I need Baldur's Gate 3 right freakin' now!

I'll take anything at this point!

I'm getting the itch, you know. No, not that one about going down another Rabbit hole, this is a different, more RPG related, itch. (I should really start looking into getting a cream for all this itching.) What I need to really satisfy this is actually something a lot more straightforward; I need to play Baldur's Gate 3. I really can't get over it, I'm head over heels for this game and I'm starting to hit that particularly antsy part of the obsession where I can't get the damn thing out of my head. It's probably just the natural reaction to someone who was such a fan of the old-school Bioware games, only for the legendary Bioware team to slowly erode itself, neatly confirming that no future title would ever live up to their old example. In my psyche, Baldur's Gate 3 neatly fits into that gap of choice-driven, party-based, character-rich gaming; and that's a salve my wounded heart could really use right now.

Now I know that in a week us folk in the wild can expect an exhaustive reveal (Okay, they never actually said 'exhaustive', but I'm crossing my fingers) around Baldur's Gate 3, but I just can't wait that long anymore. I'm desperate, okay? Desperate for a little glimpse into one of the most classic fantasy worlds that has ever existed; that of Dungeons and Dragons. (I'm sure the universe has it's own special name, but I'm that much of a Noob that I don't know it. What do you want from me; I never had the friends to play DnD; leave me alone!) Luckily for me, Larian know the value of drumming up interest before a big event, and so we have a minuscule teaser to wet our appetites on before next week's main feast. And hey- I'm desperate, why not, right?

One of the first things that hit me from this footage, apparent from the lush green environments and the eagle-view camera, is the similarities that this game holds to Larian's 'Divinity: Original Sin' Series. Now I know that's not a new comparison, folk have been joking about how this game is just 'Original Sin 3' with a repaint, but I mean that in an inherently positive manner. If you're looking for a game to help sate your hunger right this very second that lies in the same vein as BG3, then there really isn't a better choice than the Original Sin games. (Except, maybe, the first two Baldur's Gate games but do you really want to be mailing more revenue to EA-Bioware right now? I think I'll pass on that one, personally.)

Another aspect that this trailer really highlights is the way in which the actual combat goes that step further than other games of the same kin (including the few I recently mentioned) by including the environment heavily in the combat. We saw something that was hinted at in the gameplay demo, how the players could feasible strike a huge statue so that it falls on the enemies, but even more than that we even saw folks getting thrown off of cliffs with magehand and even a couple of scenes where sources of lighting seem important. I love the tactile way this brings the world back into the gameplay, even when battling, and theorise that this very much could have been where Bioware games were at if they hadn't literally sold their soul to the devil. (Sigh, I miss you guys.)

But there is just as much interesting versatility to such an approach outside of combat as there is within. This trailer calls back to one moment within the gameplay demo where one of the party members goes wondering and finds themselves setting off a dungeon trap which requires heavy planning in order to navigate themselves out of. In the trailer we just see her trapped on an island in a room covered in burning oil and fire-arrow traps everywhere, and it just sets my imagination ablaze for the sorts of puzzles we'll get later in the title; how interesting could they get? Maybe we'll get yellow-mould triggering traps; mimics; teleportation chests; built on a framework like they have the possibilities at Larian's fingertips are literally endless!

In the narration for the trailer there is an interesting point which is mentioned and I wonder about it's effect on the wider story. We hear one of the characters mention about how "new strength flows through us" and judging from what we know about the storyline for this game I can only imagine they refer to the side effects of the main cast receiving the tadpoles they get from the introductory scenes. We've already seen how one of the side effects is that the party's vampire can actually walk out in the sunlight, but this implies there'll a great many more little abilities that the characters will be imbued with as time goes on. Now I find this interesting because these tadpoles are inserted by Mindflayers with the sole intention of eating out their insides and turning them into new Mindflayers, thus is the impetus of the plot. But if, in the quest to cure themselves of this ticking timebomb in their heads, they find out that the conversion process imbues them with strange new abilities and makes them more special than they ever were, this may prove an interesting conflict of goals later into the title.

What if there comes a point wherein you have to choose whether or not to give up your amazing new abilities or go through the transformation; what sort of inter-party conflict could such a conflict cause? I know I'm speculating here, but my dream scenario would be a moment wherein all the party get to decide individually whether or not to relinquish their infection, with the secret of who choose what being kept from the others. (Maybe allow the player to make each choice based on the developed stats and relationships of each character.) That might benefit for the immediate but have a knock on for the finale wherein the transformation takes hold on the party has to go up against at least one of their former allies. That's just one of the exciting paths that Larian could take such a concept in and I'm giddy to see if they live up to it or surpass anything even I can conjure up.

I should probably wrap this up, before I create the blueprints of a whole game in my head, which is never good for expectations. The trailer itself is only a small glimpse into the promise that Baldur's Gate 3 has to offer and yet it is enough to adequately sate my growing anxieties. My only little nag comes from the fact that even if this title does launch in late 2020 like predictions say, that will just be the beta edition of the game; I'm not sure how long we'll have to wait until the full thing lands. But if everything has been on the up-and-up so far, and I trust Larian enough to assume it is, then I imagine that however long the game takes, the final product will be worth all of it.

Valorant: Start of something special?

"No more games, you're DEAD!" a line I've heard WAY too much.

Okay so Valorant has been out for a while now, right? So I feel it's safe to say that just about every interested party is already well acquainted with it. Now that the beta period has come to an end and the game is looking to fully release as a free-to-play title any day now, the question on some folks' minds (like mine) is how worthy such a game is to join the pantheon of online gaming. Because make no mistake, dear reader, Riot Games have tripped backwards over themselves in a desperate bid to have this title be the next sensation of the gaming world, and I have a funny feeling that it just might be. But at the end of the day the real question is whether or not this title will have the sort of staying power to justify it's existence, or whether or not this just ends up being a 2020 fad that received inflated attention due to the lockdown and will wind down in the new year. (Let us discuss!)

