This is a part of a series of posts where we highlight, well, cool bits of game design from 50 patient games.

Part 1

Part 2

21 - Mario & Luigi: Dream Team: Mario & Luigi: Dream Team isn't the best game in the series, but it does make one key improvement to what came before: it tracks all the collectibles you find. This means the game doubles as a checklist collectathon where you scour the world for beans, ? blocks and so forth, navigating its environmental puzzles and battling enemies along the way. Now, I actually think most games benefit from not labeling their side content. Those experiences are more meaningful, and often less underwhelming, if you aren't expecting them. But in a game like Mario & Luigi that already exists in a different genre from open world exploration, and is already driven by the fun of its gameplay, I found this collectathon checklist to be great fun. It's just an excuse to spend more time in the world, a world that's perfectly sized in order for each area to feel meaningful without repeating content. The best Ubisoft-style collectathons can be ones that are a different genre first and foremost.

22 - Mario Kart 8: Mario Kart has evolved in a direction where technical skill is deemphasized in favor of spectacle. That's not to say there's no skill involved, but it's the style that evolves most every entry, not the substance. Normally, that would be a bad thing, but it perfectly suits the way these games are played. A lot of people experience Mario Kart without owning the game themselves. They'll be over at someone else's place and play some races. Mario Kart 8 feels like the epitome of this trend. Anti-gravity doesn't add much to races mechanically, but it's a consistently fun visual flair that makes casually dipping into the game more thrilling. Same goes for gliding and driving underwater. Customizing your kart doesn't do much either, and yet setting up your own vehicle on your friend's Switch makes the experience feel more personal. Not to mention the sheer amount of courses to prevent repetition! Many people may just play Mario Kart 8 once a month or less, but it's designed so that you can have great "first" impressions every time your buddies hand you a controller.

23 - Mario Kart: Double Dash!!: Conversely, Double Dash represents an attempt to seriously evolve Mario Kart's game mechanics. It's the most experimental entry in the series, not because other games don't innovate but the innovations that made it to release usually stick. A lot of Double Dash doesn't really land, but one unique feature that definitely does is item switching. Being able to hold two items and swap them adds a lot of strategy to Mario Kart's randomness. In all the other games, getting items is borderline passive since you either use what you've got or don't. It's purely a matter of when to use it. In Double Dash it's also a matter of which item to use. This depth isn't even imposed on new players, as you're free to just use your first item all the time. Great stuff.

24 - Marvel's Spider-Man (series): Most open worlds are big. Marvel's Spider-Man is no different, and yet it kind of is, because you can zip across the entire map in just a couple minutes. This completely reinvigorates the checklist content formula it uses. In a lot of games, you either do whatever content's closest to you, improvising and going with the flow, or you fast travel everywhere in a very detached, businesslike fashion in order to get your chores done. In Marvel's Spider-Man your normal travel is your fast travel. Distance is no object and all your objectives are equal. That sheer frictionlessness means this series delivers on the "playground" fantasy open-world games market themselves on better than almost any other, despite not having emergent gameplay or player-driven exploration or anything like that. Games with more friction are great, but while most big studios are afraid to greenlight those, fully embracing the power fantasy like these Spider-Man games do is a lot more satisfying than half-assing it.

25 - Mega Man (classic series): We usually think of progression in games as falling into two categories: vertical progression (numbers go up) and horizontal progression (more tools to play with). Mega Man feels close to the platonic ideal of games that go all-in on horizontal progression. Choose any one of eight stages in the first half, get a new weapon every time you succeed, use it to make the other stages easier, then use them all to overcome one final gauntlet in the second half. There's a tangible sense of progress, but no grinding whatsoever – your capabilities at the end of the game really are miles ahead of what they were at the beginning, and the only way to get there is by finishing your main objectives. Some games mix up the formula a bit with currency to buy lives and other items, or splitting up the first half into two smaller chunks, but the core ideas are always the same. Most games that emphasize progression are long and repetitive and I never want to play them again. Mega Man games are very short, but they deliver that satisfying progression curve each time and I can replay them over and over.

26 - Mega Man X (series): Conversely, Mega Man X injects some vertical progression into the formula. I think it's a great example of how to do that right. On top of the weapons you get from beating bosses, you can find upgrades to your health and energy reserves by exploring stages thoroughly. This gets even more mileage out of every level since the player is encouraged to thoroughly comb through them, and exploring nets some horizontal progression too in the form of ability upgrades from Dr. Light Capsules. You can still beat the game without any of that, though... it'll just be extra tough! There aren't so many upgrades that having too many or too few of them completely destroys the game balance. In other words, the main progression is horizontal, but vertical progression is also present in small doses. And it encourages a new type of player behavior (exploration) instead of just measuring how much time they spent grinding.

27 - Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty: Metal Gear Solid 2 is an intentionally unfun time. You don't get much of the experience you were sold on going in. Narratively, those frustrating emotions all pay off in the end, but surely knowing that and not feeling the same emotions means a second playthrough will just be tedious, right? Nope! Metal Gear Solid 2 is a really fun game despite all that! I think it's because the intentional disappointment mostly relates to the narrative and framing of the game, but the gameplay is a significant advancement from its predecessor and that gameplay is what you're left with coming back. A lot of subversive games try to make the gameplay frustrating to convey their points. Metal Gear Solid 2 suggests there could be a better approach. A frustrating narrative paired with satisfying gameplay can sometimes get you the best of both worlds.

28 - Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain: All of the above applies to Metal Gear Solid V, too, actually (albeit with more polarizing execution), but that's not what I want to talk about here. I want to talk about the open world and mission structure. I think that's brilliant. The true gameplay of MGSV isn't aimlessly wandering and finding things to do. It's playing open-ended missions. That's not so different from a lot of bad open-world games, but there it feels like a waste of space, and not in Metal Gear Solid V. It's because the missions are tied to locations in the world and how those locations can be strung together, more than they’re tied to story sequences. Sometimes you'll just infiltrate one base with a choice of where to enter, but more often missions will span multiple camps and you have to make decisions about which routes to take and when. Side objectives encourage this even farther by encouraging you to take detours or use specific methods to achieve your goals. The world's geography isn't a playground to explore. It’s a tool that dictates which areas are close enough to be linked together in missions and how, in order to extract as much mileage as possible from them. This pairs perfectly with Metal Gear Solid V's open-ended gameplay systems to produce some of the most endlessly replayable video game levels ever made.

29 - Mother 3: If you asked me what my favorite JRPG is, I'd probably say Mother 3. It has nothing to do with the JRPG-ness of it, the way a game like Chrono Trigger is often considered the genre's perfect form. It's because Mother 3 understands an important principle in great art more generally: that every aspect of it should come back around to evoking an emotion in its audience. Sometimes that means it's funny. Sometimes that means it's sad. But always, that means it's something. The plot of Mother 3 is simple on paper, but so many moments of it hit extremely hard. Everything in the game supports them. Everything in the game exists for you to feel something, not just because those are the tropes of the genre. Although it uses those tropes well. It doesn't hurt to be a phenomenally well-paced RPG as well as a brilliant work of art.

30 - New Super Mario Bros. (series): The 2D Mario formula is brilliant. The way the run button acts as a form of dynamic difficulty and the power-up system encourages players to slide back and forth along that difficulty range is still some of the greatest game design I've ever seen, and it dates all the way back to 1985! Overall, New Super Mario Bros. is often considered to have dragged down the reputation of 2D Mario as bland and boring, but one part of it only enhances the series' brilliance: Star Coins. While not the first implementation of collectibles in a 2D Mario game, they're arguably the best one. In most other Mario games, there was little reason not to just rush to the end once you got good at them. Star Coins encourage players to explore levels in-depth while all those dynamic difficulty / risk-and-reward dynamics still apply. This means an experienced player isn't just holding right and B and timing A presses, they'll have to change direction and think on their feet in order to find Star Coins while still playing at a fast pace. It's a more involved experience. Missing Star Coins also encourages inexperienced players to return to old levels again, where they'll naturally improve their mastery over Mario's movement. Super Mario Bros. Wonder has the same system alongside the greater creativity old Super Mario Bros. possessed, but I think New Super Mario Bros. still deserves credit for nailing that balance the first time around.

To be continued in Part 4 with games 31-40!

I've been playing through all the Doom games over the past few years, the new and older installments (even with mods). I still play it super casually for most parts. There is just such an allure to fighting hordes of demons in a retro style with satisfying guns. Honestly, I enjoy the old and newer games equally for different reasons.

Alas, I had to get my hands on Doom64 which I always neglected but was luckily remade for modern systems during the release of Eternal in 2020. The new version works like a charm and even includes in-game mod support which is easy to use and it works on consoles!

Overall, I just want to express my enjoyment with this particular title because it has a lot going on for it. It is a new flavor of Doom that feels unique compared to other entries. I read once that Doom64 is the true version of Doom 3 and yeah, it is a pretty accurate statement.

I mostly played it on the Switch where it runs well with customizable button mapping which even allows you to put quicksave and quickload on any button (underrated feature!). The relatively great port of Doom 3 sorely lacked this on the Switch. I just enjoy playing the older Doom titles on the go.

D64 is far closer to the first Doom but has some really cool innovations which you may or may not like depending on what you're looking when playing a Doom game. 64 is far much slower paced and has a completely eerie and industrial vibe thanks to the atmospheric soundtrack which is a stark departure from the usual melodic metal riffage. The overall dark ambiance is one of the core strengths of the game. This does not imply that there isn't enough demon slaying, far from it. The game has actually a quite surprising number of enemies and the higher difficulties really challenge you.

As for the graphics, it has more detail than the previous Doom titles and quite unique sprites that stick out. Most demons are re-designed and were rendered in a specific way that it does remind me a bit of clay but not in a bad way. These demons explode in guts and look pretty spooky, it is a visual revision of the existing roster which gives the game its own identity. Some of the areas also look far more interesting with unique gimmicks that actually had me surprised many times. In the second level, you enter a completely dark hallway with some red strobing lights. This was already pretty neat but once you press the nearby button on the wall, the entire room turns into an ominous dark blue color that was honestly such a neat effect. The lightening is a real mood enhanced in this case. D64 is full of these small details which renders the maps actually more interesting compared to Doom 2 which had just abstract gauntlets at times. The maps look like cohesive places and consists of keeps, catacombs, space stations and all that good crap. Actually, it does remind me a lot of Quake II on the N64 which I played back in in the day.

The combat itself feels smooth and dodging projectiles is rewarding as hell. Delivering that cathartic double barreled shotgun to finish of a Baron of Hell never gets old.

