Ori and the Will of the Wisps

If you go to the woods today your in for a big surprise...

'Ori and the Blind Forest' if one of those titles that you really have to play for yourself to believe. Back in 2015 there were not a great many of high quality, studio-endorsed platformers coming out in the industry. Oh don't get me wrong there were platformers, dozens of them every other day, but most of them were very personal creations that sought to emulate the magic of the old days of platforming rather than create something fresh and new. Of course, there were exceptions to that pile of games; and 'Ori and the Blind Forest' was one of them.

Borne out in a luscious display of gorgeous soft colours and dazzling effects, Ori managed to win over the hearts of everyone who played it; quickly earning this title's place as a review darling. Playing it today, it isn't hard to see why this game proved so enduring to so many folk. The story is ethereal, but simple in a manner that doesn't so easily fall into pretentious. (A trap that so many titles like this fall into.) The platforming was challenging enough and forgiving enough to keep you playing (keeping the title accessible) and the whole thing was just an absolute treat to behold. (Which is something that any and everybody can enjoy.) The title won a huge amount of awards and was so popular that it's publisher, Microsoft, soon promised the world a sequel in 'Ori and the Will of the Wisps'. (Personally I always preferred 'Will-o-the-wisp', but what do I know?)

 Since that time, fans of Metroidvania action have been waiting with baited breath whilst this game gets breathtaking trailer after breathtaking trailer, all the while growing no closer to actually being released. Honestly, for me this has started to become like my very own 'The Last Guardian', only this time I hope there's not some inexplicably delay before a release that turns out to be 'meh'. Perhaps 'Cuphead' is a more enthusiastic comparison; a heap of waiting for an end product that was worth every delay. But joking and speculation aside, I do have the utmost faith in Moon Studios and I know they wouldn't be ones to rush this out before it's done. It was with such unwavering faith that I approached their brand new trailer this Video Game Awards; and I'm glad to relAy that my feelings seem warranted thus far.

Something that 'Ori and the Will of the Wisps' has that transcends this particular title above it's predecessor, and all the competition, is an incredible fluidity of movement that is mesmerizing to watch. Even though the segment of gameplay that was shown off at VGA was mostly just a supercut of scenes, watch it for yourself and you'll understand how stunning the animation in this title really is. Seeing Ori dart across the screen and out from the paws of a deathly wolf, as the forest around him snaps and cracks, never ceases to excite me. I think it comes from the thematic energy behind the movement of every object on the screen, that adrenaline practically oozes out of every buttery smooth frame within this trailer and I just cannot get enough of it.

Speaking of animation, I've said it before but this game looks positively stunning. Moon Studios have a real talent for making use of the canvas at their finger tips and filling it up with all manner of creative creatures and bountiful palettes. Because the title character, Ori, is realized with a neon blue that stands out against practically anything, the team are capable of going nuts with their background scenery without fearing obscuring Ori, and that's a permission that they use to their fullest. Despite this game taking place probably entirely within a forest environment, Moon leans on their fantastical elements to craft biomes that shift from harsh reds, to barren browns and icy blues, providing the appropriate level of variety to keep things fresh throughout all of the impending journey.

The characters themselves are quite endearing too, although I'm imagine an animal lover would appreciate it all a lot more than I do. Ori is depicted as a hare-like animal constructed of pure light, allowing for the crafters to imbue the innocence of cute animals into it and use it's body-language to poke at emotions where need be. He makes for a fitting contrast to all the jagged, large and snapping beasts that we see him come up against in this trailer. From the pouncing wolf to the worm-like tendril beast and even the raging flood that was teased in an earlier trailer years ago. From an animation standpoint I adore all of these unique designs and the way that convey so much personality in their very being. (That being the absolute ideal of character deign in animation.)

These are the titles that I want to see more of coming out of the industry and, more importantly, getting screen time at important trade shows. Too much of the attention gets soaked up by the big announcements even when they don't really amount to anything at all. (Like those 'ambitous' next-gen launch titles that are sure to be nothing more than passionless tech demos.) I'd love to see great games that have heart, ambition and love behind them over the next shiny cash-grab and I feel like 'Will-of-the-wisps' is a perfect example of that. Now if only we could secure the same sort of attention for indie titles, then I feel like the entire industry will start to benefit.

'Ori and the Will of Wisps' is the kind of game that speaks to a very specific part of my gaming fandom, the part which hasn't really been active since I first played 'Gucamelee' or 'Dust: An Elysian Tale'. These smaller little gems that take up treasured places our gaming libraries are the stuff that makes this hobby so fun. Just as I'm always making room in my life for the big titles like Resident Evil 3 and Cyberpunk 2077, I'm always saving some space for titles like this too. Another adventure with the child of light is completely fine by me.

200

Ah man!

It's my 200th blog. Well, not exactly. I messed up the days a bit out of an unspoken desire not to reach this point. Why is that, I find myself asking, am I that opposed to the penning of a diary? Clearly not. I've had this update planned since the first 100. My issue likely stems from the truth that this milestone marks the two hundredth day since I've started this little adventure and that hits with unexpected weight. I'm faced with a bevy of belittling questions; How much have I grown in that time, do I know what I want this Blog to be, do I even want it to be? Just as with the Christmas gone by and the approaching new year, I find little personally exciting about this celebratory times and that is a darn shame. By that as it may, I said I'd write an update so here it is.

Quick disclaimer: Once again this will be a blog within which I will discuss absolutely nothing related to the world of gaming and merely sink all of my time into rambling into the abyss. Until I overcome the nerves to go find someone to diagnose me with something prescribable, this is my only outlet of therapy so I would behoove you, reader person, to give me this. Additionally, this blog is being written in the dead of the night whilst I'm heavily intoxicated on rom-coms, so any lapse in spelling and/or coherence will likely go unedited. Also, this is going to be a huge stream of consciousness wherein I'm being as honest as I can be, so this'll defiantly stop making sense at some point. I feel like going into the process of editing will sacrifice some of that honesty so I'm making the active choice to not go back an alter this even when I'm feeling more in the mood, so that's where I am with that. That was your warning not to read this, now I shall resume.

When summing up the last 100 days of this blog I can't help but feel it all meld into one indescribable dirge. I wouldn't say that I'm exactly proud with the range of topics that I covered in that time, because I didn't nearly hit as many as I wanted to, more that I'm surprised in my own ability to procrastinate for over 100 days to get out one heavily researched article. That's right, I didn't put out one fact-driven blog all this time unless you count the Game Awards round-up. (And I most certainly do not.) It makes me feel like a total failure to look back, and looking forward I'm not sure if I'm brave enough to change things. It's not as though I fear the wrath of poor research, no one reads this blog anyway, I'm just scared of feeling to meet my own standards. An incredibly weird concept to admit as I wasn't entirely sure that I ever had standards to begin with.

On a more positive note, allowing this little hobby of mine to settle into habit has not negatively sunk into the other elements of my life as they have all gradually faded away. Whereas once there was a time that I would have to worry about the next weekend and ensuring that I had a blog ready for a day in which I could not dedicate my usual amount of time, I've been invited to less and less events allowing me to recede into blissful seclusion. I think I mentioned my natural shyness previously, but this arrangement suits me just fine even if it means that I sometimes go days without speaking to anyone at all. I remember some writer once saying that the greatest enemy to writing was being interrupted, so I guess that I'm on my way to tackling that great dragon in my own way.

On a note of personal development, I'm afraid matters that have been a far sight more stagnant. I'm still happiest when engrossed in escapism or writing (which for me is another form of escapism) but general responsibilities often drive me out that comfort zone and I don't always react well. I know, I know: being outside of one's comfortzone is a good thing, it encourages growth; but there's world of difference between acknowledging that fact and realizing it. I try to be sociable to the folk I meet in my everyday but they just end up being the worst people. I feel like I'm trying, and then they inevitable kick down at me for the most unknowable reasons. Perhaps I should try harder at making friends, afterall I'm very scant on those these days, but it's hard to do when you find yourself stuck in rooms full of personalities that you hate.