So first of all I should probably address the elephant in the room; yes, Valorant's anti-cheat program is still as invasive as ever. The way it's system worms it's way into the core of the user's computer is unreasonable and honestly unjustified (the game has still suffered from a minor cheating problem) so that may be something of a sticking point for people once the wide release hits. (Or it may not, it's hard to tell with crowds.) In the pre-release stage everyone was just so taken by the prospect of partaking in an 'exclusive program' that no one wanted to question just how smart they were being in entrusting their computer to it's systems, but maybe that star power will fade once the free-to-pay drops early next month. Whatever ends up happening, for me the anti-cheat is a deal breaker in it's current state and thus I'll be avoiding a title that I otherwise am quite intrigued by. (Such a shame.)

But talking more about the game itself, I think it's quiet easy to draw parallels between this game and another incredibly popular tactile FPS romp, (In fact, I'd say that Valorant practically invites comparison) and that's because this game is quiet literally a remake of 'Counter Strike: Global Offensive'. (Or just Counter Strike in general, I guess.) I remember when CS:GO first launched and how so many people raved about the title's storied past and theorised that this would be the sort of game that would remain active for years to come; little did they know how right they were. Despite, or perhaps because of, the games simple premise it stuck around through all the Call of Duty craze, Overwatch mania, Battle Royale frenzy and even survived a couple huge scandals against itself. (At least one of which was explicitly criminal. The other was just unethical.) So you can see why it would behove a studio to try and copy that formula, but it would take a talented studio with a good idea in order to pull it off. (Along comes Riot.)

To be clear, I have nothing against Riot but I have to admit that the core of Valorant is one of the most unoriginal and transparent get-famous-quick schemes that I have ever seen. In terms of gameplay it is almost exactly CS:GO; teams take turn to hunt each other in one-life matches whilst one side attempts to plant a 'spike' and the other tries to stop them. ("Oh, but it's not a bomb so that's different, right?" Guess what happens if this Spike isn't defused. It blows up.) In order to shake up that formula, however, Epic decided to dip into the Hero Shooter craze which tanked many a prospective multiplayer darling in the wake of Overwatch to add some class mastery to the equation. So yeah, this idea is essential a hodgepodge of other successful games thrown together into a pot. And does the resulting recipe compliment their talents?

Why yes, yes it actually does. Anyone who has played a hero shooter for any prolonged amount of time knows the amount of nuance and replayabilty the inclusion of Heroes can lend to a game, and for a formula as already repeatable as CS:GO's search-and-destroy gameplay; it's really a match made in heaven. Learning how each character functions, the times to use their abilities and the tactics they gel with is almost as important as learning your favourite gun, and it also adds sufficient room for the title to grow in the future. I imagine that if this title can be supported under the weight of it's overpriced premium store, then players will enjoy the sort of live-service additions that just weren't a thing when CS-GO first launched; neatly placing Valorant on the trajectory to entirely eclipse the predecessor it 'borrowed' so shamelessly from. ("Well, the  old game getting on a bit there anyway. Probably about time they took her out back with the twelve gauge...")

However, at the end of the day you can craft all the clever systems that you want but without a playerbase and community it won't mean jack in the longrun. Luckily Epic were no strangers to amassing both and their campaign to get Valorant into the mouths of every gamer in the world was as ingenious as it was supremely tacky. You might remember earlier how I said that the game was yet to be released, however most still know literally all there is to know about this game and that's due to the Beta keys system. Essentially, this took advantage of the huge live gaming audience on Twitch by encouraging them to watch Valorant streamers in return for randomised Twitch drops of Beta keys for the game. Of course, this would then encourage that individual to join in on the program and suddenly the pyramid scheme has begun. (Okay, maybe that comparison is being a little unfair, but the FOMO exploitation was real with this title and I'm slightly perturbed by that approach to game marketing.)

You can't argue with the results though, and oh boy did it work! Look around today (Well, maybe not today as the game is down in order to prepare for the F2P launch) but any other day and you'll see literally tens of thousands of Twitch-folk watching various Valorant streams. Whether that be in order to get their own key or simply to check out the game, it skyrocketed interaction with the public which logically resulted in a meteoric rise to stardom. It's unreal to see how huge the Valorant community has grown so quickly, and quite honestly that's not the kind of momentum that looks like it's slowing down anytime soon, even for the anti-cheat debacle. (Not everyone is as concerned with protecting their data from hackers as others.)

So is Valorant the start of something special? Yes, I think it is, although it does pain me to admit that, seeing how manufactured and synthetic that promising start was. In the months to follow I can easily see this title becoming the next Overwatch and honestly I don't think this is the sort of title that'll peter out with the changing seasons. Too much work has gone into fitting this game into a competitive state that I seriously wouldn't be surprised if Riot are in talks now, before the game has released to the wider public, to get tournaments going for Valorant as soon as possible. Mark my words, this time next year Valorant will be sitting in the hall of online video game honours, even if it's seat at that table may have been notably bought and paid for. Although, despite all my snark I will admit, I'd play it. (Maybe the inferior console version though, like a scrub) That's just a power of a good, if appropriated, idea.

The Mystery of World War Z's Game of the Year

Do the depths of human depravity never cease to sink!?

Did you know that there's a World War Z game? Well clearly you should, because afterall not too long ago Saber Interactive dropped their ultimate version of the game for everyone to see; 'World War Z: Game of the Year edition'. That's all the extra content, characters and campaigns all rolled into one easy-to-digest package, but that's beside the point right now- this was 'Game of the Year' guys! Don't you remember? When Geoff Keighley opened up that envelope to reveal his award winner to be... 'Control'? Oh right, maybe it was the Golden Gamestick's award. No, that went to Resident Evil 2. (Clearly their judges are gentlemen of sufficient culture.) But then, where exactly is WWZ's Game of the Year Award? Who awarded it and, more importantly, why? That is the mystery I intend to solve today, ladies and gentlefolk.