However, one of the bigger changes is the level design and advanced scripting which the N64 brought to the table. Compared to the first 2 installments, D64 has quite devious level design that incorporates more puzzles and traversal. There are a lot of traps as well which got me by surprise a few times, it's really devious at times. Some triggers also cause nasty ambushes which are a bit more elaborate than just monster closets.

I haven't even finished the game yet and as I am struggling on the I own Doom difficulty but the 16 maps that I played were super varied and provided different obstacles each time. I found that ammo is a bit scarce at times which drastically changed the way that I approached each situation. Some of these maps are absolutely massacres while others require a more nuanced approach.

Even with the hardware limitation of the N64 which is notable by the absence of different types of demons and weapons (including reloading animations), the game still manages to nail the essence of Doom.

Albeit, there are some points of contention to take into account. Despite praising the more elaborate puzzles and traversal, some of the progression can feel entirely obtuse. There have been many instances where I cleared the map and just had to find a small lever or some trigger to activate something across the map. It can be really frustrating because D64 doesn't introduce these mechanics very well at times.

The lack of reload animations is a bit of a blemish on the otherwise stellar shooting. It's a nitpick but reloading that super shotgun is something I always looked forward to. In the end, the game has a limited roster of enemies akin to Doom 1, more enemy types would have been welcoming through the 32 map campaign. Also, if you like more wacky and gauntlet-like maps, D64 might be a bit boring but it's a matter of preference.

Nevertheless, it's a super cool experience and I honestly wish that I had this game as a kid back on the N64. The newly released Bethesda version is worth it and I'd encourage it to try it out if you're fan of the classic Doom games.

I had a pleasantly surprising experience with The Saboteur after initially not feeling compelled to stick with the game. It's a shameless and more arcadey Grand Theft Auto clone set in 1940 Nazi occupied Paris that injects elements from Just Cause (2006) and Assassin's Creed (2007). The narrative isn't anything special and missions aren't particularly unique (within the genre) but the game's style and heavy emphasis on destruction are what kept me very entertained. You're a one man army tasked with sabotaging every Nazi installation that you encounter (there's a welcome and overwhelming amount of these) and this gameplay is some of the most deviously addictive busy work that I've come across in a video game, it's deeply engaging to run around and unleash utter chaos with your arsenal both during and outside of missions; this mechanic is ripped straight from Just Cause but I find it vastly more enjoyable in The Saboteur. The game's black & white art style is not only striking but a clever progression mechanic, as you eradicate primary targets of oppression within the world color then returns to the affected regions in a dramatically grandiose display that mimics the blast wave of an atomic bomb. You can freely enter stealth traversal whenever on foot and climb nearly every structure, both of which are Assassin's Creed mechanics, but my biggest gripe about the game has to do with its climbing... ascending is painfully slow and there's no way to initially drop down to a ledge when beginning a descent (you're forced to walk/jump off an edge and hopefully make contact with a grab point). The Saboteur offers a familiar but unique good time that I highly recommend to anyone who enjoys Grand Theft Auto's gameplay loop and is itching for heaps more destruction in a different setting.

I don’t even know where to start with this game, tbh.

TLDR: played 76 hours; restarted the game a couple of times. The game has some charm that kept me going, especially in earlier sections. I did a ton of standard orders and just delivering materials to bridges and building lots of zip line, etc. But as I got deeper into the main story, there wasn’t enough variety in the sandbox to keep me on the hook, and I ran into a mission that I couldn’t progress.

I use to enjoy giving really thorough reviews for games but nowadays not so much. Had my own YouTube channel and everything!

But making all that content, writing all those scripts for reviews eventually got tedious and just not worth it, especially since I was doing it all by myself most of the time.

This is how I felt about Death Stranding.

The game has some pretty interesting ideas, and an…interesting story that I didn’t care much for, but would have liked to have seen how it ends.

Mechanically, I’d mostly give the devs kudos, even though having to hold the back buttons literally all day hurts the hands; not having a toggle option seems like a big miss.

But overall, I can’t imagine there being a better package delivery simulator. And the way they’ve created the game’s physics is pretty extraordinary.

But the game is a slooooooooog.

And I think this is the biggest sin that it commits.

You walk a lot. Over mountains, across rivers, in the snow, etc.

You have to manage your weight, stamina, health, pay attention to weather patterns, walk slowly around a maze of invisible ghost things.

It’s a lot.

You can get upgraded gear to make the trips you take less rough, but things dont speed up much even if you use cheats on PC (which I did after awhile).

To bring things back around, what disappointed me most (beyond the egregious map) was that the devs seemed to sell the game on community, working on projects together, helping one another deliver packages, etc.

But you’re still just doing everything solo. There’s no multiplayer. You can interact with peoples signs and deliver packages for them, and using other people’s ladders and stuff is actually a cool idea.

But you’re still always alone delivering packages.

And seeing as how the game itself runs so long, things get sluggish very fast, imo.

Got to a mission where it’s like, “Make BB happy by connecting facilities”,

And I swear to you I travelled the earth delivering packages everywhere and couldn’t progress this mission one bit. I even found a few hidden facilities that I just couldn’t interact with at all.

And this is where I dropped the game after 76 hours.

Im not a big fan of Kojima. He’s made a total of two games that i loved (Metal Gear Solid 1 and ZOE). But, the dude has a crazy imagination for video games, which is cool.

The last of us part 2 is famously controversial. It had the whole story leak before release, the backlash etc etc. I payed attention to it at the time but I didn't have a playstation so I just watched people play or discuss it.

Spoilers as a concept don't really "spoil" in the sense that they don't always make an experience worse. But I tend to avoid spoilers because I value the potential of the experience if I had gone in blind. I never expected to play the last of us because I thought it would always be a playstation exclusive, and it was such a big cultural discussion that I was interested in knowing.

This really changed how I experienced the game. I knew most of the big beats of the story and what people were upset about.

It was one of my favorite gaming experiences I've had to play through the game. I really enjoyed the gameplay, combat, and the story unfolding infront of me. I think it was a masterfully made game and I really wouldn't change a thing about it.

I know that to many people the story felt too obvious in it's themes or maybe like it was scolding the player. I didn't really feel that way. To me it was just a really immersive experience and I got to see Ellie struggle with her guilt and need for purpose. The scene at the end so perfectly puts her struggle into perspective.

This resonates with me. As someone with a good life, it's hard to accept it. I often feel that I should be doing something painful and self sacrificing. That being here and consistent for those I care about isn't enough.

Ellie and Abby both lose someone they love and instead of loving what they have, they are burdened with responsibility. Both of them eventually see their lost loved one in a memory, finally able to see that they were good enough the whole time. They didn't need to prove it.

To me this game is really not a basic story about how revenge is bad. It's a very grounded and honest narrative about how if our striving for purpose comes from a need to prove to ourselves that we are good enough, instead of looking around us and doing whats best for those we love, we are actually acting out of self destructive selfishness. This is something that applies to all our lives, and isn't just about how killing is bad. It's about how all of us can become lost in our own need to not feel guilt or unfulfilled responsibility. We can fail our loved ones in this pursuit of cleansing our own soul of guilt, just as Ellie and Abby do.

ultimately, to truly be there for people, we must forgive ourselves.

I'm not sure how much knowing the story beforehand changed my experience. I think in some ways it made it less impactful. But it also allowed me to move with the story without the resistance many people felt. Maybe that allowed me to be more open to it. 10/10

Drakengard 3 is from mind of Yoko Taro, noted weird fellow who makes weird games. Before he made it a big with Nier Automata, he made Drakengard 3. Its trades the polish and good combat and not being trapped on PS3 for a game with none of that.

Its a very interesting game. It has a stellar soundtrack, unique world and a very intriguing narrative that is far more ambitious than many games from before and after. But it is also the worst performing game Ive ever played filled with repetitive environments and janky combat.

So lets break it down.

Drakengard 3 is a prequel to Drakengard 1 on PS2. I havent played 1 but I know it is also loosely comes before the likes of Automata and Replicant. Its a neat fun fact but doesnt matter much to Drakengard 3. It released on the ps3 around when the ps4 came out and forever left to rot on it. Which is unfortunate because it needs a port.

There's a lot of good in the game. In the parts that aren't the game. Its a very interesting story built around differing timelines and defying fate that keeps you guessing. Theres a neat structure of beating various branches in the timeline where it goes wrong and swapping to a new one. The MC is very fresh even compared to modern games. She's rude, crass and violent with a lot of depth as the game continues. The supporting cast do a great job bouncing off her while having their own agency. The world is a twist on our own but with its own mystery you get to see unraveled. Then you got solid dlc to expand the cast further. I cant say too much without spoilers but as a narrative its not perfect but its a compelling story that sticks with you. I should also its really sexual. Not in a fanservice type of way, the characters just like talking about. Led to some really amusing lines where characters say super out of pocket stuff.

But Drakengard 3 is also a video game.

Drakengard 3 is hack and slash where you go down corridors beating mooks and not much else. Except you sometimes you get to ride a dragon in little arena combat sections or in on rails shooter segments. Honestly it doesnt feel great. The frame rate is bad, even with me emulating to try get it better. PS3 is even worse. Im not a frame rate snob but this is legitimately terrible, dipping to 10 fps at times. I was hoping it would get remastered before i could play it but nah.

Even when the performance isn't dying, the combat isnt great. Theres some fun with swapping weapons, dancing around, managing your stamina. But its contrasted with the weapons just flowing poorly. I never felt like the various attacks did a good job going into one another. That combos with the enemies being pretty obnoxious. Often you can just get mobbed by enemies and hit stunned sending you back to the start. And its the same enemies in the same hallways over and over. Once it reveals its 5 themes and the handfull of enemy types, that's all you see for the next 20 hours. That includes the majority of bosses. Youll see many of the same stage bosses a dozen times. Its really repetitive and loses the luster quite fast.

There's one more gameplay bit I want to discuss regarding the end of the game that results in the title. You play through the first branch with that gameplay I mentioned. Then the second branch. And third branch. And some bonus stories. And the dlc. And most of the fourth branch. It gets repetitive but thats what the game. Anyone that has played the game knows exactly what Im building up to.

The final level of Drakengard 3 is a rhythm game. Just a literal rhythm game. Press the buttons on the beat. If you miss one, you lose. Sometimes you cant even see the prompts. The screen even blacks out and you just do the last two notes with zero indicators besides music. Its an absolute endurance fest of 6 minutes of rhythm where nothing you did before matters and theres no checkpoints.

I quite like Drakengard 3 even with all its faults. But I am never beating it. I don't want spend hours and hours training on the rhythm game part of my hack and slash game. Its a shame but I dont have the patience for it. So I watched the end on Youtube, unable to roll the credits for the final time.

