrated-banner9 who decided to play along with me and make their own predictions for each of the games I included in my post. I don't know whether to thank you guys for making me look better by comparison or be mad that you guys outperformed me in my own thread. Let's find out!

 

YtRvYLq.png

 

Thoughts on the Results: WOW! Am I a genius or WHAT? No, but seriously, I'm pretty impressed by how well I did by just sorta shooting at the hip from my gut instinct when reviewing some of the biggest games set to be released. Shoutout to Vice for nailing to the Hogwarts score. I was a bit more tentative on scoring it given all of the JK-off-the-game drama but the game has sold like hotcakes and will undoubtedly get a sequel. The biggest criticism I've heard from it is that they should have made the school portion an even bigger focus for the player rather than stuff outside of the school. Atomic Heart I was essentially on the money. The game looked INCREDIBLE in its debut trailer. It did not live up to the hype. The game frankly received so little coverage upon release that I forget why it ultimately failed to deliver. I PERFECTO scored Wo Long. It's by Team Ninja. It looked solid. I gave it a damn solid score. Badda bing badda boom.

 

Moving on to Crime Boss, not even myself in all my cynicism could have predicted it scoring in the low 50s. In Vice & Serrated's defense, they had never even heard of the game hence the scores in the 80's. Don't trust games that aren't from big studios that market their hired voice talent above all else. Look at 12 Minutes as another example of this! Star Wars: Jedi Survivor was a hit. While I will admit, the PC score is dragged down to the high 70s due to the tremendous amount of performance issues, there were more critic reviews for the PS5 than for PC so I feel comfortable making the PS5 85 the default. Sadly, all 3 of us were woefully wrong about Redfall and did not realize how much Arkane fell off. That game was BAD and I saw YouTube videos of people talking about how bad it was. That's pretty stunning from a studio with such a good history. Hopefully, they bounce back with that Blade game to win back some of their reputation.

 

Tears of the Kingdom I somehow managed to UNDERRATE despite giving it a 93. Something in my soul tells me that some people's opinion of the game is going to sour a bit as time goes on. Suicide Squad game did not come out. They did another trailer at The Game Awards 2023. They delayed the game outta 2023 after the way it was lambasted in review scores. It's such a shame that a studio that gave us the ARKHAM TRILOGY has had their talents wallowed away at something that I can't quite fathom scoring much higher than the mid-70s. As for Final Fantasy 16, I'll admit I took the bait hook-line-and-sinker. That intro for the demo was INCREDIBLE. Game of Thrones + Final Fantasy + Action Combat from FF14 Bros? Seemed like a perfect match. Then I watched Joseph Anderson stream it while on vacation in Puerto Rico. While entertaining for its spectacle, I miss the party members of old Final Fantasys and uhh... woof there's just a whole lotta SLOWNESS in the game from the atrocious side quests to lengthy melodramatic scenes. Serrated deserves to be me with an 85. Silksong still isn't out. I kinda nailed Starfield but that game has been OBLITERATED by fans on YouTube. Seriously, my entire feed is just people talking about how much the game sucks and is outdated, even by Bethesda standards. I think in the long run, Vice & Serrated's scores will more accurately reflect how the public feel about it. Finally, Spider-Man 2 was predictably a very good sequel and I can't wait to get around to it one day.

 

This was fun! I plan on making a 2024 Metacritic Predictions thread when we tick on over to January. If you enjoyed this, feel free to poke in then and compete with me!

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...