As I feel there might be a significant chance that you don't know, I'll be explicit; World War Z is a video game that was created from the same source material as the Brad Pitt movie, only this game chose not to quite forsake the 'anthological ' routes of the original. In gameplay it was essentially just a rip-off of 'Left 4 Dead' in the modern age, but seeing as how Valve had shown no interest in making one of their own; all's fair, no? Players would take part in chains of missions that would follow different survivors and their stories as they attempt to escape the Zombie hoards, often taking place all over the world and with very diverse casts for each 'chain'. Of course, there wasn't much in the way of story for this game, so the different cast for every mission-thread didn't really benefit the narrative, but it did provide a framework for slightly tweaked character archetypes which encouraged diversity in it's player base. And this was the sort of game that required a player base. Although I believe the title had offline play, it was really built with 4 player co-op in mind and that was certainly the target audience in all of their marketing.

And the game was... pretty good. It wasn't exactly the revolutionary ground-shattering game of the generation, but for a sleeper title that popped out of nowhere it was a decently good time. Around the weeks it debuted, one wouldn't be shocked to see it popping up across the Internet as a good time killer, with people enjoying it's benefits for what they were. But I feel it's safe to say that the title lacked staying power given that the wider world seemed to have forgotten it existed for several months now. But no more, evidently, as this title apparently won enough hearts and minds to secure a Game of the Year award, thus warranting the studio to stick it on their box. That is how it happened, isn't it? Because otherwise I'd have to give the rallying call of 'Shenanigans!'

Now the cynical amongst you will likely be saying something along the lines of "What's the big deal anyway?" (Presumably in the exact same angsty voice that cool kid from a 2000's high-school drama covets) "'Game of the Year' Awards are meaningless anyway. Every outlet puts out their own award list, is it so hard to believe that one gave their 'best' award to World War Z?" And, quite honestly, my answer is 'Yes. That is exceedingly hard to believe'. Now, not to insult the talented team behind World War Z (Here it comes) but no outlet in their right mind would celebrate that title over the packed year we had in 2019. In case you forgot, that year saw the release of Resident Evil 2, Death Stranding, Control, Apex Legends, Jedi Fallen Order, Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice, Outer Wilds, The Outer Worlds, Devil May Cry 5, Disco Elysium, (which I still haven't played but I hear unendingly good things about) Metro Exodus, Borderlands 3, Super Mario Maker 2, Kingdom Hearts 3, Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night, and about 30 other games you'd think about before thinking of World War Z in a list.

So what's the deal? Have World War Z's developers fabricated their Game of the Year in order to sell their re-release? Woah now, that's quite the accusation to make off the bat without any evidence! Besides, I'm sure this is a huge misunderstanding that will be resolved the second we look at the wiki- Oh wait, there's nothing there... Maybe google then- nope, all that pops up is the name of the new release. (Almost as though this was an intentional move to obfuscate the SEO...) What about the official website? Nada. Okay, I'm grasping at straws here, guys! I want to give the benefit of the doubt, I'm trying really hard to find any mention of an award show that so much as sniffed some attention towards World War Z, but I'm coming up blank. Seriously, even 'RAID: Shadow Legends' got a nomination!

Okay, so perhaps I'm being a bit presumptive about things. Maybe when the say 'Game of the Year', they don't actually mean 'GOTY' but they mean to allude to their win for another 'best of' category. (Like 'best of clickbait'...) Okay, so the big Game Awards show from last year with Geoff Keighley and the build-up? Never even mentioned the game, so that's off the table. I've never watched a Golden Joysticks award ceremony in my life but I can browse through their winners. Nothing, nothing, nothing, wait a minute... 'Days Gone' won best storytelling? In a year wherein KH3, Metro Exodus and friggin' Death Stranding released? (Death Stranding was basically all story, and intriguing, mind-bending story at that! And you gave it to the generic "Gotta find my girlfriend in the zombie apocalypse" story?! I mean I adore Sam Witwer as much as the next guy...) But that's beside the point, World War Z isn't here either. Not even once. I've popped around smaller, independent, outlets and I'm getting the same results. 0 matches, try again next time.

Needless to say, I've sunken way too many hours into this budding conspiracy and now I'm pulling at my hair. Is this what we've come to, people? Are we faking Game of the Year awards now? Is nothing sacred anymore... Now I find that as I take a look at all the different folk talking about World War Z, only the bare few are wondering the things I am, and it makes me agitated. Why aren't more people talking about the fact that a video game company, backed by gosh-darn Paramount studios, is fabricating it's own merits for phantom acclaim? It's like padding out your resume with fluff you pulled out of your ass, only perhaps even more of a waste of time. (No one's gonna give a call back anyway.) Am I literally the only person upset by this affront to the holy system of video game award ceremonies? Yes, quite honestly, yes I am.

But maybe my investigative journalism sucks, (actually, I think we can erase 'maybe' from that statement) perhaps someone from Saber interactive managed to corner some drunken lout in an alleyway and trade his inebriated signature for the price of a lager, I just wish this transaction had a virtual footprint so I can stop tearing my hair out! Even as a sad, pathetic man writing in the dark at '04:00 am' with no talent, friends or redeeming characteristics whatsoever, I still feel belittled by this company in a deeply personal manner. As such, I offer this own deadly ultimatum to whichever member of Saber Interactive is man-enough to stand up for the honour of their company and game; beat me in a Deprived speedrun of Dark Souls and I'll make a full apology, tail between my legs. Your next line is "That doesn't sound too hard", but let me assure you; I may have literally never tried to speedrun a Dark Souls game before (or any game for that matter) but I'm bored and willing to give it a shot. The ball's in your court, Saber...

Assassin's Creed Inside Valhalla

And my axe!