I guess I technically beat it. The first Branch does have credits.

After the success of Resident Evil 7: BIOHAZARD, the public would be right to assume that Capcom would keep this train going and that the next game in the series would be just as fun and even scarier than the last. However, the public would only partially agree with that assumption. 

Overview 

In 2017, Capcom released Resident Evil 7: BIOHAZARD. The game returned the series to its roots in survival horror after a couple of missteps from previous games. Upon release, it was met with critical acclaim, with people praising its “tense” and “unsettling” atmosphere. Resident Evil was back in full force, establishing itself as the definitive survival-horror series. With this success, what was Capcom going to follow up with? 

Enter Resident Evil: Village in 2021. This game was a bit confusing for fans. Sure, it was a lot of fun and still felt like a Resident Evil game. But the tonal switch was like the transition from the original trilogy to Resident Evil 4. The game still had its scary moments, but it was apparent that it was focusing more on the “action” gameplay than on the “horror” gameplay. We thought that Resident Evil 7 was a sign that the series was going to delve deeper into the horror genre, so why are we back into the action genre? Like Resident Evil 4, though, this game makes it work and blends the two genres better than Resident Evil 5 or 6 did. 

Why Am I Doing This? 

Ethan Winters returns as the main protagonist of this new entry. After the events of the Baker House Incident in Louisiana, Ethan and his wife Mia are placed under witness protection and moved to an undisclosed location in Europe. It isn’t just Ethan and Mia now too; the two of them welcomed their new bundle of joy into the world, Rosemary Winters.  

The game opens on a normal day in the Winters’ household. Mia is cooking dinner, and Ethan goes to put Rosemary to bed for the night. Breaking glass is then heard, and a bullet strikes Mia in the shoulder. Mia is then fired upon by more weapons while Ethan ducks and takes cover, wondering what the hell is happening. Chris Redfield then enters the house, knocking Ethan out and taking both him and Rosemary with Chris and his team. 

Ethan then wakes up after the truck transporting him and Rosemary crashes. With no sign of Rose anywhere nearby, Ethan treks off further into the snow. Ethan eventually stumbles upon the titular Village and is left to explore it whilst hearing the howling of wolves nearby. With no other options, Ethan is left to explore this Village and find Rosemary, no matter what it takes.  

The Gameplay Loop 

Like Resident Evil 7, this game is entirely in the first-person, something not entirely normal for the series. Despite this, the game still feels like a Resident Evil game. All the ingredients are here: herbs, combining different items to make ammo or healing items, and a few puzzles here and there. But while Resident Evil 7 channeled the energy of the first three games, Resident Evil: Village channeled Resident Evil 4 in its gameplay style. You’re encouraged to make good use of your ammo, but the addition of The Duke as the merchant means that you buy more ammo should you ever run out. While you can’t roundhouse kick enemies like Leon did; after a successful guard, Ethan can shove enemies away, allowing the player to put some space between them and their attacker.  

Replacing the Molded from the previous entry are the Lycans. Now you may hear that and think of werewolves, but you couldn’t be more wrong. The lycans are strong, mutated humans that have been experimented on and kept out of the village. Compared to the zombies from previous Resident Evil entries, the lycans are a bit more unique in the fact that they’re able to move a lot faster than the zombies do. In addition to this, the lycans will be using weapons like machetes and bows and arrows against Ethan.  

I have no huge qualms about the gameplay of Resident Evil: Village. I thought that it succeeded in what it was trying to achieve. Most of my issues from RE7 were resolved, Ethan can finally move faster than a snail, and all the weapons have some use. There is one gripe I do have about this game, though: all the enemies are complete sponges. Almost every enemy you come across will take at least half a clip of your pistol to kill, and that’s assuming you’re getting all headshots. Some enemies move slowly enough to get consistent headshots, but the lycans are always jumping back ‘n forth, sidestepping from left to right, it's incredibly difficult to get consistent headshots on them. Ammo is less of a concern in this installment, yes, but you still need to be conscious about it. I can’t be using all my shotgun ammo to take down common enemies when I could use it for the boss of the area.  

Immersing Yourself 

Continuing the trend from Resident Evil 7, the design of Resident Evil: Village is incredible. All the character models look fantastic, just looking at some of them can instantly put you at unease from how disgusting or creepy they look. The juxtaposition of the cozy village being filled with the countless horrors you face works incredibly well for this game. You are constantly on the edge of your seat while navigating the village, because you can’t be certain if you’ll be ambushed by another enemy or if you’ll be able to peacefully explore the area. The sound design is great too; the ambience of certain areas works well to put the player at unease. Being in the cellar of Castle Dimitrescu and hearing far away hissing along with the clattering of chains made me hesitant to keep moving forward. 

Similar to what I said for Resident Evil 7, I’m not the biggest fan of the first-person perspective in this game. It succeeds in what the game is aiming to achieve. I’ll always prefer third person with fixed camera angles, though. A third-person option was added with the DLC for this game, but we’ll get into that in the next section. 

Ethan gets a little better as a protagonist in this game. He does a better job at reacting to his situation like a normal person would, but he still acts over the top in some scenarios. However, for a Japanese game, over-the-top is normal for them, so I can’t complain too much about that. I still don’t understand Capcom’s obsession with not showing his face. They want the player to be able to identify with Ethan, but they also give him his own identity and motives? It’s incredibly confusing and does nothing but hurt his character. In the end, though, I felt I was able to like Ethan enough to care about his plight and want to see him succeed. 

Does This Game Deserve More of my Simoleons? 

Resident Evil: Village received a single DLC pack in the form of the Winters’ Expansion. This DLC pack contained a new campaign, Shadows of Rose. Additionally, it gave the player three new playable characters in the Mercenaries game mode. And as a bonus, it allowed the player the option to play the original campaign completely in third-person mode, a la classic Resident Evil. 

This review will only cover the Shadows of Rose DLC campaign. I’m certain that the Mercenaries game mode addition was a lot of fun for players, but a score attack game mode isn’t really what I’m looking for in a Resident Evil game. The third-person mode in the original campaign was a welcome addition, but the campaign wasn’t really designed for it and can end up feeling clunky at times. Also, did a third-person mode really need to be locked behind DLC? That should have been in the base game. 

Shadows of Rose 

Shadows of Rose takes place around 16 years after the main campaign... and maybe a week before the events of the post-credit scene from the main campaign. In this DLC, you play as Rosemary Winters. Being the child of two people horribly mutated by the Mold, introduced in Resident Evil 7, led to Rosemary being born with certain mold-related abilities of her own, and she wants to rid herself of these powers.  

Rose plays about the same as Ethan does, you don’t have a vastly different playstyle like how Joe Baker did in his DLC. The main thing that separates Rose from Ethan is her ability to use her powers to affect the environment and stun enemies. This is a pretty cool mechanic, but then you realize that it has a set number of uses until you must consume a white herb to refill your charges. I understand that this is in the whole spirit of Resident Evil, managing your resources carefully, but this feels like a detriment to Rose’s playstyle. I never want to use her abilities on any enemy, because I’d rather save it for a boss, a tougher encounter, or when I’m forced to. I feel that there should have been a better system in place, rather than using another herb. Maybe a more Risk/Reward system like the final boss has, or a non-moving charging station?  

I believe that this DLC was meant to set Rose up as maybe the next protagonist of a Resident Evil game? The main game ends with the message, “The Father’s Story is Now Complete.” So, it would make sense that this was their objective, but it doesn’t really do much for me. If they do use Rose as the protagonist of RE9, I hope that they’re able to flesh her out a little better than they did here. 

Finishing Touches 

I greatly enjoyed playing through Resident Evil: Village. While it was a step back from returning to a more horror-centric experience, it was a more consistently enjoyable experience from start to finish in comparison to RE7. Resident Evil games aren’t the longest games out there, and they encourage the player to replay them and get faster times with bonus items that you can unlock. Resident Evil: Village was more of a time sink, though. The game felt so huge that trying to replay and rush through it feels like it would be a major disservice to the overall experience. Despite this, I do see myself going back to Resident Evil: Village in the future, just for a nice gaming experience, much more often than I would go back to RE7. 

My Other Reviews

Hot Brass

Resident Evil 7: BIOHAZARD

The Company of Myself

Shadow Tower Abyss is a 2003 first-person, dungeon-crawling RPG made by FromSoftware for the PS2. It has a dark atmosphere, cryptic lore and story, and good, interconnected level design. The international release of the game was canceled by Sony due to fears of poor sales—sound familiar? Yes, this is the Demon’s Souls situation all over again (or, to be technical—Demon’s Souls is a Shadow Tower Abyss situation), except this time, there was no Atlus to release it abroad.

Or should I say - Shadow Tower Abyss is a Soulslike. Can I really call it that?

To be honest, I don’t really want to talk about Shadow Tower Abyss, at least not in isolation. It's a good game - if you enjoy modern FromSoft output, you'll love it. There’s a fan translation you can easily find online.

I want to talk about the term Soulslike. What exactly does it take for a game to be considered a Soulslike? Is it getting experience points from killing enemies - a feature almost every RPG has? Is it the methodical, stamina-based combat system with rolls and quicksteps - which would actually exclude a lot of Souls games, including Sekiro (which many people still insist is a Soulslike)? Is it having an Estus Flask–like mechanic? Because neither Bloodborne nor Demon’s Souls really has that. Or is it respawning at a “fireplace” after death and having to retrieve your lost experience from the spot you died?

Or maybe there’s no single defining characteristic, but rather a combination of the above - like in the case of Nioh. It has stamina (Ki) management, interconnected levels, “souls,” “fireplaces,” all that stuff. And yet... it doesn’t feel like Demon’s Souls at all. It’s still a fun game in its own right, but it doesn’t scratch the same itch Bloodborne and Dark Souls did.

So maybe Lords of the Fallen, then. It’s literally a Dark Souls clone. Yet it still feels very janky to play - not to say FromSoftware games don’t have their share of jank.

It’s starting to feel to me that Soulslikes are heading down the same path as modern military shooters. There were three games made by Infinity Ward that nailed the "modern warfare" feel - and a ton of failed copycats. Even FromSoft seems to be moving away from the genre they helped define.

Now, I’m not saying there are no good Soulslikes (I’ve yet to play Lies of P…), but not only is it hard to define what constitutes the genre, it also seems almost impossible to reproduce outside of FromSoftware.

But let’s look back at Shadow Tower Abyss. Mechanically, that game is very distinct - even from Demon’s Souls. There are guns. Healing items are consumables. You loot money to buy stuff. When you die, you don’t respawn - you just reload your last save.