Even when writing these words I find myself reflecting on how unlike me it seems. I know that I jokingly personify a cynical approach in my general blog, but in truth I tend to be quite the staunch optimist even in the bleakest moments. Perhaps that comes from living in a lower class family of folk who all seem somewhat successful and happy; if a large family like mine can turn out all right, with half of them being third-generation immigrants and the other half being lower class, then why can't there be good fortunes everywhere? But I'm never happy, I've never proud of the work I put out, and I never feel like I deserve the things that I have. I feel like a parasite or a leech and long for the courage to pull myself off and away from everything and everyone else.

But here we are; it's the end of the decade and I'm out the otherside, still as clueless and anxious as I was when it started. (Okay, probably a lot more so, in truth.) It's in pensive moments like these that I find myself coming back to one question. The question in fact. The classic 'job interview' question that everyone knows so well that it's a cliche at this point. (Not that I'd know what other questions one could expect at an Interview; I've only endured a couple.) "Where do you see yourself in ten years." Honestly, even now my stomach lurches at the very thought. Where do I expect to be at this exact moment in 2029? I do not know and the idea sickens me to a visceral degree, I don't think I even want to still be around in that time. I almost hope that I'm not.

The other day I was strong-armed into picking up some alcohol at the shop, requiring the ol' ID check that folk my age undergo. (This is the shop that I've been going too for the last 10 years, manned by an assistant who I've know for just as long; but sure, check my ID, I'm not disgruntled...) It was actually with an overwhelming sense of embarrassment that I handed over my passport, and her surprised reaction at my age certainly didn't help. This is by no means the first time that I've become  aware of how frightened I am at the concept of growing older, but just the most anecdotal evidence that I currently have of that fact. When I think on it, I find I'm constantly asking myself; 'What am I hanging around for' (which sounds kinda pretentious to admit) and I'm never satisfied with my answer. Maybe I'm waiting for the day when I can say "Nothing", but I can't yet be honest with myself about what that exactly means.

At this point I think that I'm very much talking in circles so I'll just wrap things up be saying that I'm still doing this blogging thing for a few more weeks at least. I like how it feels for now but I've been a right hormonal sod these past few months so who knows where I'll be tomorrow. I might like the pressure right now and scream to be rid of it in a month, I suppose we'll see. I never suspected I'd make it to 200, and am practically certain that I won't make it to 300, so stay cautioned all those who bothered to read the rest of my drivel. On a pop culture note... I just watched and love the Mandolorian, struggling to start watching 'The Witcher', and I got Pokemon for Christmas and am currently grinding for a Shiny Magikarp. (By currently I mean; literally as I'm writing this.) Hope ya'll got something you wanted this Christmas and find something to look forward in the coming year, keep excited for your sake and mine, why don't ya. Ta.

Resident Evil 3 Remake: Big changes on their way

STARS!

Ever closer we tread to the release of Resident Evil 3, (I mean, it's 3 months aways but that's still technically closer than last time.) and the excitement is positively tangible. However, due to Capcom's decision to keep this title under wraps until the last possible moment, there are no more big trade shows between now and it's release, meaning that we have to rely on infrequent interviews and news drops to ascertain any idea of what this game will finally look like. Capcom seem to enjoy holding this power over us too, or at least that's the impression that I've got from the way that they've incessantly teased us these past few days. But I understand that it's all part of the theatrics and a small part of me does actually enjoy it, albeit in a begrudging manner.

It is through this irregular channel of reveals that the Resident Evil fandom received some information from a Capcom TV Interview. (Which had to be translated, of course.) Here we learnt that the key driving goals behind the premises of this remake and the Resident Evil 2 remake are actually different in that this time around they aren't trying to be as faithful. When the original Resident Evil 2 first launched, it followed a very successful initial zombie outing, only to promptly eclipse that and, incidentally, everything else that Capcom had ever made before. The original Resident Evil 2 is revered as a classic for good reason, everyone played it and agreed that it did everything right to up-the-ante from the first title. It was the 'Aliens' to Capcom's 'Alien'. With that in mind, it didn't make sense for the remake to stray too far away from the formula that made the original game so special because that's the kind of thing a clueless Disney rep would approve, not a Capcom Developer who cares about their product.

In Resident Evil 3: Nemesis' case, however, the praise wasn't nearly as profound. Don't get me wrong Resident Evil 3 wasn't trashed on by any means, in fact, it's considered the last 'pure' outing in the mainline series before the games started becoming... weird. (I love you, Resident Evil 4, but we both know you ain't all there.) That being said, Resident Evil 3 was not the 'revolutionary step-up' that RE2 was to the original, and that led to the title becoming largely forgotten. It was mostly just a remix of Resident Evil 2 (Which, funnily enough, is how it was made so expediently) and that meant that folk merely looked at this title like an addendum to that game. (A matter not helped by the fact that the entire story occurs concurrently to Resident Evil 2 and seems to follow what can be charitably described as "The B-Plot".) This perception has been perpetuated all the way to modern day with many folk, including myself, believing that Resident Evil 3 should have been slapped onto the Resident Evil 2: Remake package as DLC. Capcom have come out and confirmed that this isn't their plan, and now they're seeking to justify that decision by making a few key alterations to Resident Evil 3's fundamental story, ideally earning it's independence.

The most obvious departure from the original is the way in which the lead stars have been envisioned. They have been spruced up to meet with modern design standards, (And, I'd imagine, to resemble a couple of unnaturally beautiful models that Capcom hired) as well as to fit a more action-oriented theme. That means Jill has been deprived of her iconic tube-corset-top-thing from the original and given a breathable tank top. (She might actually be able to turn her torso in that!) Carlos has also been given a redesign with his hair now resembling something that you might find squashed in the middle of a highway (So that's an improvement, I guess.) Carlos is also said to hold a much more important role in this title, becoming a worthy partner to help Jill through this nightmare. (Hey, maybe that means he'll actually be memorable as a character this time around.)

Capcom also want to expand the spotlight of characters who aren't narratively essential, those who's story could prove insightful for the larger world, such as Dario. If you remember Robert Kendo from the first game, the gun store owner who has the heartbreaking task of looking after his infected daughter, then you likely don't remember Dario as Kendo completely outshines him. Dario is the only civilian in Resident Evil 3 and is supposed to serve as the audiences indication of how Raccoon City is falling apart (on a budget, seeing as how he is only one guy.) Honestly, I don't remember this guy much even though you actually interact with him more than Kendo in the original, this could really use with a remodelling in this remake. Perhaps this time around he'll become as well-remembered to audiences as Remake Marvin was, but we'll have to wait and see.

Another more practical revision for this time around is the return of one of the most deadly non-boss enemies in this franchise; The Hunter. back in the original Resident Evil, the amphibious Hunter was one of the most terrifying monsters in the mansion, not for appearance but for pure deadly potential. Resident Evil 3 originally bought these monsters back as Hunter Beta, which was essentially the exact same creature with a different name. However, in the years since their powerful mythos has been sullied by numerous low-power appearances in the plethora of rail-shooter Resident Evil titles. (There were like, three.) This Remake intends to rethrone these killing machines as the worst things to come across in a narrow alley way, whilst giving them an update which will be 'Appropiate considering the new style of movement'. Whatever that means.

Finally, of course, there are the changes that are coming to the big bad himself, Nemesis. Although we've yet to actually see the fellow in action, the leaked boxart is enough for us to see that his design has varied significantly from his original outing. Instead of the patch-work Frankenstein look from the original, Nemesis has a 'stretched-face' dynamic that works better in accentuating the 'body-horror' vibes of Resident Evil. Once again the team has teased some fundamental changes to the way that Nemesis operates that they are unwilling to go into, only highlighting that he will be more aggressive than Mr.X from the RE2 Remake. I'm not entirely sure what we can derive from this, but I have a feeling that it might have something to do with the multiple boss encounters that we are destined to face throughout the main story. Perhaps this time around there is no way to 'defeat him' like in the original, only to slow him down for a few moments whilst you make an escape. (Similar to how Mr. X worked.) I think that would certainly help retain the 'fear-factor' that the original lost from having you slay the Nemesis over and over.