Finally we come to the big closer, the one game which all the chips were on and the one reason why so many people, who weren't me, knew about the Inside Xbox event beforehand. Of course, I'm talking about Ubisoft's next sales leader; Assassin's Creed Valhalla. What can one really say about another Assassin's Creed title? It's Ubisoft's hand-drawn licence to print money and they'll cherish that until their dying day. Even when they've run out of ideas and have to resort to rebooting previous popular entries for cash (Activison) they'll still run Assassin's Creed out as their big headliner because it's the only they've got that's exclusively Ubisoft. No other game displays the unmatchable talents of the Ubisoft dev team quite as strongly as the AC games do, and that's a legacy that ol' Yves is adamant to cement. So does it makes sense for them to show up at an event celebrating the fidelity of the next generation? Absolutely. (In fact, it almost makes too much sense.)

Of course, Ubisoft were kind enough to grace us all with a pre-rendered trailer a few weeks back, in traditional Assassin's Creed fashion, but this was destined to be the trailer actually worth paying attention to. Ubisoft teased that this time around we'd see actual ingame footage and, whatsmore, it would be footage of a brand new console playing the game! How exciting is that guys? The exact same Assassin's Creed gameplay with a slightly smoother framerate? Take my first born you Promethean gods! Of course, in traditional Ubisoft fashion the team couldn't even pull that off and we were left with an in-engine, but somehow excessively cinematic trailer.

For those that had fooled themselves into thinking the Inside Xbox gameplay reveal event was going to wholly revolutionise the world of gaming forever, this was perhaps the greatest betrayal. For me it was just a little lackluster but par-for-the-course for a Ubisoft title. (Yikes, I'm being mean to Yves today. I'm not that cold on them, truth be told. Heck, I still buy their games.) But the point is somewhat sound, Ubisoft bigged up this big new trailer that would debut brand new footage of the game and sate fan's ravenous appetite, only to throw down a wet towel of a trailer that had about as much work put into it as goes into your average accolades trailer. (If the people who worked on it really did put their heart and soul into that project than I'm sorry, but one can't deny the final cut of the trailer was kinda lame.) Of course, that being said there are things to like about what Ubisoft deigned to show us.

First of all is the obvious that I am honor-bound to bring up, the game looks good; as was it's purpose to do so, being at this event in the first place. But I mean that this Valhalla title looks abnormally good, even for an Assassin's Creed game. The amount of love and detail that went into the glorious celestial bodies was quite honestly astounding, and some of the interior shots look expertly crafted. (Which is worth noting coming from a studio notorious for ignoring indoor sections.) The textures and framerate were just as good as they should be, but the strength of the artistic intent is what hooked me, and I feel like what we saw really did stress the point at how transformative the next gen can be for a studio with the scope and passion to take advantage of it. Their old England looks simply magical and I'm taken to imagine the set-pieces the team could pull with a framework this solid.

Of course, some of my mirth my be borne from an innate predisposition I hold for the subject material, I'm willing to take that blow. As a student of mythologies I have quite the adoration for those myths and legends that shape a culture around it; tales of morality, shames and embellished histories are my ambrosia, and amongst them all there's none I enjoy more than Nordic myth. That love and respect comes from the way that their poets humanised their gods and gave them relatable personalities and trials to overcome. They provided a satisfying ebb and flow to their myth, to the point where they even went to the trouble of devising the end of all their entire mythology in Ragnarok. As the later Assassin's Creed games have begun to draw more and more from the fantastical and mythological, I think it's fair to assume that Valhalla will be no different in this regard and that excellent Nordic storytelling will get a go around in Ubisoft's murder-simulator.

Additionally, his is another title that intends to take advantage of the 'Smart Delivery' service wherein those who purchase a last gen copy of the game can redeem a next gen version, free of charge, but I wonder just how feasible a current gen version of Valhalla will even be. From this trailer alone we can see vast straits of lands, huge fortress battles and roaring seas all within the same game, can the consoles of today keep up with such goings on? Perhaps I'm speaking from 'new machine envy' here, afterall if Cyberpunk 2077 can run on this gen then who's to say what can't, but I'm no tech developer so I have no definitive answers on that front. Back at the start of this gen Assassin's Creed Blackflag did a dual generation release and it was actually to minimal concessions on the lower gen's side (although might argue that could be due to overall concessions with the entire product at large. It's hard to say without definitive word from the team.)

My biggest worry for Assassin's Creed Valhalla, however, remains unchanged. I just don't have faith in Ubisoft's ability to tell a compelling story. Know I now that may sound a little silly bearing in mind that the last AC game I played, Origins, earned my praise for it's storytelling, but let me remind you that I'm a veteran of this entire franchise, Origins was an exception, not a rule. Already I've been hit with serious doubt rays as Ubisoft's team has come out to promise that they have no 2 dimensional heroes or villains and that everyone will be 'deep' and 'complex' for Valhalla. (Which, given their track record, reads like bull.) But even assuming that none of that is plain PR talk and that's their honest opinion, stop and think about it; is that the metric to which one should judge good storytelling? Not a great plot, strong themes or satisfying payoff, merely characters that have more than one side to them? And what's wrong with a good one dimensional badguy every now and then? Cesare Borgia was a classic Assassin's Creed villain, was he not? Maybe I'm being a bit judge-y here, but I'm just not buying Ubisoft's BS right now.

But in the end I guess that's Assassin's Creed's strength, isn't it? No matter how poor the storytelling is the games always end up being worth your while for some other reason. Revelations felt more like a lazy streching of Ezio's story, but their Constantinople was pretty fun to roam in. Unity fell flat on it's face in terms of gameplay, stability and especially characters, but Paris was a joy. Syndicate was laughably by-the-numbers but London still- you get the picture. Valhalla has already secured my, and several other fans', purchases long in advance, it's just a matter of waiting to collect now. And hey, maybe if we're lucky the game will be good too. (Whew, I went on a bit of a roller-coaster with that one, eh?)

Yakuza: Like a Dragon

Everybody was kung-fu fighting!