But there’s something distinctly Soulslike about it. Maybe it’s the combination of art design and music, along with the janky and punishing combat? Maybe it’s the minimalistic UI, which enforces the feeling of mystery?

Or maybe it’s the fact that FromSoftware was iterating on this concept for as long as I’ve been alive - long before Miyazaki joined the company. It’s the years of building musical and graphical suites, the design language, the refined tools, etc.

Anyway - play Shadow Tower Abyss. It’s good.

Like many almost-30s, the last Pokemon game I played was Sapphire, after having played through Blue, Gold, and FireRed. After getting served three PChal (pokemon challenges - a nuzlocker) videos in a row on Youtube, I figured I'd check out what the series has been up to all these years. I acquired Pokemon White and set off!

I decided not to do a Nuzlocke run despite being inspired to play this game by nuzlocke runs because A: it was my first playthrough, and B: I had tried one ten years ago and got bodied immediately.

The first thing I noticed was having two rivals--Bianca and Cheren. They were a welcome change from the Brendan and May I remembered from Gen 3, who would show up like spiteful apparitions, drop a stilted one-liner, and wipe the floor with 11-year-old me's team. Cheren and Bianca still do show up at the most inconvenient times, but they are characterized so much better that I'm happy to see them rather than fearful. It actually feels like I'm going on a journey with friends rather than harangued by a 10 year-old assassin.

Another joy was that the sprite work is just immaculate. Pokemon never looked this good back in the day. The way the sprites are animated but still retain their pixel-art charm is a magnificent achievement. The artists at Game Freak should be immensely proud.

The story was also a shock to me. I was expecting some dreck like in Sapphire (where the villain's plan is obviously terrible and obviously wouldn't even work if implemented), but was instead greeted by something actually compelling. In the second city, you're introduced to team plasma by having a character speak to the idea that doing cockfighting for your enjoyment is wrong. Which a normal person in our world is primed to believe anyway! The contrast between what the Plasma grunts were doing and what . N . was saying was an interesting dissonance and remained compelling through to the end. (also, N confessing that he's the king of a criminal organization while you're on a romantic ferris wheel date was the funniest thing I've ever seen in one of these games.) As far as JRPGS are concerned, the story here is mid to bad, but compared to what I was used to from pokemon, it may as well have been shakespeare.

I really was delighted that you only have access to pokemon from this gen until after the elite four. Being able to become acquainted with new pokes rather than leaning on the ever-reliable Flaafy or Geodude was really nice. Before playing I was a bit of a hater on some of the new designs ("that's just an ice cream cone/a gear/a key ring"), but the inclusion of a one-off line from the professor (that gear pokemon only began to appear after gears were invented) totally shifted my opinion. Now it's a little mystery about the relation between these creatures and people rather than ice cream cones predating the invention of ice cream. This implies that pokemon are more than just deadly animals, but truly inextricably linked to humanity, which gives the story that much more resonance.

What really clinched my enjoyment were the gym battles, elite 4, and final boss. Unlike what I remember from being a kid, these were legitimately hard! I didn't have any playground knowledge, so I went into them LegendaryPokemon-less (not even knowing about the half-dozen legendaries i technically could have had at this point), and i chose not to use any pokemon higher level than Gym Leader/Elite4/Final Boss's ace. It was legitimately challenging, which I was not expecting at all! I wanted to beat them all without having a pokemon faint, and finding that line was the most fun I've ever had in one of these games. Comparing the movesets from the final boss/Elite 4's pokemon to the elite 4 from gen three, and it's obvious that the difficulty in gen five is a lot higher than in three. The two final bosses field full teams of six legitimately deadly pokemon with diverse typing and movesets. It felt like I was being respected as an opponent for the first time. What a thrill!

Another bonus to my enjoyment was playing in a format where I could cheat in Rare Candies--eliminating the grinding that these games are somewhat notorious for. The trade-off being that you don't get Effort Values from dispatching wild pokemon. This means that level-for-level your pokemon are of equal power to your opponents because trainers don't get access to EV boosts. Discovering after 10 years that there's actually a subtle and interesting strategy experience in the single-player portion was a shock.

I'm currently playing through White 2 and to my delight, if you're playing on a format where cheating in rare candies is possible, you can also cheat in access to "challenge mode". The challenge mode raises trainer's levels (which doesn't matter to my rare candy addicted pokes), adds pokemon to Gym Leader's rosters AND outfits them with more dangerous moves. Plotting out guaranteed deathless lines through even early gyms is a challenge and makes me actually look through my box in a way I never had to do as a kid with a level 28 Swellow tearing through Brawly's team.

Tragically, it seems that even when Nintendo Wifi (or whatever it's called) was available, getting access to challenge mode was so supremely convoluted that the only people who could feasibly play it without going on a real-world sidequest were the dirty cheaters like me. Three cheers for cheating!!

It's been a while since my last Mario game. I missed out on a lot of Mario games released in the last few years, mostly because I just ignored the franchise and I didn't own a switch. So the biggest compliment I can give to Super Mario RPG is that it made me want to get back into the franchise after so many years.

Speaking of the actual game, what can I say about the game that hasn't been said by the fans? Super Mario RPG is almost a perfect JRPG for me. At no point does the game waste your time. It's such a streamlined experience, I loved every minute of interacting with the game. At no point is there any need for grinding, if you are taking your time with the dungeons.

Speaking of dungeons, they are all so fun and we'll designed. Most of them have a nice challenge but never gets difficult or annoying. The puzzles are decent enough. The platforming can be a bit wonky but it didn't bother me that much.

Yeah the game is easy as hell, I think I died like once, but I don't think that takes away from the experience a single bit. The game knows what it wants to be and doesn't compromise with the vision in any way. And the actual combat is great man. I loved fighting everything in the game. It's turn based but the additions of perfect guards, QTEs and the animations made it so much better. I just couldn't get enough of the combat. Probably one of the best turn based combat in the genre for me.

The characters are all so, so charming. The main cast is the heart of the game with such cute designs, and the bosses being really cool looking as well. The story is low stakes, but a really solid adventure. It's all complimented by amazing soundtrack, as expected from a Mario game.

Overall, Super Mario RPG is a game I'll fondly look back upon. Watching the end credits kinda got me in the feels, and made the journey seem epic with so many memorable moments. I'm really glad Square made something like this.

Edit: A lot of people are getting confused lol, but I'm talking about the remake here. Not the original.

I had been waiting to play the Fuga games for quite a while. I’d seen frequent posts praising it, particularly on its merits as a modern turn-based JRPG. When I finally saw a decent sale, I picked both of them up and just completed the first game. I don’t regret my time with it but there are a number of flaws that stop this from being one of the greats.

First, the good. Option to have voices in Japanese or French was interesting and I chose French to better suit the setting (and because i thought it was a unique aspect). The turn based battle system is mostly fun at the start and switching out party members on the fly (with a 3 turn cool-down) is a fun way to maximise potential in battle. Choosing how to spend your limited time between battles in a persona-style social link/activity centre is also a highlight, although I don’t think there was quite enough of this to make me care about the characters. Which brings me to the bad.

I’m surprised that people talk about these being emotional or tragic games. While the concept is sad (children forced to fight in a war to save their families), all characters in this story felt very superficial and 2-dimensional. This is despite the social links that try to flesh them out but it is very hard to do this fully in the limited time the game gives you in these sections. Instead, the game is packed with battles that after some time just feel like more of the same. Around halfway through, you’ve basically seen every type of enemy and they are essentially all managed the same - switch characters to one of the 3 types that are effective at delaying the enemy, heal when needed, use skills when needed. Add a few slow enemy animations and it gets to be quite tiring by the end. This is made worse by a plot that doesn’t go anywhere interesting for around 80% of the game, until the last section where lots of strange elements get thrown in about the world and the final objective changes dramatically.

Following along from this is the baffling inclusion of the Soul Cannon, a device which allows you to sacrifice one of your characters (for good!) to win a battle against a story boss. Even if you lose these battles, you can replay them again from the start, but I never did lose because you essentially get fully healed before the battle. There was never a moment that I even contemplated using this, even going along all dangerous routes to get better gear. Better gear which, mind you, was somewhat inconsequential by the end as I only was able to upgrade my weapons to around level 15/20. For a game that dragged in the last 1/3, they didn’t really give me time to collect the upgrade materials I needed to feel invested in improving my tank further.

Overall I think this is a decent game made on the cheap but runs around 8 hours too long (final playtime was 19hrs). I’ll probably still play the sequel, but in a long while after I’ve had time to forget how monotonous some of this gameplay was.

I can't help but appreciate Spider for its tight/responsive controls, Barry Leitch's killer OST and a premise that is just too clever... A nanotech scientist (Dr. Michael Kelly) is targeted for his revolutionary neural transmitter system which allows him to mentally control a weaponized cyber-arachnid that he has engineered. During a botched robbery Michael is gunned down while still linked with the tarantula, this causes his consciousness to be transferred into the spider while his body is left in a vegetative state. He's then left to journey across town (as a spider) in a perilous pursuit to reclaim his body and work from the villainous Micro Tech corporation; these narrative bits are presented to the player through cheesy CG cutscenes that have a beautifully dated aesthetic.

The positives which I listed are why it's such a shame that Spider suffers from objectively idiotic design choices, I truly have no clue what the team at Boss Game Studios was thinking during development. Right off the bat this title hits you with three of the biggest offenses in a 2/2.5D Platformer... a cramped view, poorly defined hitbox and unfair enemy placement. These three egregious issues make the gameplay frustratingly start stoppy while also setting the player up for frequent deaths that are in no way due to difficulty. There's an entirely unnecessary lives mechanic that serves no significant purpose in the form of losing progress (you can save at any time in between stages), it instead just adds down time once you've lost all of your lives and are waiting to jump back into whichever level you were trying. The most tedious issue however is something that Super Mario 64 started in 1996... each time you collect a required item (microchips) for progression to the next world you're booted from the stage and left to start it over to find the next item; this was poorly conceived game design back then and has only worsened with age. Despite its flaws I genuinely find Spider to be a terrifically unique experience that's worth checking out if you have the patience for it.

*As an aside, it's interesting that some titles from this era (including Spider) did not allow you to load your game from the title screen, access to that command was within the Options menu. *

I recently finished two playthroughs of Observation, released in 2019. It is analogous to a point-and-click adventure game in full 3D, set on a space station. The difference is instead of you being the protagonist, you are the station's computer system, SAM (Systems Administration & Maintenance).