The art of the remake is an unspecific science, but I've always approached it from the camp that "Change is good, as long as it keeps the spirit of the original." Many recent Disney remakes have been blasted for forgetting key themes of it's source material and even the Final Fantasy 7 remake is facing backlash for the way they've cut up the story for no good reason. Capcom have proved themselves before, however, so I'm more inclined to believe them when they say that they know how to change this title for the better. My worries, therefore, are not on their continuing efforts but now on the rumored 'secret new game' that Capcom are currently recruiting their 'Ambassadors' to playtest. The obvious guess would be Resident Evil 8, but a recent trade filing could indicate the return of a franchise that is a lot more... prehistoric. (Actually 'Dino Crisis' is set in the future, but you get what I'm hinting at.) More on that as the situation develops.

Amazon: our 'New World' order?

Hang on, I'm getting a little bit of Deja Vu...

I'm no fan of Amazon. Not The Amazon, that rainforest has yet to aggrieve me in any significant manner, but the monopolistic online retailer created by, mid-construction love doll, Jeff Bezos. As a fellow all too familiar with how it feels like to work under the thumb of a waste-sniffing megalomaniac, I can't help but scoff everytime I hear of a new scandal from the Amazon store house. And don't get me started on the fact that Amazon has next to no competition on this half of the globe, allowing them to practically set the online retail standard on their storefront. (I thought there was supposed to be tradelaws established to curtail this level of market manipulation.) What I'm trying to say is, whenever I see the 'Amazon games' tag on the side of a product, my initial reaction is of hostile skepticism.

What essential corner have they cut in the founding of this game, how many coders did they slave over this piece of software to get it out and how awful will the, inevitably overbearing, microtransactions be. I'm enough of a bitter, cynical sod to expect the worst from every studio I see, a prejudice that will take a decent amount of good decisions to shake. With Amazon's track record, I wouldn't count on this game being the 'best it can be', in fact, I'm fully expecting Amazon game studios to make a good shot a dethroning EA as the 'Queens of mean'. These aren't the sorts of thoughts that one wants to be courting when approaching a potential brand new IP, but here we are.

Divorcing this game from it's developer for a moment, we get a title that sounds both different and familiar in a rather curious manner. Set in the 1600's, 'New World', quite predictably, sets players up with the task of colonizing a new fictional continent loosely modeled on British America but swarming with supernatural beasties. That's right, this game is quite literally a note-for-note copy of the premise of Greedfall. In Amazon's defence, I do not believe that any of this was intentional, two separate studios just happened to dream up the exact same concept at around about the same time, only Greedfall was an RPG and so came out sooner whilst 'New World' is set to be an MMO and so is a lot more demanding. It does suck for the team, though, that every effort of theirs already has a comparative counterpart before they've even put out a beta; they were already fighting an uphill battle with making a fresh-IP that is also an MMO in today's world, now that task has become damn near vertical.

Taking a look at the Game Awards trailer alone, we get the image of a historic fiction setting that does, admittedly, hold some vague promise. Despite squatting itself firmly in an alternate version of the 17th Century, we do get to see some ancient civilizations pop up such a legion of Romans who seemingly become cursed to haunt this land as undead. (Move over, Nazi Zombies.) Although the logistics of that does seem a tad suspect. (Apparently these Romans managed to cross the Atlantic Ocean somehow. Sure.) This does open up what one can expect to see in this alternate history world. We also get a vague preface of a battle between the forces of 'Life' and 'Death' which summons to mind the whole 'Raava/ Vaatu' conflict from 'The Legend of Korra'. (Although that just makes me wish this was an 'Avatar' video game instead, so maybe that's a negative association.)

We are not completely in the lurch when it comes to what we can expect from this game, as one would imagine, for all the way back in February Amazon teased us all with a gameplay overview that offers a brief idea of what the final product might entail. (Or at least what they were aiming for last year.) The immediate takeaway from that gameplay establishes a huge concern for someone like me, namely that this title seems intent on aiming for a 'survival' experience. Now, there's nothing inherently wrong with the survival genre, (If you don't count the fact that 99% of dedicated survival games being frustrating snore fests as an 'inherent problem') but I feel that gameplay style significantly clashes with the whole 'epic story of light versus darkness' angle that the MMO is going for.

'Surival' is an ultimately grounding topic in gaming. It asks players to balance all their fun adventuring with the everyday tasks of eating, sleeping and drinking. It is an ideal that works in situations where everyday survival should be thematically appropriate, such as in post apocalyptic scenarios, but can prove quite distracting when improperly implemented. From a customary glance we can see that 'New World' intends to profit off of the 'epic adventure' crowd that typically excites the crowds of titles like 'The Elder Scrolls: Online' and 'Black Desert Online'. The type of story wherein the players become fonts of buzzing magical potential with the power to battle gods, and wherein the key worry for any player should be managing their buffs and set bonuses. Fallout 76 has taught us that this type of high level MMO strategy gameplay doesn't gel with a dedicated Survival experience and actually has the potential of sundering that careful balance between challenge and fun. (By that I mean, no one wants to give-up on a hard boss because they've run out of chicken legs to munch on. It's demeaning and boring.)

In terms of combat, Amazon game studios have gone for the 'Action = response' combat model that emulates the movement of traditional RPG's much in the way that ESO does. However, I've yet to see the kind of real-time agility that BDO provides, but then there's surprisingly little combat to sift through at all. (Which is an odd omission in a 30-minute gameplay run through.) We also see the hints of a faction system that may offer the same sort of territorial bouts that Cyrodiil does for ESO, but I shudder to imagine how much actual balancing has gone into a system like this. What's to stop one faction taking over the entire map and making it unbearable for everyone else to live through? These are the sorts of fundamental structural questions that Amazon need to be answering before slapping down another highly-curated CGI trailer.

To say that I'm highly dubious about 'New World' would be an extreme understatement. I don't trust in the marketing, I don't trust in the concept and I don't trust the studio making the big decisions. Amazon is an untested development studio, and the fact that they're opted to cut their teeth on an MMO is both applaud-worthy and eye-rolling. Personally, I expect this title to be a colossal flop, but that is just my initial inclination. Honestly, there isn't nearly enough out there about this title to get a strong idea of what to expect, which is a fairly big problem considering this is meant to launch a new franchise. At the end of the day, Amazon game studios have to decide between drumming up marketing and fleshing out tangible details, and there's no inbetween.

Prologue: A playerunknown game

Boo.

I'm not the only person who did a bit of a double take when they found out that a new 'PlayerUnknown' title was being issued. I'd imagine that might be due to the fact that, until recently, Brendan Greene (a.k.a PlayerUnkown) was known for creating the second biggest Battle Royale in the world: PUBG. Although things have been tough for the company since the advent, and subsequent domination, of Fortnite, most believed that PUBG would be the kind of bottomless well that would continue to feed that team indefinitely. Why bother make another game ever when you've already peaked in your first outing, right? Valve decided to hang up their game development hat long ago, which they've only hinted at putting back on recently, Epic haven't so much a breathed about 'new development ideas' since 2017, and that illustrious club of 'Winning without ever trying' seemed like the perfect spot for ol' Greene. It would seem that our budding game developer might have a bug he cannot scratch, however, as he is willing to throw himself back into the turmoil of fresh development once again with: Prologue. (Not sure if that's the actual title yet. Sound like things are still being brainstormed.)

Hints first started to pop about Brendan Greene's willingness to seek fresher pastures all the way back in March when it was reported how he was moving on from his cushy 'Director of development' position and onto somewhere new. Specifically, Greene joined a new position within the corporation that bears his own name, PUBG Corp, (Because that's not narcissistic in the slightest) to the newly formed; PUBG Special Projects. The prevailing take-away from this move was that Greene was tired of the world of constant updates and one-up-manship from the 'Battle Royale' world and wanted to abscond to something much slower-paced and lower stakes, although presumably still within the rich PUBG mythos? Although all that is just rumor and speculation, as with many decisions in the gaming world, Greene's reshuffling was heralded by canned PR speak. (He could have been forcibly moved around for all we know.)

For me, though, I'd imagine that the whole 'Cult of persoanlity' thing that PUBG has going for it might have proved a bit trying for the fellow in question. Perhaps that comparison might seem a bit unfair, but it's all I can envision when I think about the way that this entire company, and their flagship game, bears the name of the creator. I feel like that fact alone really detracts from the individual effort that the team put behind each and every game and makes it feel like ol' Brendan here sucks all the air out of the room. I'm sure that's not the intent, but the mere hint of that is sure to weigh on someone eventually and make them seek a change. Perhaps in Brendan's case that change is the pursuit of new ideas and concepts to keep his brand fresh and to justify his name being on the office door.