I wasn't lying last blog. I don't know how to open these anymore. We're looking at another blog regarding the Inside Xbox Event. Yeah. But at least this is one game that I can happily approach with smiles and expectations because yes, ladies and gentlemen, I am a fan of this franchise. For that reason I'm super excited to see 'Yakuza: Like a Dragon' coming to Xbox Series X and thus landing in the hands of so many more players. (Although, full disclouse, I'm only really invested for the localisation that this release promises, my Yakuza platform is PC.)  So before I've even looked at any footage for this game I already know that is hails from an oddball, intense and often epic franchise that has never managed to disappoint me so far. (So expectations are understandably high.)

Although I will start my delve into this game by actually addressing a point I've made in practically every single 'Inside Xbox reveal title so far', namely what this game does to deserve being showcased in a next-gen focused event. Previously we've had very few titles who boast a scope beyond that which the current gens can handle, and mostly just games that have resolutions just a tad above what the One and PlayStation 4 are currently comfortable with. It's a trend that certainly calls into question whether or not this jump to the next stage of development tech is really necessary at the present, but no where does that question blaze brighter than with the trailer for 'Yakuza: Like a Dragon'. And why is that? Well, because 'Like a Dragon' just looks like a Yakuza game, not bad but not exactly cutting edge tech either. Since time immemorial Yakuza games have been jumping through seemingly long redundant loopholes in order to make their games work, (The tiny play areas seem like a holdover from Playstation one) their strength comes from the gameplay and story, so why did anyone think this game was a headliner worth touting to the world about? It just doesn't make any sense...

That aside the trailer itself is pure Yakuza magic and makes me personally beyond excited to try this title out for myself. It's seems the story will follow a run-of-the-mill Yakuza grunt named Ichiban Kasuga as he is convinced to take a fall for his family. (That's 'criminal family', by the by.) However once he's out of prison he is only met with an attempt on his own life by the boss he willingly went to lockup for, and so the game will follow Ichiban's rise from the ashes to find out what happened and, I assume take his revenge. Now, for a Yakuza storyline this actually does seem rather by-the-numbers however the strength of these stories do come from the characters themselves and if that really is Majima I saw briefly in this trailer, then 'Like a Dragon' is going to have no shortage of them going around.

The rest of the trailer is filled to the brim with all that bizarre off the wall nonsense that we all love the Yakuza series for, only to the point where it might just eclipse anything they've done before. We've already seen that this entry wishes to evolve upon the series by adopting a party system, (is it still considered 'evolution' when every other Japanese game ever made has a party system?) which has given the team the opportunity for weird party skins and members, but this trailer pushed beyond that. We see power blasts of blue energy flying out of character's fists, wrecking balls, battle lobsters and even an orbital strike from space. (And I still don't know how much of that is typical exaggeration and how much I'm supposed to take seriously. I suppose the lobster is the former. Probably.)

From personal experience, I can attest that the Yakuza series manages to quite deftly manage the absurd with the impactful in quite a satisfying and enjoyable manner, something which I imagine this game will be no slouch at either. There's something about going through a vicious battle to the death and Yakuza bosses one moment and consorting with a half-naked lunatic who can't stop dancing the next moment which is so uniquely whimsical and, quite honestly, Japanese. That's the same sort of unmatched entertainment that I look to anime for and what I get out of some of my favourite Japanese games like Final Fantasy, Metal Gear and Xenoblade Chronicles. (Yep, I'm going so far as to compare Yakuza to those greats!) With the way that this series constructs itself there is something especially intense yet magical to it's execution that I simply can't get anywhere else. Think 'Jojo's Bizarre Adventure' only without Hamon energy as a plot point. (Which by my reckoning is a 100% improvement.)

If there is one problem I must bring up, and yes it's an elaboration upon my earlier point, but does this game have to carry the shortcomings of it's predecessor? Ever since this series began it has pulled of this 'simulation-light' of the city space in which the game is set, and whilst it may have been sort of impressive in the first entry nowadays it seems a little lame. Every time you're between main story events, you'll find yourself in an instanced area of free roam that basically just serves as a staging ground for the game's many sidequests, and I feel like it could be just so much more. What would become of a game like this is work was put in to make that in-between world feel alive and consequential? I know that's my expectations for western game design values getting ahead of myself there but I like to think the concept of quality would be universal. (If nothing else it would make the story locations feel more immersive and less like the 'fight arenas' that they absolutely are.)

But I do know why it is that Microsoft lined this game up for it's Xbox Series X reveal, contrary to what I might have implied earlier. You see this wasn't their way of showing off 'the power of Series X' like it was for most of the other entries, no this was an attempting of boasting about the relationships that they've built since the last generation. At the start of Xbox one's lifecycle, there was still quite the perplexing divide between the western and eastern gaming world, a bridge that only Sony, with their natural connections, could bridge. It's this separation which helped keep many decent Japanese games as exclusives to Japan with the odd exception to the titles that Sony could drag up. (And they ended up being PlayStation exclusives anyway.) There was the 'Dragon Quest' franchise, the Persona games and even Yakuza. Microsoft have dedicated themselves to making up the slack in that regard, and they've already secured Yakuza 0 on the Xbox One. This was clearly their way of showing that the team haven't forgotten this new focus and that it's working for them to some degree. Personally, I'm currently unfazed. (Get me a PC version of Persona 5, then we'll talk.)

At the end of the day 'Yakuza: Like a Dragon' looks like more of the same, and that is absolutely fine by me, knowing the quality that entails. I don't really think such a title really had place being exhibited in this setting, especially in a trailer that seemed completely uninterested in showing off the headlining attraction, but I won't complain when it's something that I like. Of course, the other reason this game was shown-off was because it would be making use of Xbox Smart delivery, allowing folk to purchase the game on current gen and port it over to next gen at no additional cost, but that could have been accomplished with a tweet, guys. (That's what CDPR did with Cyberpunk. Although now I've thought about it, that tweet was in the place of another potential Cyberpunk trailer! Dammit, Microsoft, no matter how I twist this you've still done us dirty!) But hey, what do I know about console marketing anyway? I'm just the target audience...

The Medium

"I see dead people."