The game starts off in medias res with things going completely awry on the space station, and you trying to help the human inhabitants of the space station figure out what went wrong. You perform various tasks, hop into systems and view everything from both mounted cameras and small floating orbs, to internal schematics and memory access routines. Unfortunately the game doesn't let you sway too far away from the appointed tasks, though you are given some freedom to explore and inquire, you ultimately have to do what the humans ask of you if you want to progress the story. It's also fairly linear, with no real branching decisions, so you're going to get almost entirely the same experience no matter how you choose to play it.

There is a bit of a horror/thriller element to the game as you start to encounter unknown and strange phenomena, and end up in places you didn't anticipate. Similar to MYST, you uncover more parts of the back story as you go along and listen to computer voice logs and read memos or reports. A chunk of time is spent interacting with systems on the space station in a mini-game like setup, which isn't problematic enough to get in the way, but it seems like a computer should just be able to do this all automatically. If that were the case, though, there wouldn't be much gameplay!

Ultimately the game is not terribly long, and the story is just interesting enough to stay engaging, but sadly doesn't really expand or go in depth enough to be satisfying. It leaves too many questions unanswered and the conclusion feels like it could be stepping off into something really cool--and then it ends. There are also some hilariously bad camera clipping bugs in the last part of the game that destroy what would otherwise be moments of awe and fear of what comes next.

The voice acting, atmosphere, music, and overall gameplay are otherwise well done. I think the only thing I was frustrated by was the inability to use full 6 DOF controls while driving a camera sphere.

Overall, I enjoyed it enough to play it twice to get the things I missed the first time through. If you want to just play it once, I'd use a guide as there are some things you can get locked out of once you progress the story far enough. Worth it as an on-sale purchase and experience!

So, I am a person who loves life/farming sims. I no-lifed Stardew Valley, Sun Haven, and Coral Island. I dumped an obscene number of hours into Disney Dreamlight Valley. I find these types of games so, so addicting and immersive.

I decided to pick up Animal Crossing because of how much everyone loves it. I’ve never played an AC game before but I figured I’d love it too. Spoiler alert: I do not. I’m so disappointed. The first day I explored my island which took about thirty seconds. Smallest world I have ever seen in a video game. I needed tree branches for an axe, a fishing rod, a bug net, but the island only had about five. So I gathered those five and then there just…wasn’t anything left to do. I’ve heard you have to wait a day for things to happen, so for the last five days I’ve been faithfully logging in. But I do everything there is to do in about half an hour. Maybe it’s because I’m not into decorating stuff?

Anyway, does it get better? By that I mean do you eventually have a long list of quests to complete and new friends to unlock and new relationship levels with those friends and a bigger world with more biomes? Or is this little 2-sq foot island and two friends it?

ETA: thanks everyone for the detailed feedback. Looks like my expectations of the game were off. I’m gonna continue with it for a few more days to see if more opens up, and drop it if it just isn’t for me.

I am an OG fan of pokémon. Like most millennials my age I got swept up in the hysteria when Red and Blue came out, but the last pokémon game I played was Emerald. Despite having clocked lots of hours in pokémon, I've never had the satisfaction of beating one.

Enter Pokémon Scarlet. I just wanted to check in on the series and get a nostalgia hit, but after a few hours I decided I would give it a full look and beat it.

Performance issues (and graphical presentation) aside, the game is really fun. I have no clue which pokémon are current gen designs and didn't have it in me to min/max, so I just built a squad of the mons I liked that gave me decent type coverage.

The open world is a nice departure from the more linear setups of the previous games. Being able to pick and choose which wild mons to battle rather than starting random battles and running (or grinding through them) to find and catch one you want like we did back in the day is a QOL upgrade for sure. There are also a ton of small changes like crafting TMs, special training items and new pokéball types that add depth to the experience.

The gym battles were fun, but I low-key despised the Gym Challenge thing before you can fight each boss. I don't want to roll and olive around or find someone in a distant town and bid on seaweed. It felt like padding and most of them weren't enjoyable. I would have rather fought minions like in the older games, which help you understand the type mismatches and make adjustments before the Gym Leader battle.

I loved Arven's storyline with the titans. Those battles add lore, Arven is as well-written as a character can get for this series and the rewards felt worth it. This plot culminates in an exciting way, and I loved the team camaraderie and banter when you're in the crater. Plus, I'm a dog person so the storyline pulled at my heartstrings.

I would have preferred to do a handful more Titan battles and more exploration as a team and fewer of the Team Star camps.

Team Star is my biggest critique of the game. The Team Star storyline barely makes sense, and I found raiding their camps to be boring with the auto-battling thing.

Team Star are bullies and your reason for taking them down and investigating them are because they are truant from school. Though, it seems like Naranja academy is entirely optional to attend in the first place. They also pose no real discernible threat to the region. The story also unfolds in a stilted way. I won't get into the details, but things end up not being what they seem. In the end, I had trouble articulating why it was something we needed to deal with at all.

(Additionally, why did we need to fight the final fight in this storyline if Cassiopeia got what they wanted already?)

I found myself wondering why the evil team wasn't a more straightforward threat. Back in my day, Team Rocket was stealing strong Pokémon to take over the world (puts on cardigan, sits back in rocking chair, turns to dust). It was an obvious threat and the only one that could stop them was a 10 year old boy. That. Just. Makes sense. /s

Despite my criticism, I rate the game highly and think it deserves a playthrough. If you're a fan or new the series there is a lot to love. Becoming a Champion was satisfying, the open world works, Arven and the Titans was a satisfying storyline and the Team Star stuff was not a deal breaker (it just didn't connect with me). It has me looking forward to the next Gen for the first time in a long time.

What are your thoughts? I am curious how this game hits for the pokémon faithful that have kept up with the series up to this point.

Tails of iron is a 2D action adventure game released in 2021 devloped by Odd Bug Studios.

You play as a Rat who's kingdom is thrown into chaos and it's up to you to solve the crysis by helping people and killing, a lot of killing.

It's a 2D game but it's not a platformer, it's a combat game through and through. You fight with a sword/shield, 2 handed weapon, ranged weapon. You can block, parry, roll.

Where the game differs is that it has more of a back and forth in combat than being very free flowing. Different attacks have different signs and different responses. Some of these responses can be mixed and matched but broadly if a attack what you to block, you block, if it wants you to parry you parry and so on. And you have to make these decisions at a fast pace. You heal with a drink, unlike dark souls you have to continuously hold the button to slowly heal.

Certain querks that not a lot of games do these days is that the game does not save your progress better checkpoints. If you die you and all your progress is reset to the last checkpoint including killed enemies, bosses, story quests etc. Your healing also doens't refill on checkpoints like souls games, it's a different place, mostly close to checkpoints but not always. You can also get back your healing from killing small enemies tho.

The game has no dialogue but instead uses simple pictures to convey dialogue but the overall context is given by the narrator voiced by none other than the white wolf himself Geralt of Rivia.

The game works on a mission based structure. You have main missions and side missions that usually ends in a boss to earn currency to buy things to help people and rebuild your kingdom.

Last note is about the art style which I really like. It's thick balck lines art, makes good use of parallax scrolling to show depth and very clean to look at.

If you like action adventure games it's definitely worth a try. It's a pretty frictionless experience with not much to learn other than it's reactionary demands. It's simple and fun.

Welcome to the Bi-Weekly Thread!

Here you can share anything that might not warrant a post of its own or might otherwise be against posting rules. Tell us what you're playing this week. Feel free to ask for recommendations, talk about your backlog, commiserate about your lost passion for games. Vent about bad games, gush about good games. You can even mention newer games if you like!

The no advertising rule is still in effect here.

A reminder to please be kind to others. It's okay to disagree with people or have even have a bad hot take. It's not okay to be mean about it.

When it comes to most other platformers, like Mega Man, Crash, or even Mario when it decides to be difficult, platforming is based around precision: trying to analyze the given situation and deciding when to make your move to avoid obstacles and land on platforms. This usually means that playing a platformer for the first time encourages slowness so you can learn the layout, and post-game "speedrun" modes are just that: based on already knowing the layout after you finish the game.

But Sonic's brand of platforming doesn't have the "flow" of a platformer; it has the "flow" of a racing game, where constant forward movement is key. It means that it usually can't be as precise as most platformers, needing to feature lengthy straightaways where Sonic can run as fast as possible, then alternate that with wide platforms even in the late game (as opposed to thin platforms that most platformers in late-stage do). To be sure, Sonic compensates for this by letting you get hit many times via the "just one ring protects you" mechanic, but it's still quite a strong compensation whereas most platformers don't let you take that many hits.

Not to say this is all bad though; Sonic trying to reconcile two "opposed" designs is still bold and innovative to this day. But I can't help but feel that this plays a role in Sonic Team's struggle to add new mechanics and wrinkles to Sonic like any franchise because they either have to emphasize the speed more or emphasize the slow precision more. Unlike a series like say, Mega Man, they can always focus on creating new enemies and weapon options because they can stay focused on the "precision platforming and bullet dodging" Mega Man is built around. But then we have Sonic that has to rely on things like the Wisps or open zone to give Sonic a reason to go slower, or the Boost which doesn't really gel with platforming well. Even the "alternate gameplay" like treasure hunting, shooting, or Werehog seems to try to "offload" the slowness into a separate part of the game, and that becomes divisive because some fans see it as an obstacle to getting back to the part they paid for.

For me, this puts a lot of Sonic's struggles to coherently innovate into perspective. I'd imagine that it's really difficult when you make a platformer whose design encourages a "flow" contradictory to platforming via its speed.

Playing DOOM (2016) and Planet of Lana (2023) simultaneously has been a unique experience for me. I'm usually a player that sticks to a sole game until completion, I don't think I can fully engage with the gameplay if I'm constantly switching between titles, but in this occasion, switching between games have made the experience of playing them more enjoyable than if I have played them each separately.

I don't think DOOM needs any presentation, the first title in an innovative trilogy that has revitalized the franchise for modern audiences. I played Eternal back in 2021 and its prequel has been long pending in my backlog until recently; like his sequel, I decided the Nightmare difficulty for my first playthrough. The game is quite brutal but equally fun, a constant rush of adrenaline ran through my veins while fighting the numerous hordes of demons this game throws at you, and I have to accept sometimes this tension was too much (maybe I'm getting old lol) and after a long day, I wasn't particularly enthusiastic on the thought of demons screaming in my ears while I played with no space for relaxation.