During the Game Awards we got to see the fruits of Brendan's labours through a short teaser trailer for 'Prologue'. And when I say short I am by no means exaggerating. The trailer itself is perhaps 18 seconds in length, not including the title card, and features a mostly static view throughout it's run time. We see a forest, incredibly indicative of the recent 'Blair Witch' game, before lightning strikes and we hear the bark of a dog. There's your teaser trailer, guys, that's all your getting.

Judging from the aesthetic of the whole ordeal as well as the use of sounds and the handling of the camera, I feel it's safe to say that this title is going for a 'horror' angle, which is a somewhat interesting proposition in and of itself. As I've expressed before and recently, the AAA market has found itself sorely lacking on horror titles of late and so any attempt to fix that void in worthy a little degree of attention at the absolute minimum. Seeing as this is a Horror game from a developer whom we know very little about, however, is even more interesting of an idea; the best ideas can come from those that you least suspect. It will be equally as fun to discover exactly what the team and Mr Greene have learnt from their time supporting PUBG, without having to wrestle with an existing title with a rough base.

I'm being positive though, and we all know that's against my very nature so allow me to settle into a decidedly more British stance of pessimism. The Horror genre is an easy 'go-to' for smaller developers because of the widely spread misconception that it a genre that is easy to make for. However, in truth the subtlety and mastery that goes behind crafting a good horror experience make it one of the most taxing types of games to persue. Succeed and you've crafted a product that can reliably manipulate it's audience, well done, but fail and it tends to end up as a spectacular mess. We've seen nothing out of PUBG as a company besides from their penchant for rough games, and that doesn't exactly inspire confidence moving into this new title. Matters aren't helped by the fact that this title seems to invoke the spirit of 'Blair Witch', which is a title that is widely considered to be 'Okay'. Not really 'aiming for the moon', huh guys?

In truth this trailer has left me with more questions than answers, which can be a good thing if you know what you're doing, or could be the sign of a project that was revealed way too early for it's own good. I don't find myself being excited at the prospect of being teased by a developer who is unproven attempting to ape a notoriously fiddly genre and honestly feel like the team should have held off until they had the ability to share more about the core concepts and systems that are running the game. Plus then there's that title. 'Prologue'? To what; PUBG? In that respect, I suppose we could be delving into the origins of a society that permits regular death games held all over the world, perhaps in a manner similar to the 'Hunger Games' movies, but I'm really grasping at straws here. Playing through a 'Proto-PUBG' style matchup doesn't really sound like the most compelling prospective in the world.

'Prologue' seems to have a very long road ahead of it grabs the hearts of the public, and I honestly feel they may have played this reveal a little too safe for their own good. To score an announcement at an event as grand as the Game Awards is a very big honour, and unless you have something worthwhile to show it might have been better served offering that space to someone hurting for attention right now; like Oddworld's Soulstorm. Although, the intent was to drive up a conversation from as little effort as possible, therefore I suppose the trailer did it's job in that regard. However, jokes on you guys, because I'm only having a monologue with myself because I don't know anyone willing to listen to me talk about games. Sigh.

One year later and Fallout 76 is right back where it started

Trash, trash never changes...

Fallout 76 was a very bold proposition upon the world when it was first announced. Here was a title that sought to capture the role playing magic of the Fallout world without resorting to the ESO model and merely simulating it's gameplay. Indeed, Fallout 76 intended to use the exact same engine as Fallout 4 to ensure that the gameplay felt as one-to-one as feasibly possible, something that many thought was impossible seeing how unstable that game felt. Modders had been trying for years to install some form of online multiplayer for Bethesda titles, most notably in Skyrim's modding scene, although most efforts had ultimately achieved very little tangible potential. For that concept to then be ballooned into an entire MMO felt unbelievable, but then, Bethesda had much more resources and personnel at their beck-and-call so perhaps it wasn't so outlandish. So we thought. How little we could suspect the truth of the matter.

Since it's October debut Fallout 76 has been the poster child for bad game launches, bragging issues on every front from lacking content, baffling design choices, weak stability, various bugs and glitches, and an overpriced storefront. Truly there has never been a worse launch for an Online AAA product. Everyone who doubted this game and Bethesda in general had their trepidation validated once this title finally launched and proved to be a travesty. Those who disliked the direction that Fallout 4 was taking the franchise were proven right and pre-order victims were reminded once again about the dangers of blind faith. And, as it just so happens, this would only be the first mistep of a year of blunders for Bethesda Game Studios, working to systematically erase the decade's worth of goodwill they had built up, providing a poignant showcase of how the mighty can easily fall.

There were those that dared to hope for Fallout 76, In fact I was one of them. Bethesda titles almost always launched with some bugs, we rationalized; 76 was even more broken than the average Bethesda launch, true, but once those holes were all patched surely it would be smooth sailing thereon in. Once the 76 roadmap had been published and the first new content started dropping for the title, that was the start of a whole new age for the game. People were starting to come to the game and realize it's unique merits, they started to realize that this was the kind of title that one could enjoy in some limited capacity. But the real exciting part was the potential for this title to evolve with the times, we'd already been promised a whole new 'Raid' system and even NPCs come Winter. The future looked bright.

Somehow despite all that potential, things became progressively worse as time went on. Bethesda gradually began to break the content already in the game with ill-thought-out remissions, their new raids turned out to be clueless and boring, their monetisation practises became more desperate and predatory and, most recently, the game has buckled under it's own weight and descended into buggy chaos. I can but imagine how frustrating it most be for everyone to pour their life-force into resurrecting this title only for it to end off worse than before, but in all honesty Bethesda have no one else to blame but themselves in that regard. Almost every misstep that Fallout 76 had taken in the past year can be directly traced back to a conscious decision on Bethesda's part and thus they'll certainly reap what they now sow.

It should surprise no one to hear that in the past few weeks Bethesda have managed to reach a new low when it comes to providing a stable platform for Fallout 76 to play on. (or rather, failing to.) Two key issues have appeared, one being their incompetence at releasing another update which fundamentally breaks the game and the other being their lethargy with tackling the growing problem with cheaters that the title has suffered from. (Although that can be likely tied to 'incompetence' also.) These are the same issues that has been taxing the Fallout community for months now, and another prime reason why it's laughable how Bethesda expects its community to by $10 a month to play this title through their 'Fallout 1st' system. Honestly, one could almost say it speaks to an underling contempt for their audience.

Pop on their Reddit for the past few weeks and you'll see one key issue being bought up time and time again by the community, and that is of the artificially created 'legendaries' that have flooded the game's ecosystem. These are weapons which are given 'prefixes' to determine a special effect that they all exhibit, similar to how 'item rolls' work in looter games. As these 'prefixes' are ideally randomly assigned, the most useful and synergistic combinations become valuable and highly sought-after amidst the community. Due to a recently discovered exploit, however, cheaters have been able to 'game' this system in order to reliably reproduce weapons with a desired effect which they then sell through the game's inexplicable, and unofficial, gun-running market. This has broken all the balance of the title, established the community as decisively pay-to-win and given rise to a whole slew of 'dead prefixes' (Bonuses that have no effect to the weapon they are assigned to, such as a baseball bat that 'reloads after every kill'.)

Another huge issue that has popped up recently is one that has been incidentally recounted, but I''ve seen it with enough frequency to assume it's validity. That being a new bug introduced by Bethesda whereupon somehow, for some reason, armour durability decreases everytime the player reloads their weapon, until it breaks. Now this effect is primarily cosmetic and can be fixed by simply removing your amour and putting it back on again, but such actions are very difficult to conduct in the middle of a gun fight. This sort of issue is one that speaks to the absolute lack of quality control that afflicts the Fallout community, strengthening the pleas for Bethesda to institute a Public Test Server. (I've no clue why they've yet to oblige.)

This final issue is, from what I've read, exclusive to the PC editions of Fallout 76, but still holds the potential to sunder the balance for everyone. Basically, people have found a way to access certain spawn mechanics from the console of the game that allows them to summon in assets from Fallout 4. The worst example of this being those can summon human NPCs into the game (something that Bethesda famously, stupidly, excluded from Fallout 76) and those that spawn items so large that they get in way of everything; Like the Prydwen. (Which, though it may be besides the point, shouldn't canonically appear in Fallout 76 given that it was retrofitted for use 200 years later and is currently residing in a scrap heap north of DC.)