Okay I'm gonna level with you; I've run out of natural sounding intros. Plus, my head's all over the place now because I just now started watching a damn good show and I'm in love; but lets see if this game can amass any similar feelings of enrapturement. Let's see... the games called 'The Medium', okay then physic stuff can be cool... It's a 'physiological horror?' That can be pretty creatively freeing, I guess. It's by- Bloober Team!? GodDamnit, what is up with those people and making the same games constantly. I mean I understand sticking to your strengths but jeez; you've gotta branch out eventually! (Right?) What happened to spreading your wings? Pushing yourself out of your comfort-zone? Trying something new so that your progressive staling formula can be revitalised with new ideas? I mean I don't wanna poop on these guys too much, but; Layers of Fear, Layers of Fear 2, Observer, Blair Witch, when will these guys finally ease off on the horror throttle for a hot minute? But I heavily digress, let's try to put away our preconceived notions and dive into yet another horror game from Bloober... (That studio name sounds stupid by-the-way)

First I'll start of by saying; Bloober do seem to be going out of there way to prove that this game will be a step up from the usual offerings. The trailer itself focuses a lot on the breakthrough in visual fidelity that games boasts over their other offerings, we see several facial close-ups with textures and light diffusion miles above what their team has managed before, so the team are certainly improving upon their talents. However the majority of this trailer is more of a huge teaser than anything substantial, which is fine considering this is supposed to be a grand reveal of the project, but by the same vein I'm not going to get too excited by what I see. That being said, for a physiological horror title from a studio that seemed intent on doing that genre to death just last year; this one certainly does stand out as a cut above.

Previously Bloober's horror games would consist of two things; walking and jumpscares. Now as far as I'm concerned that is a perfect recipe for your indie horror outing but rather insulting for a full-price outing. (Just as well, then, that most of Bloober's games aren't full price.) They would follow a formula wherein the player character would undergo some startling revelation about themselves (Which is becoming a real tiresome trope out of horror. Surely my character already knows all this stuff, what are they getting out of this trip down memory lane?) whilst delving ever deeper down into their own psyche whilst their perception of the world becomes more twisted, fantastical and horrific. There is it, that's ever Bloober horror game in a nutshell. Now too their credit, their team does have some great imagination behind it so that the moments when these goes do go into psychological stints it's never trite or boring, this team knows how to twist reality on a pin head in really unique ways. Unfortunately that strength is often offset by cookie-cutter metaplots (Layers of Fear), ludicrous lethargic pacing, (Observer) and central characters that are, I'm sorry, just boringly average. (Blair Witch) Now can 'The Medium' break free of that cycle and hit upon something really special? I actually believe it can.

Although the trailer was rather vague and 'symbolic', thanks to descriptions and ancillary information we can make vague sense of what it is that we are seeing. 'The Medium' has the player take control of a woman capable of looking into two worlds, the human one and the spirit world. (Wait, doesn't that make her the Avatar?) This unique trait sets her on the path to solving a mystery that will lead her to an abandoned hotel resort wherein, judging from the trailer, she'll have some difficulty keeping those two worlds separate as she searches for the source of her 'murdered child' dreams. Know immediately this should be ringing some people with a certain alarm; a woman haunted by a tragedy travels to an abandoned town before being trapped in an otherworld...  this is Silent Hill! And you know what... I truly do believe that might have been the inspiration that our little Bloober Team drew on for this project.

You can see it from the trailer from the way we see the surroundings peel away unto a decaying cursed world beneath; this is almost the exact same aesthetic which Silent Hill's Otherworld coveted back in that series' heyday. They even draw attention to it themselves at the end of the trailer when the developer pops up to tell us all how they are working in collaboration with Silent Hill's composer. (Which makes sense, it's not like Konami's been giving him any work recently.) Clearly Team Bloober want to fill some sort of void in the gaming landscape, but I'm not sure if their usual brand of first person walking-simulator horror is up to the task. Lucky then, that at the tail-end of this announcement we see evidence that this title will actually be over-the-should third person, perhaps hinting that this will be a more traditionally character driven story in the same vein as old school Silent Hill. (At least that's what I choose to take from it, but I way be a little biased.)

Not ones to rest on their laurels, Bloober went out of their way to talk a little bit about the game itself. From this we learn that one of the focus' they went t address with this game is the secrets that people hide about themselves and the way that a medium can break through that, pretty much confirming that this title will, once again, feature a lot of 'cut away' sections where we dive into other's minds. (That's been their brand up till know, I'm not surprised they're sticking with it.) We also get to hear the team describe the spirit world as a 'Dark mirror' which, once again, aligns perfectly with the way that the Otherworld was always used in Silent Hill. In those games, the city itself served as a limbo that would trap the tortured protagonist until they could resolve their ingrained trauma, and they would do that by exploring two worlds that are both equally as questionable regarding their reality. In the normal world they'll be confronted with familiar figures and situations from their past, whilst in the spirit they'll come face to face with manifestations of their own most toxic and vile thoughts and emotions. If 'The Medium' is attempting to step into a similar balance between confrontation and psychoanalysis then we could be looking at a somewhat sophisticated character study which is a step above their usual affair.

As you may have noticed, I'm not exactly a raging fan of Bloober's work, and that's because I feel they sacrifice a lot of the experience for storytelling. As an amateur writer myself I understand the allure of this approach, but I feel that without a solid gameplay foundation any game falls apart, no matter how well conceived and imagination the premise. Right now we haven't seen much of 'The Medium' but I'm encouraged that the team is on the right track, they're pulling from the right influences, making the right concessions to their usual-formula, and just saying the right buzzwords to get me excited. Knowing as I already do that the team know exactly how to establish atmosphere and sell horror, all this is icing on the cake that convinces me how this game has the potential to be their best horror game yet, maybe even one of the best of all time!

Whatsmore we won't have to wait too long to find out (assuming that the release date isn't shifted) as this title is already slated for a holiday release. The only problem I see is thus, the title's going to be a Series X exclusive. So Playstation fans are getting left behind because of another stupid exercise in exclusivity culture (God I hate exclusives.) At least the game will also be coming to PC, so their hope for the rest of us who won't be spending an arm and a leg on next gen this Christmas. But I don't to stir negativity as a closer, 'The Medium' looks like it has all the ingredients to be a great title and as such it definitely makes my much-watch list to see how it shapes up in the months to come.