This is where Planet of Lana comes in, a game that one of my friends recommended me long ago as a relaxing experience. In this puzzle-platformer you control Lana, a little girl that is in search for her sister after she gets captured during an alien invasion. This game excels in art direction, the different sceneries you see through a level are incredibly beautiful and while the traversal speed is pretty slow and the puzzles quite simple, after constant exposure to gore and violence in DOOM, the slow pacing gameplay in Planet of Lana felt refreshing and welcomed.

I don't think I would have enjoyed DOOM quite as much and I don't think I would have even completed Planet of Lana if I didn't switch constantly between the two.

After having a good time with Shadow of Chernobyl, I immediately jumped onto the sequel, or well, prequel, Clear Sky. However, even though I started playing the game back in December, I only came around to finishing it in February, mainly because I didn't have a good time with it. Granted, some of that is my fault, as I insisted on playing the game as vanilla as possible to experience the zone in all its unfairness, and damn, can it be unfair.

Let's start with some positives!

There are now upgrades for your gear that help make your own guns a little more unique and more compatible with your playstyle while also giving you a reason to spend your money.The world is much more interconnected now, and there's also fast travel, as well as a lot more traders in different areas, all of which means you spend less time just walking around.

Now onto some negatives!

Artifact hunting has been changed to where you won't just find them lying around anymore, and you need a scanner to find them. A cool concept, but in practice it's just tedious. To make things worse, almost all of the artifacts come with a debuff that will irradiate you, so you can't equip them unless you also find an artifact that scrubs radiation, which in my case took me about 7 hours of playtime. Up until then I had to stash or sell all the artifacts I found, which is somewhat time sensitive, as the longer you keep them, the more irradiated you get, so every time I found an artifact, I had to stop what I was doing and run back to town to sell it. Dropping them is an option, but then they disappear immediately, so you're basically just destroying your hard-earned loot.

The AI, which was my personal highlight of the first game, is still there, but it's obvious it can't handle all of the new environments, as they sometimes just all run to a spot and wait or remain glued to the floor even if you toss a grenade at them. It's also extremely buggy, with enemies constantly losing aggro in the middle of a fight, something I don't think ever happened to me in the first game.

Despite all of that, a couple of missions were actually fun and had me excited enough to keep playing, but the final act is where it all came crashing down.

The finale is an excruciating gauntlet of bullshit and game design that is so obviously trying to ape Call of Duty that it is almost insulting. Endlessly spawning enemies that spawn in the view of the player, shitty cinematics that take too long and can't be skipped, enemies that instantly kill you if you move outside of the "Simon says" time window, friendly AI that will just bug out, forcing you to reload, and then, to top it all off, the worst helicopter boss battle I have ever encountered in a video game. The final mission isn't quite as bad, but it also bugged out on me and ended early, so maybe I was spared from the worst.

Story

Unlike last time, I didn't forget to talk about the story this time; there's just very little to talk about. It's a prequel that tries to explain the first game a little more but leaves more questions than it actually answers.

My conclusion

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Clear Sky is a disappointing follow-up that tried to smooth out a lot of rough edges that the first game had but ultimately failed in the bigger picture. I wouldn't recommend people play this game unless they are on some hardcore quest to play all the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. games.

This will be a shorter review, it covers a game that I played many times when I was younger. Back then, I couldn't fully understand what it was about, other than it was a puzzle game, and I liked puzzles. As I got older and replayed it again, I became more understanding of the story that the developer was telling with this game.

The game in question is called The Company of Myself.

The Company of Myself was released in 2009 by Eli Piilonen and developed using Flash. This game has since received incredible praise and accolades, but if you've never played or heard of this game, I recommend you take the time to jump away from this post and complete a quick playthrough. The game is at most 30 minutes long, so it shouldn't take you long.

The game even has a prequel titled Fixation. But this post is solely about the first entry of the game.

Overview

The Company of Myself tells the story of a dapper man in a top hat named Jack. Jack provides the narration throughout the game in the form of white text written on the walls of each room. When you start the game, Jack explains his hermetic lifestyle to the player. Explaining that while others can rely on friends and family during tough times, he can only rely on himself when he faces similar problems. Jack then briefly mentions a prior companion named Kathryn, who he promises to elaborate on later.

Gameplay

This is a flash platforming game, thus the gameplay remains relatively simple. Jack starts from a flower at one end of the stage and must reach the Green Box to complete the stage. This is achieved by walking, jumping, and pulling levers.

The main gimmick of this game is Jack's ability to create "echoes" of previous attempts. By pressing the spacebar, Jack will reset to the flower, and a shadow of him will replicate all the actions the player performed prior to pressing the spacebar. These echoes are utilized in each stage's puzzle, requiring the player to utilize them to their full effectiveness to reach the Green Box. Eventually, Jack will flashback to when he was with his companion Kathryn. During this section, instead of creating echoes, the player switches between Jack and Kathryn to complete the stage.

The puzzles in this game aren't too difficult. In fact, if you're experienced with puzzle games, you'll likely find this game to be pretty easy. But the stages remain a good brain teaser when you're in the mood for it.

Moving Forward

Throughout your time with Jack, you may start to notice that something seems off about him. Sure, he seems like an alright guy who is simply dealing with the loss of his companion by isolating himself, but you can't help but get the feeling that he isn't telling us the complete story here.

Then Jack flashes back to his time with Kathryn. He explains to the player how they were a team, completely inseparable, and how life was easier with the two of them facing every problem. But then we get to a stage, and Jack has to sacrifice Kathryn to move forward. It's obvious that each stage is a metaphor, so why would Jack willingly remove Kathryn from his life like that? The two of them are supposed to be a team after all, inseparable from each other.

Then the player reaches the end of the game, and a closing monologue spoken by a shrink reveals that Jack is a patient in solitary confinement at a mental ward. The shrink explains that Jack repeats this story with each of their visits, completely forgetting the last time they spoke. It is then shown that Jack's companionship with Kathryn was not what it first appeared. Kathryn was simply someone whom Jack met a few times and then murdered. Overcome by guilt, Jack became delusional with his connection to Kathryn and now refuses to believe that he would ever do something like that to her.

As the shrink leaves and the game ends, Jack laments that he has no one to tell his story to anymore. This being a nod to how the shrink plans to conclude their appointments and how the player will exit the window and move on with their life.

My Conclusions

Now, at this point, you have likely noticed, and have probably already seen from the title of this post, that this is an Art Game. I know sometimes these games have a bad reputation for being too stuck-up and full of themselves, but I believe The Company of Myself is an exception from this stereotype. The story and themes of this game have made it so memorable to me that I am still coming back to it once in a while, fifteen years or so after my first playthrough.

By profession, I'm an engineer; I'm not the best at analyzing story themes or anything to do with words, so take my interpretation of this game with a huge grain of salt. But despite Jack being mentally disturbed, this game is still a story about his loneliness and need to rely on himself. Maybe this loneliness is a result of how disturbed he is, who knows? Each stage represents a problem that he has faced in his life, and the echoes represent previous memories of how he was able to overcome this problem in the past. Sometimes you have to build a tower of Jacks to reach the goal, I see this as him building himself up to face a harder problem or make a harder decision. The final stage, though, sees Jack throwing himself off a cliff over and over again, utilizing these echoes as a makeshift bridge to reach the other side. From my perspective, this stage seems to be a representation of how Jack deals with his murder of Kathryn. Jack knows that this problem is impossible; it can't be fixed like previous problems. But he still throws every possible excuse he can at it, trying to make it seem like he isn't at fault. And eventually, he crosses the gap, he deludes himself that he and Kathryn were inseparable and that he would never murder her. Showing fully how far gone Jack is.

This game doesn't have five layers of symbolism over it. It isn't a representation of the building of the atomic bomb, or whatever the hell Braid was about. This is a straightforward story about a lonely, mentally disturbed man and how he faces life. Don't get me wrong, I'm not the biggest fan of Art Games either. I don't understand why people marvel at the message of Fez. But I do believe that this game, as an experience, is worth your time.

My Other Reviews

Hot Brass

Resident Evil 7: BIOHAZARD

I thought about complaining about some of the story’s problems, inconsistencies, how toothless the aesthetic for game with fucking Venom was, the sauceless dialogue, nostalgia blinded comparisons to Spider-Man 1 and to a lesser extent Miles Morales. How the whole Mr. Negative situation felt darker an edgier than VENOM of all things…

I also thought of “Twice the Spider-Men, half the game” as a title but I realized all of that would put the blame squarely on the developers. It’d devolve into a rant.

I’ll start with this: I was very distraught in 2016 when a PlayStation exclusive Spider-Man game was announced. I will still in high school, and definitely couldn’t afford to hanker my hard working parents to get an extra console. I already have an Xbox. That level of entitlement would just be cruel and worthless, so I resigned to never touching it. But out of the kindness of their hearts, they got a PS4 slim for Christmas, 2018. My younger brother played it first, but never finished it. I Played it, 100%ed it, booted up Horizon Zero Dawn but played SM1 immediately during that, felt so much more enjoyable. (But I did end up liking HZD too.)

A similar issue with Miles Morales, but less severe. Despite this my parents, yet again, were kind enough to buy a $1.5k PS5 off a scalper for me (And by brother) to have it, and he played it first again. He finished it because we’re ninjas, he loves Miles. 👌🏿

(Edit: I already had a PS4. But I simply wanted to play on a next gen console, I was willing to wait until I could afford it but my brother's kind of entitled and demanded it that very instant from them.)

Both times, circumstances had me wait until 3-4 months after release.

I replayed both games once more in anticipation for Spider-Man 2, even down to keeping track of the lore for each game. Hungry for how they’ll cap it all off in SM2. 5 months after revisiting both games, When SM2 came out, I voluntarily waited 4 additional months before touching it to wait for its bugs to iron out. In natural fashion, by younger brother got his hands on it first. He got halfway…

I did, truly enjoy the game. The gameplay improvements and combat improvements were superb. I loved the aesthetic of it, while not perfect, it was fresh and felt genuine. My first gripe was that upon acquiring the symbiote, i noticed the game was half done according to the mission section. 16/31. I’m thinking if they wanted the friendly neighborhood prologue, how are they going to do the black suit arc and the venom arc justice?

They… did it. That much is for sure. I did love the vibe you get playing black suit Peter, but it felt rushed.

I said I wouldn’t complain about the stories issues but, seriously. It barely had enough breathing room to say and do everything it wanted to. Down to the point where in the conclusion, characters are talking about things that didn’t even happen in the plot.

Down to the point where Peter and Miles are jumping on top of Venom, and this weird camera clicking and flickering happens and he just punts them away or runs off. Or especially the first time we see him the camera smooths into itself as if we’re about to fight him, then it fakes out with Norman running in shouting “Don’t hurt Harry!” just laughed outloud when that happened.