All in all, this has amounted in a dour ending for Fallout 76's 2019. They started the year strong with promises and dreams and ended it all with broken hearts and general hatred. At this point the prevailing question for Bethesda's development team is, how long can they keep this up until the other shoe drops; that is to say, until someone finally pulls the plug on this dying beast. We've seen no growth out of this title and some could argue that things have gotten worse, afterall there was no 'Fallout Ist' system when the title first launched. Titles that have found themselves in similar shoes, like 'Final Fantasy XIV' and 'Anthem', have had to take drastic steps in order to win their audience back, but that has required them to admit that was a problem first, before steps could be taken to fix it. Bethesda haven't even got that far, and it's making fans lose hope that this team will ever get their proverbial act together. I don't know what it will take to make Bethesda wake up and smell the fire they've been fueling for the last year, but I pray it happens soon because I'm not sure whether this is a rut that the team has the potential to come back from. God speed, guys.

I talk about Event Culture on Christmas day. Yay.

Something different this way comes.

It's Christmas I guess. Rather than spend the day being judged by my extended family (and family friends!) I''ve taken the time to treat myself to doing something that I still inexplicably enjoy; writing these blogs. As such, it should come as little surprise to hear that the topic on my mind today is 'Event Culture' and specifically how that pertains to the video gaming world, be it offline or on. (It's mostly online.) Perhaps this isn't most festive of topics or moods to get oneself in this time of year, but it's the only way that I can alleviate the massive headache that I always get this time of year so that's where I am. (I've always held that cynicism has healing properties.)

First you might ask; what exactly is it that you mean by 'Event Culture' and how does it relate to the world of gaming? Well, in the words of that one eye-gouge-worthy advert that I keep getting off YouTube "Event Culture is dedicated to those willing to invest in experiences rather than material possessions." (And no, actually, I don't remember what that Ad was for making it's entire purpose a failure.) So, in relation to video games; it is those moments in a video game's life cycle whereupon additional elements are added into the game in a temporary fashion for the end of creating valuable memories for the player rather than adding value to the permanent package itself. I suppose, at a stretch, you could relate it to a 'Fight Club'-esque 'Anti-materialism message, but then you'll have to find a spot for the 'nihilism' angle to fit in so I'd personally avoid that particular analogy.

For someone such as myself, who is forever aware of their own mortality and yet finds themselves a struggling slave to it, this is a concept that inherently makes no sense. (At least not in the video game world. Real world: Sure, whatever, I don't care.) Whenever I am dedicated to playing through a title and experiencing everything that game has to offer, the absolute last thing that I want is to be rushed towards certain activities for fear of missing out. This is the tactic that is pushed in many modern online titles such as, ESO, BDO and WOW just to name a few. The commonly accepted theories behind these attempts are two-fold; on one hand they attempt to draw in new folk by assuring people that the game is healthily active and that they'll miss out if they wait for a bit and on the other hand they want to draw existing customers back to the title for re-currency purposes as well as alternative monetisation.

Now that isn't to say that there is anything inherently wrong with the act of celebrating events and holidays in style; afterall there is nothing inherently wrong with either of those two goals. I'll never complain about being given an excuse to go back and play through a title that I love and if a title is deserving enough, I have no issues with spending a bit on microtransactions to celebrate the event, but my irrational fear of the finite plays on my nerves just enough to put me off. What is especially as baffling, are those events in which huge chunks of content are added to the game with a deadline before being taken out. It makes no sense to me; you put in all this effort to put this stuff together only to snatch it away within a manner of weeks, what's the point?

'The point', of course, is to provide value to the holidays. When Runescape would conduct it's yearly Winter questline (I presume they still do that but I don't know) it would serve as a great rallying call to the game whilst putting everyone in the right mood for Christmas. For habitual gamers, these events can be our chance to experience the fun of the holidays without having to actually force ourselves outside in order to physically see people. (Thank god.) My own neuroses about this kind of content is really unwarranted when you consider the value folk get out of events and the aura of 'exculisveness' that is generated from unique rewards of such events. Overwatch would often limit some or their best outfits to the holidays and that often made such events the best time to play those games.

There are times, however, where event culture is sought to the determent of the game. Lets take 'Anthem', for example. There's a game that certainly had a rough launch-year due to the way that it was put together in a year by a team that had no idea what they were making or where they would go with it. The title suffered from many criticisms from those that endured it, most parroted of all being; there's not enough content. Bioware were very lethargic when it came to supplying content too, with players having to wait until close to 6 months later to see a substantial addition to the game in the form of: The Cataclysm. What people weren't aware of initially, however, was that 'The Cataclysm' was conceived as an 'event'; meaning that the name play area and game mode that it offered was snatched away a month or so later. As a result, in the effort of building up and giving the community an event for their trouble, Bioware just ended up wasting their development time on an event that annoyed everyone by ending too soon. (Or at all.)

Perhaps it won't surprise you a great deal to read, but I'm not particularly the most 'event driven person'. I find that 'Events' rarely ever live up to the hype around them and the annual build-up to such moments can easily become nauseating. But then, I understand the place of events in society and do not 'wish them away', so to speak. Out of the monotony of the everyday it can be exciting to escape it all, even for a day, by escaping into a fantasy of 'love and understanding' and 'good will to all men'. I suppose being a 'habitual gamer' has desensitized me to the rush of 'escapsim'.

This blog was probably even more incoherent than my usual drivel. So I'm sorry for that, but I just needed something to catch my attention while I nurse this literal headache that I get every Christmas, so I just threw this together. I hope to tackle at least one big meaty subject before the end of the year, but it depends how I'm feeling over the next few days, might not have the right head space to get into it. Fingers crossed, I guess.

Resident Evil: In Depth. Part 1

T'was the night before Christmas,
And there was nothing to trouble you,
No Zombies or Red-Heads,
Or pesky B.O.W.s.

I talk about Resident Evil quite a lot on this blog, and it is with good reason as Resident Evil is one of best gaming horror franchises of all time. You're likely sick of hearing me ramble on vaguely about the mastery of sound design, monster crafting and visual decadence, (actually, have I bought that last one up before? I'm not sure...) but I have some exiting news for you; I'm going to do it again today, this time with pictures! Just as I recently implied, I have decided to go through Resident Evil again today in order to refresh my memory of the whole experience and go through it all in exhaustive detail so that I never have to talk about this series again. (Of course I still will anyway.)

Now, I wanted to tackle Resident Evil from all angles so I thought that the best all-around method for that would be to experience the game from a fresh angle, so that meant an entirely new game with none of the 'clear-time' bonuses or 'warddrobe room keys' that you get from beating the game through before. This was as pure as it could be with the intention of drumming all those old feelings of fear and nerves that one gets the first time around without the benefit of an unlimited ammo rocket launcher once things get dicey. (Okay, I never actually unlocked that rocket launcher. I was literally 2 minutes off.) That being said, it's only been a year since I last played the game for 4 complete playthroughs, so bear in mind that my impressions are not even remotely virginal and I know this title basically inside and out. Conversely, bear in mind that I haven't played this game in a year so I may get stuck with incredibly simple tasks such as; how do I get the first key? (If I keep making blunders like that then this series might take a while to get out.)

Just so that you know what to expect going forward; I intended for these 'in Depth' tagged posts to serve as a blog-essay, summarizing everything about Resident Evil in order to learn and critique all the different ways that Capcom tell their story, set their mood and drive their themes. Of course, as these will be multipart, and these games don't exactly have clear-cut mission layouts (unless you count the way that the first games are split into distinct roaming areas.) I will be choosing very arbitrary cut-off points of analysis from a progression standpoint to ensure that I don't take on too many topics at once that I won't loose the strength of my analytical eye. Also, obviously, I'm about to spoil the ever-living crap out of this game, so if you've never had the pleasure; pick up Resident Evil today for a little under £20. It's worth every penny.