Scorn

The perfect organism?

Once more I'm back to look through another recently unveiled game and see if I'm liking what I'm seeing so far. Although this particular game is rather unique to note as this isn't this game's unveiling, nor is it a big budget that we've already heard a great deal about. That is to say, we've heard whispers through the years but the pertinent reveals, such as a potential release date, is still very much in the dark for the public. The game in question is 'Scorn', and I have to say that as intrigued as the game does make me, I'm getting a little sick of the 'all tease, no delivery' approach that this game's marketing has taken. Although I'm getting ahead of myself a little, let me introduce this game to you as best I can.

Scorn is first-person horror title developed by Ebb Software with a huge emphasis on stylist environments and atmosphere. In fact, the game is based heavily on the works of H. R. Giger and Zdzisław Beksińsk; and whilst I may not know much about that latter gentleman, Giger's work is very familiar, just as it should be familiar to everyone, being the influence behind legendary horror flick: Alien. And you can see the same sort of identity plastered over everybit of Scorn's artwork, and indeed, this particular trailer. The whole bio-organic-mechanical aesthetic shines so brightly in every corner of this game to the point where it looks just like a Ridley Scott set, and to the point where it over-shines literally everything else about this game.

There's a reason why I haven't touched on anything regarding 'story' or 'themes' in this blog, and that's because in the several years that this game has been teased, none of that has ever been referenced at by the developers in the slightest. They've focused entirely on ensuring the look of the game is right, and there's nothing wrong with that, just as long as the rest of the game doesn't get completely lost in the effort. This is a similar fate that befell 'Agony' from a while back. It was another highly visual title which told it's audience nothing about the experience apart from the fact that it would revolve a decent into hell, thus justifying all the grotesque, demonic and psycho-sexual imagery that the trailers all revelled in. The aesthetics were great and everyone knew that, but no one had any idea what the actual game would look or play like and that was because the game itself turned out be rather lame and lackluster, taking all the potential that the trailers built up and wasting it. That's something it's so easy to forget when creating an art-house experience, that the demands of the medium still need to be met. (In this instance: that the game still needs to be good.)

One developer who I feel is great at treading this line is From Software with their Souls games. All of these games boast highly thematic visual styles, sophisticated storytelling and all manner of aspects that could easily smother marketing, but the team know to balance as much artistic indulgence as they can with that which audiences want; gameplay. Dark Souls is a franchise built upon the bedrock of themes like decay, stagnancy and renewal, but they are also great, sound games that built an entire genre on the backs of their gameplay. That's something that 'Scorn' really needs, maybe not ideas strong enough to build a genre around, but at least gameplay ideas familiar enough to get excited about. Right now, I'm just seeing a very pretty looking tour through a disconcerting metal/flesh hellscape, whereas I should be seeing a game.

All that being said, the trailer for Scorn was, just as every trailer in the Inside Xbox event, intended to showcase the fidelity of the Series X hardware and to that I will admit it all looked good. It's hard to really critique the realism of imagery as vastly wild and imaginary as Giger paintings, but I'll give the developers enough credit to say that their environments look more real than the sets I've seen in the Alien films, so there's an achievement I guess. For those that look for a visual treat out of their games (and who don't mind mild gross out) I'd imagine that this trailer must be a nectar for you, and with everything this game showcases I fully understand such a yearning. But at the end of the day you could tell me that this was the trailer for the latest Blumhouse movie and I'd never know. (Although I suppose you could argue that given Blumhouse's usual quality, that's not exactly a criticism.)

"But wait" I hear you cry, "hasn't Scorn received an actual gameplay trailer in the past?" Indeed it has, my intrepid historian, and it dropped as recently as a full three years ago. (There's a title that knows how to keep it's audience on their toes; they've got no clue when the next substantial trailer will drop) I've watched through this before and I glanced over it again to see if my opinion was any different, but still I find myself largely underwhelmed. Don't get me wrong, it means the world to actually see how a game like this will function, but that's just it; I don't think the gameplay from this trailer really resembles the vision of the team at all. (Which might explain why we haven't see anything else of it's like since.) That pre-alpha footage mostly just followed the usual game's exploration and 'look at how gross this monster is' pattern, before showing us an actual encounter with gunplay. And it's weird.

Now a title that calls itself as a horror game is well within it's rights to have a combat system, in fact I'd prefer it if they do (it makes the gameplay feel like there's more at stake) but it just feels a little off when that's all the gameplay shows; everything else lacks any semblance of horror to it beyond mildly disconcerting imagery. There's no control over the sounds the player hears, no building sense of foreboding, no creeping terrors in the dark; just a gunfight with a flesh-firearm. Even the mysterious nature of the environments falls short because the world looks so outlandish and beyond the realms of reality that it's hard to relate to these surroundings on any level that makes the horror feel 'real'. Now of course, all this I'm basing from a trailer, it could be that the full game has all of these, or completely innovates on horror games in an as-of-so-far unseen manner, but I can't comment on what might be the case when I have to take into account all that is the case; and right now, Scorn just doesn't seem scary or even sufficiently unsettling for what is ostensibly a 'horror' title. (Aside from that frighteningly long and obfuscating reload animation, that'll get a few cheese deaths if it makes it to the final game.)

So am I being a little unfair towards Scorn? Probably. The game looks stunning in the visual department, but I'm a staunch opponent of style over substance so that plain just will not fly with me, at least not alone. The fact that Scorn showed up in an Xbox event that prioritised visuals doesn't surprise me, but it does disappoint me. I get it, the developers want to show off all they have achieved with this game, but perhaps it's time for a different, more informative, approach in the future. Besides how I may have made it seem, I'm nowhere near ready to write off 'Scorn' just yet, I absolutely love their style and pray they can do it justice; but after the mess that was 'Agony' I'm cautious and will continue to be unless given good reason to be otherwise. (So please give me that reason, Ebb Software. Please!)