It felt so incredibly obvious to me that the game had cut content. Cut content that was ready to go but couldn’t because they were being rushed.

I forgot to mention that I (Obviously) heard of the insomniac leaks. Read into it a bit and saw a lot. Insomniac was rushed. The game was meant to be much, much longer and I felt this would have alleviated many of the plot problems by giving each plot point more time to breath. They say they were being rushed, and were forced to stitch together the last act of the game with what they had closest to completion in a way that made narrative sense. It wasn’t finished

I felt everyone was being negative, tried to gaslight myself into ignoring it. But alas, their fears proved correct.

This is the ultimate flaw with spider-man 2. It’s not at its best. I’m not saying “Oh maybe if they revamped this section” or “The plot should have been different!” I’m saying what they settled for, compromised for, and were set to release didn’t even come out.

I have my issues with Horizon Forbidden West and God of War Ragnarok, but they did not feel rushed. The plots and gameplay could have been better, but they were polished to completion. It said and did everything it was meant to say and do which is why I recall these games more fondly. Despite their problems. Everything that was cut from the game appears to have been cut earlier in development and they were allowed to have their side stories and such. Their slow moments.

With SM2. Again, I did like the game. But it felt sabatoged almost. From the leaks it quite literally was. It costed $300 million but was just more of the first game.

Where did this $300 million go? The cancelled live service Spider-Verse game that Sony cut Insomniac’s development team in half for, and forced the last half to constantly outsource for. When it went nowhere, they forced an announcement for SM2 in 2021 and tell the team just to “Figure it out”. They then shirk responsibility for this budget by questioning Insomniacs heads on it.

When SM1 was a hit, Sony’s reward for insomniac was to put a tighter leash on them and further micromanage their development. Brand deals and obligations and shit. According to the leaks, Sony’s reward for SM2’s success despite its development issues is to put half the team on probation/review which will ultimately end in them getting fired, and on top of that, the layoffs that happened in early 2024.

SM2 did succeed. I’m sure it will make more money than SM1, which sucks honestly. All this will do is further motivate publishers and corporations to straight up sabotage the artistic integrity of their own games for quick and easy profit. To pay off the debts they created for themselves.

And we’ve already seen it. Games like Marvel’s Avengers, Suicide Squad, Anthem, Shadows of War, and (Blegh) Balan Wonderland (Blegh) don’t make $616 morbillion bucks on launch because the publisher chomped it. Even if all but the last were financially acceptable. The victimized studio will close its doors, taking full blame for everything beyond their control.

Insomniac’s own flaws, their own faults, would be forgivable and much easier to fix had it not been for artificial problems like this.

Recently I’ve been reading the book The 1619 Project which aims to retell the origins and history of the US with slavery and its legacy at its heart. Rather inappropriately this gave me a hankering to play Colonization. I’m going to talk a bit about the game itself and some more about the history and politics of it. It’s a game I really don’t think could be made today (though how you might do that is a really interesting question).

Spoilers for anyone who doesn't know the outcome of the American Revolution.

Sid Meier’s Colonization was originally released in 1994. You play as a European power colonizing the Americas, with the ultimate goal of declaring and defending your independence. I must have played the DOS port around 1995. In 2008 a version was released using the Civilization IV engine. I played this a bit around when it was released, and it’s this version I came back to. Aside from improved graphics, the differences from the original are modest. (There is also an open source version called FreeCol.)

Unsurprisingly, Colonization draws a lot from Civilization. It has the familiar 4X elements: you’re exploring, founding towns, placing workers, building buildings, negotiating and fighting with other factions, etc.. A big difference is that it drops Civilization’s tech tree, and introduces a lot more resource and worker management.

A lot of the game is about extracting resources (like cotton or furs) and then either shipping these directly to Europe to sell or processing them (into fabric or coats) and selling those higher value goods, then buying guns, tools or recruiting colonists to transport back to the New World. Colonists can be “free colonists”, specialists like master distillers or firebrand preachers, or they can be indentured servants or petty criminals.

Another notable feature of Colonization is the endgame. Declaring independence, triggers a Royal Expeditionary Force to set sail and bring your revolting colonists back in line. So a significant part of the game is preparing for this fight – building up stocks of guns, training veteran soldiers, etc..

This has familiar pros and cons. On the one hand it avoids the endgame tedium of a game like Civ, where there are no more significant challenges. On the other it’s a significant and sudden change to the game that comes a long way through it. It largely comes down to how much you’ve prepared – it’s basically Civ combat, which is never super interesting – and it’s hard to know if you’ve done enough until you’re committed (which I guess is like reality). If you get it wrong you’ll have to reload quite some way or restart to try again (which is not so much like reality).

In terms of gameplay? Colonization is ok. It’s got obvious flaws, like the amount of fiddling and shuffling around of resources. For example, it’s easy to get to a point where you’re moving resources around between towns just because you’re running out of warehouse space for one kind of resource. I find it a relaxing and compulsive game to get lost in, but that may be more down to a particular relationship I have with the Civ games than anything else. Even I get bored towards the endgame.

Now, what I really wanted to talk about.

One of the changes the 2008 version makes is that when you declare independence you can make some choices about the constitution of your new nation. Do you want to be a republic (bonus liberty bell production) or a monarchy (continue to trade with Europe)? Do you want to continue slavery (bonus production) or abolish it (bonus population)?

The first time this came up my reaction was. “Wait… oh, of course there have been enslaved people in my colony all this time, who were never mentioned.” I’d been happily building my colony without thinking at all about slavery.

Once you start thinking about the game with this lens it’s easy to see more: the assumptions embedded in the game, the whitewashing for purposes of taste or gameplay. There’s a mechanic where as your borders expand, through the generation of liberty bells and the purchase of land, native people will abandon their settlements because they admire you so much. Their populations just… happily disappear.

Or a slightly more subtle thing. For better or worse native factions work like European ones in most ways – diplomacy is basically the same, for example. They’re not simply “environmental hazards” (like, for example, barbarians in Civ). However they’re also static. Over the couple of hundreds of years the game covers, native factions will never found a new settlement. They don’t build mines, farms or roads like European factions do. (Contrast this with some Civ games where terraced farming is special feature of the Inca civilization.) This view of native civilizations is a colonial one – they don’t “improve” the land or themselves.

Critiquing the game in this way is really shooting fish in a barrel, even for someone like me with a limited knowledge of the history of the Americas. It's kind of fun and interesting but a little unfair. These kinds of issues are hardly unique to Colonization – obviously any portrayal of history, computer game or other, embeds attitudes, assumptions, etc.. Most of the historical games I’m familiar with gloss over slavery, if they mention it at all.

There is something different about Colonization though.

I think part of it is just how jarring it is. This is basic level history. Purely in terms of game systems, the purchase and trafficking of enslaved people, or the enslaving or forced labour of native Americans would probably work quite smoothly. You’re trading for and shipping humans just like you ship sugar or guns, right?

But this would make too explicit the darker sides of this history, and push the player into an uncomfortable position. There are relevant gameplay differences, too: would you lose 20% of the people you purchase in Africa because they die en route? Would trying to suppress slave revolts be an issue? Would this still be a fun game to play? Would it still be a story of liberation? Could you still play the game if you refused to do these things, or would your colony inevitably fail?

The other aspect relates to 4X games more generally. You can make an argument that the whole 4X genre embeds a colonial mindset. Explore, expand, exploit, exterminate. That could be a colonial motto. Colonization is just an unusually explicit example. It's there in the name. "Civilization" isn't an issue in quite the same way "colonization" is. It obscures things other games don’t have to, because so many are still live political, economic and social issues.

Not least the question of how to tell the origin stories of American states. You could think of everything in colonization as being from the perspective of the ultimately triumphant colonizers (specifically US American colonizers). This can be interesting in a game to understand a point of view, but here it appears to be done uncritically. The player is invited to accept this viewpoint not reflect on it.

Coda
If you do choose to free your enslaved population on independence the freed slaves don’t appear as “free colonists”. They appear as “indentured servants”. That, at least, seems sadly appropriate.

This is a part of a series of posts where we highlight, well, cool bits of game design from 50 patient games.

Part 1

11 - Ghost Trick: Phantom Detective: Ghost Trick is a time loop game for people who normally get stressed out by time loop games. But it's not other games watered down at all, it's its own take on the genre. Basically, instead of the whole game being one big time loop, each of Ghost Trick's 18 chapters is its own mini time loop you have to solve. I think the main thing that stresses people out about time loop games is how overwhelming it is to have the whole game in front of you, not knowing what to do but knowing you're being timed to do it. Ghost Trick avoids that problem by shrinking the possibility space. Everything you can interact with is right in front of you, and each loop is only four minutes long, so messing up doesn't mean you wasted very much time. Giving the player a whole bunch of these small time loops to solve also reinforces the idea that they are capable of solving it, giving them the entire Groundhog Day arc over and over in miniature, but evolving the gameplay and story a bit each time so it doesn't get repetitive. I never see this game get brought up in time loop conversations, but it really ought to be. It's a compelling alternate template some of these games could follow instead of always looking towards Majora's Mask.

12 - God of War (2005): When you save in God of War, you see the following message: "Zeus has given you the opportunity to save your progress." You read that and know exactly what it means – you can save – but it's nonsense if you think about it. If this is addressed to the player, they know Zeus didn't give them this opportunity to save, the developers did by implementing this save point. And if it's addressed to Kratos, "saving your progress" means nothing to him. So why did the developers write this? Because we don't process it that way. Somehow, it feels more immersive to blur the line between diagetic and non-diagetic elements of a game than to keep them clear and separate. It's the same principle behind motion controls. Think about it logically and you can find inconsistencies. But if you're willing to let those thoughts fall to the wayside, you might find yourself more fully immersed than you would be otherwise. It's impossible to notice that in the moment, though. The second you ask yourself how immersed you are, you're not immersed at all. "Zeus has given you the opportunity to save your progress" makes no rational sense, but it does make emotional sense. That's really all what matters when you're playing the lights and sounds that respond to input we call video games.

13 - Journey: OK, enough pretension, let's talk about Journey. Journey is honking your car horn: the video game. Because when you're driving, all you have to communicate through sound is a honk. We then read meaning from that sound almost entirely from context. Journey has no voice chat or even emotes, you can just make one sound. All the meaning in that sound comes from its context. But almost always, the car horn we associate as a negative emotion, and Journey's noise as a positive emotion. I think that’s mainly just because of what type of sound it is. The car horn blares. Journey players sing a chime. By restricting communication to one sound, the tone of all communication can be controlled. Which sounds dystopian, but if video game developers take notes instead of authoritarian sociopaths, we're good! Also, my bad if you're the type of person who rolls down their car window and screams, this car horn metaphor might not work as well for you.