Firstly, it should be noted that I'm not actually playing the original Resident Evil (Although I am actually familiar with that title because I played it back in the day when I was wholly too young to do so.) That is because, as good as the original was, Capcom went back to the drawing board to re-envision that game in 2002 with the Gamecube remake of Resident Evil. A remake that, in 2015, got a full remaster and re-release on modern-day consoles, making it a lot easier to get my hands on that rather than the original title. Also, this Resident Evil was the one that I fell in love with in my later life, so it makes absolute sense for me to start with this title. (The basic layout of the game is the same anyway, just performed to a much higher standard.)

Resident Evil starts off in medias res with the Alpha team of S.T.A.R.S (Special Tactics and Rescue Service) in their helicopter doing a sweep of the Arklay mountains in search of their Bravo team. In our cosy little team we have; Chris Redfield, Jill Valentine, Barry Burton, Albert Wesker and... Joseph Frost? (Well, seeing as I had to look your name up I don't think you're exactly long-for-this world, buddy.) Capcom use this set-up to rather bluntly reveal the recent spat of bodily mutilations that have occurred in the near-by Raccoon City, which ostensibly has nothing to do with the situation at hand but I appreciate their attempt to establish 'zombies' as early as possible. Their pilot, Brad Vickers, spots the downed Helicopter of Bravo team (and not the giant Spencer Mansion which can't be more than 500 yards away.) and sets the team down to check it out.

At this point the 'rescue' squad scans the wreckage with their weapons out and drawn as though their raiding an active shooter compound. (Seriously do not want these guys coming to 'rescue' me.) They find the helicopter abandoned, apart from the clawed-out face of someone called 'Kevin' who doesn't actually show up on the S.T.A.R.S list of operatives. (Is that a budding mystery or a slip-up, you decide!) For some reason this incentivizes the team to take to the woods in search of survivors; again, gun first. It is now that we get a scene taken right from 'Evil Dead' as our perspective switches to that of a dog as we see it attack and brutally maul poor mister Frost. (Taken too soon.) What follows is a frantic race through the woods as the team are pursued by rapid, and undead, hounds capped off by the best, and most odd, line read in the entire game. Observe:

At this point the game takes over as the story branches out in two different ways depending on who you choose to play as in the selection screen. Not only does this add a re-playability factor to the game as both storylines feature different beats and even unique characters; but it also adds a subtle layer of difficulty selection as Chris' playthrough is objectively harder than Jill's. (Likely due to the fact that he starts without a firearm.) For the purposes of this analysis I choose to play as Ms. Valentine as hers is the campaign that I am more inherently familiar with. (Perhaps I'll have the time and inclination to branch out after I'm done.)

In Valentine's path, the team find and enter Spencer Mansion only to find that Chris has vanished and Wesker is clueless about where he got to. So, in a situation wherein they are one-man down and another man missing, the team immediately decide that the wise thing to do is split up Scooby-Doo style. This paves the way for Jill and and Barry to go searching on their own and run into that incredibly iconic cutscene wherein you meet the first Zombie. Now, I'm being 100% honest with you all when I tell you that; I used to be scared out of my mind of that cutscene. (Bear in mind that I was too young to be playing this game at the time, so I was bound to get freaked out by something.) I just remember being stunned by the way the game blacks out everything and focuses on the grotesque face of the beast, a face I would then see in my dreams. Honestly, that scene right there is likely the reason why I never played this title to completion until over a decade later. (That's an effective scare right there.)

If you're me and wish to conserve ammo, this scene is immediately followed by you hightailing it back to Barry in the knowledge that he will off the thing for you. The two of them acknowledge that something is very wrong with this mansion and then travel back to the main room to find; surprise, surprise, Albert Wesker has vanished into thin air like Macavity. (oof, there's a reference I hope nobody gets.) Barry offers Jill her character specific tool, which is a Lockpick (Perfect for "The master of unlocking") and then decides to go off on his own giving players the opportunity to settle into the game properly and start investigating this maze of a mansion.

The first thing I will point out about the setting of Resident Evil is the great way in which is leverages traditional Gothic themes in order to establish the oppressive nature of that genre. We see that not only in the grand towering nature of the rooms that we travel through, such as the entrance hall and the dining room, but in the surprisingly interactive environment that is littered with morbid themes and tragic imagery. One can click around the environment and read several descriptions about the art on the wall, some of it even comes into play later in the form of puzzle solutions. It should be noted, however, that due to the pre-rendered manner of many environments in this game, it is hard to make out the pictures themselves, so that description is all you have to go on. The effect of this, intended or otherwise, is that players are allowed to envision the environment in their own mind and make it as spooky as they need to. (A fantastic way of playing on the almighty imagination.)

Resident Evil also does a great job of playing on the oppressive nature of wide open spaces and the confined manner of corridors. Capcom pull this off through their feature which some would argue has aged poorly and I would say was taken too soon; fixed camera angles. As you explore the Spencer Mansion, you have no control over where your camera will show which allows for the team to manipulate what you see in order to heighten your fear of the unknown. Perhaps they will position you in a way where you cannot see around that next corner, or become uncomfortable as the shot becomes ever-so-slightly odd. It's a brilliant way of harnessing the camera-angle magic from Horror movies and bringing it into the world of gaming and it is so effective. Upon entering the 'Bird cage' room I literally felt a shiver run down my spine, and this is a game that I've played ad nauseam. (That's the power of strong atmosphere.)

That is helped, of course, by the powerful sound design that recognizes that universal truth; "Art is as much about what you leave out as what you put in." In the wide open spaces of this game, you'll often find yourself accompanied with no music whatsoever, and will have to listen to the echoing of your own footsteps broken up the occasional crack of lightening. In tighter spaces, you may hear the occasional vague melody that mostly features haunting drawn-out notes to heighten your even present fear that something is watching you. The silence works wonders with the camera angles once you start entering problem areas, as you can start hearing the rattling moans of the undead in the distance but be unable to pinpoint them. One of my favourite examples of this comes from the mirror room early on, where you can see just around the corner but the bouncing nature of the undead moans will still trick your mind; it's truly an unsettling feeling.

All of those effects are ancillary, however, as your key worry at this point in the game is finding your bearings and figuring out the layout of the Spencer household. Despite it's intimidating size, the Spencer mansion is surprisingly restrictive at first as you find most of the doors are locked with different keys unlocking different doors. At the beginning of the game you have no keys and can merely try each door and note down the iconography adoring each lock detailing which key opens which door. Once you find the first key, your exploration opens up for you to find another and on and on. In many ways, this makes Resident Evil feel like an elaborate puzzle game bought to another genre, similar to the Hitman games. (I'm starting to realize my own niche biases.)

Navigation is helped by making use of your handy UI tools that keep things convenient yet still vague. By this I mean that your handy map will mark down locked doors as well as rooms that still have lootable items in them, but it won't reveal what doors need which keys or where those items that you can still collect are located. Plus, your map is imbued with a 'fog-of-war' mechanic wherein you have to visit a room in order for it to show up on your map, making it impossible to get a grasp on the scale of your environment at first glance. Of course, this can be offset by collecting the maps around the house, but these are all option objectives and reveal just the floor that they reside on. You'll find the first in a curiously simple 'push-the-thing-to-get-to-the-thing' puzzle, but the rest may require a little more ingenuity and/or perilousness.

As your exploration is so restricted to begin with, you're first ports-of-call will likely be going towards the mirror room and the room with the trapped key. That latter location does a great job in setting the tone for the kinds of traps that one can expect to come across, by pitting you against a problem with no apparent solution. There is a key in a pedestal that locks you into a death scenario as soon as you retrieve it, meaning that players are forced to leave the thing behind and come to terms with the fact that some solutions are not immediately obvious, backtracking will be a necessity. The mirror room is a lot more straightforward in it's threats, in that it is full of zombies, which works because that room contains the first puzzle solution, the Peridot tipped arrow head. (Something that I completely forgot about, and literally walked past when I played this last night. Seems this mansion is more confusing and winding then I initially thought.)

That arrow can be manipulated into opening the grave site out back, after which we are welcomed into one of the most overtly horrific locations in the game. These 'catacombs' showcase a row of sculpted faces that are missing thematic features, a book full of secrets and a hanging, bleeding, sarcophagus that is suspended by four chains. (Just the perfect man-cave for old Mr. Spencer, I suppose.) It is in that book that we get another key mechanic of Resident Evil game's; Item manipulation. You can mess with items in your inventory in order to solve puzzles or flesh out your understanding of them. This type of 'hands-on' approach creates an investigative aura around the act of exploring that makes players feel like they're taking an active part in unravelling this mansion's history. Because they kinda are.

The key you get from that book really starts to open up the world of Resident Evil, and the information in that book gives you a goal to focus on for the first act, but I decided to use that freedom to b-line for the first item-room as I needed to process everything that I had been through for this analysis. (Incidentally that was my first save and I did nearly die getting there. Total dumb move on my part.) There are, of course, several more key aspects of Resident Evil to discuss and walk through but I feel that I've already covered a decent amount today. I'm certainly looking forward to diving head first into this series from the strong beginning to the rocky end, and maybe learn some valuable things along the way,

Gears Tactics

Brother!

You might have heard me express, every now and then, my personal issues when it comes to playing tactical games. It's not that I dislike them, rather the opposite in fact, I'm just inherently terrible at all of them. Perhaps it's  testament to my patience or intelligence, but I could never wrap my head around the basics of tactical planning without bashing my head against a wall time and time again. Oftentimes my go-to solution for any problem is to crush with overwhelming force, which isn't even remotely real tactical planning but more just common sense. Be that as it may, I can't get enough of the genre and, by extension, the sub genre of tactical turn based games.

The Tactical turn based genre owes much of it's DNA to the original 'X-COM: UFO Defence', and much of it's renewed interest in that series' revival; 'X-COM: Enemy Unknown'. Folk like me just couldn't get enough of the unparalleled tension of splitting one's fate between the responsibilities of strong management and a roll of the dice. It's an absolutely intoxicating balance, possessing that slight control over the positioning of your troops, knowing that a single mistake could spell their doom. Whatsmore, this genre is colourized by the fact that most of these titles boast a permanence to their consequences. Once a member of your team ends up dead they are, more often than not, gone for good. A fact which exacerbates the tension behind your every choice, for obvious reasons. This is the allure behind the X-COM games, The Wasteland Games, and is sure to have a part to play in this upcoming 'Gears Tactics' if my cold-read holds any merit behind it.

Although, I will admit that my initial gut reaction to the very concept of 'Gears Tactics' (All the way back in it's E3 announcement) was trepidation mixed with confusion. The Gears of War games, in their purest form, were little more than mindless shoot 'em up games with an incredibly loose grasp on story and characters. The main feature of a 'Gears of War' game is the ability to eviscerate the enemy in the most brutal possible way whilst roleplaying as a literal mountain of meat. Those first three games revealed in this identification and the team never once sought to expand beyond this, which is why many people saw the franchise as dead after that finale. Once the new studio took over, however, the games started taking a new 'story-first' approach. This was a new 'Gears of War' which invited investment, personal attachments and, crucially, expansions upon the lore. This is the world in which this new 'Gears Tactics' title fits nicely.

Set 12 years before the rescue of Marcus Fenix at the beginning of 'Gears of War', 'Gears Tactics' looks to take place not too long after the firebombing of world in a desperate attempt to eradicate the Locust threat. (An attempt which does not work, obviously, or else we wouldn't have a series.) This title looks to divorce us from any of the main cast of previous titles and saddle as with a group of unknowns lead by a character who is apparently the father of the main series' new star. (I stopped playing these games after 3, cut me some slack.) This means that everyone in this title apart from the captain is a brand new face with the potential to snuff it before the credits; potential which, in my opinion, 'The Coalition' would be foolish not to capitalize upon at some point.

From the little gameplay glimpse that we have seen from the Game Awards trailer, we can see how the team behind 'Tactics' have gone above and beyond to secure the 'X-COM' crowd, even going so far as to literally copy their HUD layout in identical fashion. (Hey, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.) We've yet to get any tangible hands-on gameplay to sift through, but honestly everything looks so familiar I can likely give you a good overview of what to expect. Combat will be broken up into rounds wherein the player has a chance to perform their actions, after which the enemy can respond. Actions will be split into 3 categories, movement, firing and special abilities, with the act of firing usually finishing the turn no matter how many 'action points' that the player still has available. The trick will come in the fact that whenever the player takes a position to fire, instead of having to rely on the accuracy of their trigger thumb they must count on a percentage chance of hitting the desired target. This percentage can informed by a number of factors including the individual stats of the firer, how much distance there is between the them and the target, and how much cover is in the way. (Alongside how protective that cover is.)

'X-COM' may have set the groundwork for constructing a game like this, but it is up to The Coalition to populate that game with context and a large amount of enemy variety. Luckily for them, Gearbox already did wonders in that regard 10 years ago. Although in the trailer all we've really seen so far are the Grunts, Brumaks and the Corpser I would be surprised if the final game didn't feature Beserkers, Boomers, Theron Guards and all the other creepy monsters that are so fun to shoot through in the main games. In fact, I feel like the Gears universe has such variety to their enemy design that they could seriously even give 'X-COM' a run for it's money in that category, and that's something that I do not say lightly.

As far as story potential goes for a title like this, that's where I start to have my doubts. The trailer from the Game Awards seems to tease some plot about chasing down "The monster that made the monsters", but I thought that whole storyline was what the new Gears games were following. Isn't that what the whole 'Queen of the Locusts' plot point was created for? (I genuinely have no clue, I stopped caring about these game's stories the moment that the team started to care.) I also wonder about whether or not this genre of game opens up enough space to tell a story. As I said, this genre is almost reliant on the implementation of perma-death functionality in order to fuel it, and it can be hard to tell a serious linear narrative when staying true to constrictions like that. (Just look at how weird the story cutscenes look in the upcoming 'Watch Dogs: Leigon')

Personally, I gave up on the Gears of War games once 4 rolled around, and haven't looked back since. As such, Tactics has been the first title to truly turn by head and make me pay attention; and yes, that is entirely down to the fact that this title went 'turn based tactical' on us all. Even if I don't care much about the story and lore behind this franchise anymore, I still find myself particularly intrigued by that core gameplay because the 'TBT' formula is just so darn strong. Unfortunately, I am held back by the fact that Gears doesn't appear to have bought anything new to this genre, (Or if they have, marketing stubbornly refuses to talk about it in trailers) so it makes it feel like their using this gameplay approach as a clutch rather than because they thought it would make a good addition to the Gears world.

Sons of the Forest

Carry on, my wayward son.

There are a certain breed of games out there that earn their popularity not on the battlefield of reviewers and public discourse, but in their ability to attract that most free of advertisers; Streamers. Titles that cultivate scores of viewers through streaming sites such as YouTube and Twitch are often lucky in that their imminent success is then written in the stars. Whereas usually such affection is incredibly hard-won in today's varied assortment of genres and titles, 'Youtube Darlings' are the titles that get to skip that drama and poise themselves for the top. A few years back this phenomenon was known as 'The Pewdiepie effect', for reasons that should be fairly obvious, and it is a philosophy that still holds true as evidenced by the recent surge of love towards 'Untitled Goose game'.

'The Forest' is not a title that, by traditional definition, was worthy of the praise and attention of millions. It lacked in a unique concept, stable gameplay, tight controls and attractive graphics. In fact 'The Forest' was, by-and-large, another forgettable survival title that should have vanished into the ether along with all the others. But for whatever reason, that's not what happened and various Internet personalities, including Pewdiepie, latched onto this shell-of-a-game and turned it into a popular success. I guess one could say that 'Endnight games' won the proverbial lottery, and now that inexplicable success is starting to pay off with an impending sequel; 'Sons of the Forest'.

The original 'Forest' was a simple enough game to understand. You played a potato man with his potato son aboard a plane enroute to somewhere; Cue the 'LOST' contrivance and your plane ends up falling out the sky and crashing into a mysterious island in the middle of nowhere. (A very forested Island, hence he title.) Once there, players are expected to undergo the typical routine of a 'survival experience game'; they must build shelter, secure food and water, and craft themselves rudimentary tools in order to survive the wilderness. The twist came in the fact that players were not steeling themselves to fight against wild animals (I honestly can't remember if the original game even had wild animals in it.) but rather to battle against the throes of naked 'natives'(?) that lived on the island and would throw their forces against you night after night. As development of the title went on, players were encouraged to delve deeper into the island's caves in search of their potato son, and doing so would reveal Human limb monstrosities that made this story verge on the supernatural at times.