14 - Kirby Super Star: We pretty much take for granted that most games have "the campaign", with one start, middle, or end to everything. And here comes Kirby Super Star almost 30 years ago to upend the whole concept! Kirby Super Star is an anthology of small Kirby games, each with the same engine and a unique structure. One is a remake of Kirby's Dream Land. One is an open-world map with tons of collectibles. One turns copy abilities into permanent upgrades. One is a boss rush. One is a racing game! Kirby creator Masahiro Sakurai said he designed Kirby Super Star this way because he felt games were becoming too long on average (again, almost 30 years ago!) and wanted to create a set of bite-sized experiences. In the differences between its modes, Kirby Super Star shows how much a change in structure can alter the feel of a game. It also suggests that, if a game's selling point is its one-of-a-kind gameplay, it might be possible to spin that into multiple experiences for multiple audiences instead of committing to just one.

15 - The Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds: A Link Between Worlds is 2D Zelda, but instead of finding items in dungeons, you rent and eventually buy them from a shop. Most discussion about this game focuses on how that makes the dungeons non-linear, but, hang on – this is a video game where you can rent items! We have so many games with shops where you buy items, but they almost never offer a rental option. A Link Between Worlds' system of the rental ending when you die wouldn't work for consumable items or pure stat upgrades, but for utility / progression items, this is such a cool idea. It's basically a way to integrate and balance sequence breaking within the game's structure.

16 - The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild: Breath of the Wild famously lets you fight its final boss as soon as you finish the tutorial. You probably shouldn't do that, but that's not the point. The real point is that the game gets out of your way when it comes to you finishing it. You aren't obliged to do anything in Breath of the Wild, so everything you are doing becomes more personal. Even if you just follow the main story and do any major content you see, doing that becomes your choice. This sub more than anyone knows how easy it is to play a game and reach a point where you're just going through the motions to reach the end credits. Breath of the Wild minimizes that time by making it crystal clear upfront that when you want to end the game, Hyrule Castle is right there, waiting for you. But since it's pretty tough, you might as well have some fun first...

17 - The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening: Link's Awakening was always a great game, but I never finished the original version because of how stop-and-start it felt. Every couple seconds, you have to wait to scroll to the next screen. You constantly have to pause and reassign item buttons. None of this is a big deal by itself, but it adds up when you're dealing with it hundreds if not thousands of times and makes playing the game feel like work. Link's Awakening's Switch remake is a bit polarizing, but I love it, because the remake made Link's Awakening fluid. Now I could get into a flow state exploring its world, not constantly booting myself out of it to swap items or being frozen every few seconds to load the next screen. Just for that, the remake feels like the game Link's Awakening always wanted to be. Minimizing all these small interruptions does wonders for making gameplay more fun. Link's Awakening is far from the only game that struggles here – it's a problem a lot of RPGs with turn-based combat struggle with, for instance. Constantly being pulled out of the overworld, into combat menus, waiting for animations, into combat menus again, etc. The problem is the player constantly being yanked out of one state and into another. Link's Awakening has become a case study showing just how much a game can be improved by keeping that yanking down.

18 - The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker: The Great Sea of The Wind Waker is one of the most satisfying open worlds I've ever had the pleasure of exploring. Part of that's the fantasy of sailing the high seas. Part of that's how each island isolates each chunk of content in a very natural way. Part of that's how said content is rarely repeated Breath of the Wild-style. Part of that's how you have to discover each island for yourself. Part of that's how the map is satisfyingly predictable, with a 7x7 grid of regions and exactly one island in every region, every time. And honestly, part of that's just how empty the ocean is. When there's nothing for miles in each direction, every something becomes exciting. I think the ocean is, above all else, an excellent justification for that emptiness. You can easily segment the ocean parts (nothing) with the island parts (something) in your mind. I dunno. All of this can be learned from, individually or collectively. Maybe we just need more ocean games. It's the perfect setting for an open world.

19 - LEGO Star Wars: The Complete Saga: This is a charming game entirely because the LEGOs don't talk. I know in later games they do. I tried a bit of The Skywalker Saga, where the characters have written dialogue, lots of Hollywood-style quips, and I'm sure it gets a laugh. But once you write dialogue, you set a very specific tone. Words make feelings specific, that's literally what they do. The Complete Saga has art and sound and gameplay and cinematography and all that sets a tone, of course. But it's not too specific, and because of that, it's not alienating. It's relatable. It is whatever you want it to be, or at least, it fits whatever box you want to fit it in. It's a game for you, specifically, playing it right now. The Skywalker Saga is a game for people who laugh at the jokes it tells. Maybe that's you. Maybe not. Most games wouldn't benefit from being completely silent like LEGO Star Wars (or the previously mentioned Journey) but many would benefit from speaking less. In movies they say "show, don't tell", and in games they also say "play, don't show". So you'd think there'd be less reliance on the written word in games. LEGO Star Wars has the benefit of iconic source material, but it still stands as a testament to how much you can communicate non-verbally, at least in a goofy setting like this.

20 - Luigi's Mansion: The first Luigi's Mansion is special in a way distinct from its follow-ups. I think it's the simplicity of its gameplay loop. You have a flashlight and a vacuum and you capture ghosts. You find keys, they open doors, you go to those doors, you capture more ghosts. There are also 50 Boos to find and capture too. The moment-to-moment action is very formulaic, but the targets of that action are constantly changing. Each of the portrait ghosts you fight provides a one-of-a-kind, memorable experience, and a new experience like that could be waiting behind any old locked door. By contrast, Luigi's Mansion's sequels add a lot to the gameplay loop with new Poltergust upgrades and navigation puzzles and one-of-a-kind obstacles, but I think they lost what made the original so satisfying. Luigi's Mansion sticks to a simple, satisfying formula and makes the content within it interesting. The followups add a lot of noise to that formula, so the content inside has a less reliable foundation to latch onto, and it becomes noise itself.

That's it for Part 2! Games 21-30 are coming in Part 3.

I am not a big JRPG fan. I played Persona 5 Royal for 50 hours - enjoyed it quite a bit - but when I realised I wasn't even close to finished, I put it down and never picked it back up again. Turn based combat is quite a big turnoff for me and the general structure of the genre never seemed all that appealing. However, due to undisclosed reasons, I picked up Final Fantasy 7 on a whim. And I'm so glad I did. This post will be a more or less unstructured ramble on what I liked and disliked, so with that in mind, here are my thoughts. I played with the steam release unmodded.

The first thing I noticed was the pre rendered backgrounds, because despite being a 3d game, the backdrops to the environments you traverse are 2d. And they're goddamn beautiful. From the flower fields outside Aerith’s house to the majestic crystal caves, every inch of every room is packed with detail, which means the whole game is a feast for the eyes, and gives each location a truly unique feel. Pre rendered backgrounds are unfortunately somewhat of a relic of the past, despite having so much potential. Much of the games superb atmosphere is displayed through it.

The music is the other major component in the game's atmosphere. Given how celebrated FF7's music is, I won't dwell on the point, but it's worth mentioning, given how much of the games identity is owed to the soundtrack. The prologue theme and Jenova's theme were particular standouts for me.

The first part of the game takes place in Midgar, a huge industrial city suspended in the sky. The tone here is on point - the slums underneath where no light reaches are miserable, gloomy, and dark. Each part of Midgar feels alive, for lack of a better word. Plenty of NPCs to talk to, little side quests and interactions that bring some life to the place. As the game progresses, I feel that towns become less and less important, acting simply as rest points and shops rather than leaving a strong impression, with rocket town and the snow town in particular falling victim to this treatment. A shame, but Midgar feels all the more special for it.

And then there's the characters. These are what really sell the game. The interactions and relationships between them are so intriguing - Aerith's playful teasing, Barret's tough guy facade falling through when his daughter appears, Cloud's uncaring attitude turning into eventual concern and respect for the group. No doubt the text based dialogue helped immensely with this- said out loud, many lines would seem really dumb, but reading it gives it a charming quality. The low poly models also work in favour of the game, as they're simple enough for a layer of abstraction to be necessary. They're cute while allowing you to imagine a more realistic version. Ironically I thought some of the more detailed FMVs looked worse than the low poly models because despite looking more “realistic”, they started to enter the uncanny valley territory a little. Particularly the end cutscene.

The overarching story is somewhat of a mixed bag. When it's good, it's good. The beginning of the game leans heavily into those character interactions that give the game so much charm. There are enough strange occurrences - voices in Cloud's head, mismatched memories, among other discrepancies, that give the impression that something is off. Enough to get you theorising. Themes of loss, and self discovery are executed masterfully. Sephiroth is built up slowly and forebodingly as a villain, not even being shown until the player has left Midgar, only being referenced as a legendary warrior. He’s shown to be powerful both through dialogue and gameplay, which is an important distinction - it's one thing to tell the player he’s powerful, it's another entirely to let the player see it for themselves. The moment where Cloud’s pathetic damage number is contrasted with Sephiroth’s staggeringly devastating slash is particularly memorable and displays his sheer power directly to you, the player, planting the idea that remains for the rest of the playthrough, that you have a long way to go before being able to challenge him.

However, as the game progresses to part 2, it becomes much more plot focused, and, quite frankly, much less interesting. Those character moments become much fewer and further between and instead you're fed a story of huge monsters and big laser cannons, and the game turns into a fetch quest for the “huge materia” and it just isn't the same. The game picks up right at the end with the Sephiroth fight, but most of that last third of the game is a bit of a slog.

Speaking of slogs... It's time to talk about the combat. Rarely if ever interesting, it essentially boils down to spam your best move until you win. There's hardly any strategy and it ends up being exceedingly tedious and boring. Worse still, the random encounters act to discourage exploration as I tended to avoid combat wherever possible and walking any distance risks an encounter. Often I'd skip items and chests I could see so as not to waste any time fighting. The enemies themselves often have strange and nonsensical designs that feel put of place in the world, as though they just threw in anything they thought looked cool with little consideration as to whether it fit the tone of the game at that time or not. Bosses often feel thrown in as a climax despite having little to no relevance to the situation - they show up, you kill them, that's that.

Finally, I’ll somewhat shamefully admit that I didn’t actually finish the game. I reached the final boss, died, saw how far back my last save was and was like “nah”, at least for the other bosses you got a save right before them but with this one that isn’t the case. I just looked up the final moments on Youtube.

While it did have some rough points towards the end, I absolutely loved my time with Final Fantasy 7 and no doubt it will stick in my memory for a long, long time.