As a resident early access title, The Forest, was the kind of game that was notoriously rough at launch and continued to be for several years into it's life cycle. The game looked and played like an unfinished mess for so long that it eventually became part of it's identity and people didn't bat an eye when a series of fixes would utterly fail to fix anything in a meaningful manner, that was just the way that 'The Forest' worked. After all of those years in the workshop, I suppose the title must have achieved some level of polish, (the title doesn't crash with depressing regularity anymore) but it still isn't anything pretty to look at and if you told me that this game would ever be finished, let alone warrant the development of a sequel, I would likely laugh in your face. Funny how things turn out.

Sons of the Forest seems to want to replay the success of the original by going over the same general story beats, leaning into the 'horror' angle that they developed in the later stages of the first title, and play up the 'eroticism' angle that I honestly thought was an accident the first time around. (I mean. I known that everyone was naked, but I thought that was more of a practicality thing.) We start off by seeing our new protagonist, a wannabe Booker Dewitt soldier with the tattoo "Fight Demons" on his wrist. (A little on-the-nose there, guys) Predictably, his military transport is bought down by something that bears a passing resemblance to GOW's Nemacysts, and you wind up on the 'LOST' island once again.

The most talked-about moment in this trailer, however, follows next after the horror elements start to creep in. You see one of your squad dragged off into the woods and then come across a pale form of what appears to be a ghost woman. Ghosty, as I have called her, then starts literally humping some nearby rocks in what I'm going to straight up call one of the most uncomfortable moments in the Game Awards; then her limbs start splitting into duplicates and everyone immediately breathed a sigh of relief that this trailer is venturing into body horror instead of descending into a supernatural Porno. (I'm all for games taking more 'adult' themes but there has to be a line in the sand somewhere.)

One of the biggest changes we see in this trailer, in comparison to the original title, is the way in which your character appears to be a trained special forces soldier. This hasn't changed the baseline of equipment you are saddled with (We still see the player character equipped with the weirdly iconic tactical axe) but it should have an effect on the type of items you interact with. We've already seen a decent amount of ballistic weaponry being tossed about and it should be interesting to see how it all comes into play. It should also be noted that this trailer, assuming it's in engine, displays an incredible step-up in fidelity, perhaps showing that all of 'Endnight's profits are being allocated appropriately.

Given the lack of high quality horror titles that are out there today, I'm marginally more inclined to appreciate this product given it's recent redirection. Although I'd be lying if the 'survival game' routes of the franchise doesn't leave me with lingering trepidation. I haven't really given this studio a chance in the past, their choices haven't quite gelled with my own opinions on what makes a 'good title', but I generally do enjoy to see a budding Indie studio inject their own unique perspective on ostensibly tiered genres, so I'm willing to give this title the benefit of the doubt. Whether the final product can live up to the trailer, however, is the real test today.

Fast and Furious: Crossroads

Earn that paycheck, Tyrese.

I have expressed before my general respect for the effort and hard work that goes into developing racing titles. I've always found that their grasp on fidelity and all the little features that elevate this hobby from a pastime to an artform can often put entire other genres to shame. Just look at the amount of talent that went into constructing the recent F1 game; genuine F1 drivers have attested to how accurate that title is, if there's higher praise to be had I don't know it. But if there is one type of racing game that brings down everyone, not just the racing genre but gaming in general, it is a half-assed cash grab product. Just as a brilliant, well-conceived product ups the quality of all those around either out of inspiration or fear of being left behind, a soulless cash grab drags down the quality of all those around it in a depressing fashion. On a related note; Fast and Furious: Crossroads, everybody!

Let me be the first to admit that I am not a fan of the Fast and Furious movies, I've only seen the first two movies and 15 agonizing minutes of 'Tokyo Drift' but I got a decent grasp on what the franchise had to offer and why it didn't appeal to me. It is a franchise built around grand spectacle and impressive (if fake) stunts, with weak attempts at character development shoved in every now and then. Now there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, mindless action films can be a great time for those with the time and tolerance to withstand it, but it tends to birth a franchise with very little space to grow and become transcendent. Fast and Furious has proven to be one of the few lucky ones who have managed to escape that stigma and become important to the global movie conversation, (for better or for worse) allowing the brand to stretch out to multiple sequels, an apparently god-awful spin off, and a real life stunt show that actually exists. But could such a franchise survive the jump to video games?

My initial gut response to that query would be 'of course it could, duh.'. Afterall the franchise is built on giant spectacle and set-pieces lacking any real substance, a great many AAA gaming titles boast that exact same premise, but what if that very merit is harder to translate than we give it credit for? To understand what I mean, take a look at the first F&F video game tie in, (At least that I know of) 'Forza Horizon 2 presents the Fast and Furious'. The basic premise of that title was grabbing the successful framework of the car enthusiast game of that year, Forza Horizon 2, and using it show off digital versions of the flashy cars that identify the F&F franchise. A perfect storm of free marketing for the films and an attractive tie-in for Forza, everybody wins.

However, when you take a look at the actual effort put in by Universal to accommodate this crossover you can see an interesting discrepancy. The car models for this spin-off title look great, obviously as they were all handled in-house by the Forza developers, all the team behind the movies had to do was provide an interesting scenario and the voice talent. The story in-question was incredibly weak and revolved around racing cars (a plotpoint that the movies left behind since 2006's Tokyo Drift) and, despite racing everyone's iconic cars, the only voice talent that the studio were able to provide was Ludachris. (Wow, I'm star struck.) Now, I understand their mentality "Hey, we're providing the bulk of the value by agreeing to this crossover, so why should we have to put in any effort?" But the lack of tangible effort on the studio's part speaks to an inherent lack of caring for the perception of their brand and/or a disdain for the video game market in general.

So now we have the announcement of 'Fast and Furious: Crossroads' which seemed to tick all the right boxes, in theory. They revealed the title at the game awards, using the 'gamer-cred' of Vin Diesel to sell it's legitimacy. (And Michelle Rodriguez, I guess, but she did arguably mispronounce 'Tekken'.) So what went wrong? How about the game itself? From the moment the trailer started it became immediately obvious that something was seriously off about this product. Maybe it was the PS3-era graphics, the seemingly sub-60 fps or maybe the... actually, it was defiantly the face models. Dear god: the face models! This time around Universal went out of their way to bring their A-talent to this title (likely because they had to) but the end-result ended up looking like uncooked pudding more than an accurate digital depiction of Vin Diesel's mug. I mean, how could they get it this wrong? Vin has been bought to life in video games before, from Riddick to Wheelman. (Although those titles were admittedly rather visually stylized.) This just screamed 'half assed' from the moment go.

Developed by 'Slightly Mad Studios' (The guys behind 2015's project Cars), Crossroads seems set to deliver a more faithful F&F experience than the Forza outing. That is to say, when looking at the trailer one can see all the hallmark indicators that you could expect from a Fast and Furious movie. The game's narrative will follow espionage, explosions, giant guns attached to sports cars, and all manner of set-piece moments that look like they come straight out of a bad Bond movie. They even managed to rope in the talented Sonequa Martin-Green to lend her voice and a rough approximation of her facial features to the project. Throw in some vague talk about 'vengence', an unfunny back and forth between Vin and Tyrese Gibson, and you've got yourself a F&F trailer.

And yet it all of it feels very weak-sauce compared to many of the things we see out of  the F&F movies of today. (Or at least, the trailers that I watch.) Where's the big eye-rolling stunt to close out the trailer, where's the customary message about 'family' for the umpteenth time, where's the braggadocios celebrity villain? This trailer failed to capture any of the stupid charm of the movies and I feel that may be a real problem going forward. 'Slightly Mad' have a game that looks dated and a trailer that doesn't feel like the source material, at this point all this game really has going for it is a release date that hits the same week as the movie, and I'm not entirely sold on if that will be enough.

Just like most everyone else who watched the game awards, I found this title to be an embarrassingly weak title to end the show on and that may have peppered my reception towards it. After watching the trailer through again a few times, I will admit that it does look like a title that might some vague potential. Afterall, it's been a while since we've been graced with a racing game that is married to a narrative, so the end result might not be completely terrible. I just hope the team has the time to do something about those character models in the next 6 months. (Yikes.)