The Fallout 76 2020 roadmap

Rebuilding Fallout?

Well smother me in tar, stick on the feathers and call me a no-good lying pony-faced dog solider; because I've been playing a lot of Fallout 76 of late. I know, I said that I would probably be done with it by now but hindsight, and stockholm syndrome, makes fools of us all. Inexplicably this title has ended up on my rotation of daily grind titles and I cannot just write that off as a fluke, I have to admit that some of the more subtle changes of Wastelanders had a bit more staying power than I realised. (Mostly the Gold Bullion being tied to events, that was a smartmove on Bethesda's part. Wait, did I just say that something Bethesda did was smart? That doesn't feel right...) I think it's encouraging to see just how much effort and thought went into Wastelanders in order to revitalise Fallout 76, point-in-case; Bethesda wasted absolutely no time in putting out a roadmap for the year of 2020. (Striking while the iron's hot? They're learning!)

Now, of course in recent years the whole 'roadmap to success' model of detailing the future of a live service has come under supreme scrutiny. Years ago when this was used for smaller indie titles like Starbound, these served as a great grounding tool for the development team as well as to provide sufficient reasons for the audience to support these projects. (In return for rewards like extended features) In the modern day, however, they usually just serve as a way to make wild, even vague, promises about what you will receive from a game in order to keep you interested even if there's no way in hell that it'll ever deliver. Just look at Anthem and the way that their Roadmap fell apart because they promised too much without making sure the base game was working. It's basically the equivalent of drafting a business plan exclusively for your audience. (Only ours has to have bright colours and pictures because we're all twelve.) Yet Bethesda have proved that they can execute on their roadmaps, at least mostly (those Raids still offline, Bethesda?) so maybe you can give them a little credit. If nothing else, it shows how they see Wastelanders as a beginning over an endpoint.

This block of content that we're currently in is easily the one that has received the most buzz and that's likely because of how it's the one with the most details. (Although one such detail was blown a little out of proportion) Yes, that's right; Fallout 76 will finally be implementing a Battle Pass system in their 'Seasons'. Now I'm not going to do you the disservice of explaining what a Battle Pass is again, but I will detail the general response because I think it's interesting. In their post detailing how 'Seasons' will provide actual items and skins as a reward, Bethesda commented on how the first season will be free, which set off so many people it's not even funny. Take a look at the Internet and you'll see oodles of people slamming Bethesda for adding another monetary system to Fallout 76, all because they specified that 'the first one' is free, without any evidence that the later ones wouldn't be. I personally demonstrated uncharacteristic restraint (or probably just very characteristic laziness) in waiting for an official response from Bethesda and guess what; the other Seasons will be free too. Yeah, it was just unfortunate poor wording on their part. (Obviously. Have you seen literally the entire rest of this game's life cycle?)

As for the other items in this block, it seems that Bethesda are committed to finally solving the longest awaited player QOL features, which is a great bedrock for this next year of content. Public team finding is a big one for me, Fasnacht festival is a nostalgic look at the first time that Fallout 76 really started to nail bringing the community together (Also, if the spawn rate of this event is anything like it was last year, we're all gonna be Gold Bullion rich by the end of this event) and Meat Week is... I didn't really like Meat week, but we're getting it again so... yay... For me, the big new feature are the legendary perk cards which hope to solve the issue of redundant levelling for many people once they fix their build. As a crit sniper myself, (No, that build is not very effective; thank you for pointing it out) I could really use a few bigger perks to add to my character and become a bigger presence in some of the harder events. I just want to successfully build my glass cannon, and I think legendary perk cards might be the first step to that weird dream coming true.

The 'One Wasteland For All' block is probably the most eyerolling from where I'm sitting, because this is literally the arc that all of these games seem to take. They start out as traditional RPG's with online skeletons thrown on top; meaning level-lists and damage scaling, only to realise that community is better encouraged without that barrier to play and so they remove that. (whilst calling it a feature.) Zenimax pulled the same stunt for ESO with 'One Tamriel' and now Fallout 76 is following suit with practically the exact same labelling. (Just another example of how Bethesda simply refused to learn from Zenimax's mistakes when originally putting 76 together.) All that being said, I won't pretend like this isn't the right move for the game and I do encourage it, although for me the much more interesting footnote is the one about the teaser questline that will be introduced here in order to build hype for the next big step of the game.

That's because in the Winter the Brotherhood of Steel finally return to Appalachia with Fractured Steel, the second big event for the Fallout 76 landscape. (I couldn't be more excited!) It's crazy to start seeing the actual things that make Fallout unique come to the game, and it's heartening to think that a solid journey is being planned out for this title. Even when Wastelanders hit and the bones of a Fallout world were built, it still felt hollow without those timeless factions like the Brotherhood, Enclave or the Followers of the Apocalypse. Bethesda tried to create their own factions with Foundation and, the imaginatively named, Raiders; but let's just say there's a reason why this franchise keeps coming back to it's routes. (Yeah, the new factions are about as well thought out and deep as a puddle.)

As a bit of a lore hound I will admit that I am slightly ruffled by the mere existence of this branch of the Brotherhood (they were founded on the West Coast) but I've had a year to get over that fact now and all I want is more content. Additionally, this block will come with some new allies to get to know and by then I might actually have enough content to make a 'the best companion in' blog, so you could say I'm personally invested. It appears as though Bethesda have framed this to be the next big step forward for the game, and in that case it's actually quite interesting that it's coming as soon as this Winter. They're not waiting until next year to hit the fans with another shock to the system; it's quite the momentum their building and I'm curious whether or not it's something they can keep up.

In conclusion, I approach this roadmap with the same muted optimism that I did with the last roadmap, only this time with the vague hope of something more. The endgoal of the last roadmap was to perform a successful course correct and get this game to a state it should have launched in, and to that end I feel they've performed adequately, however the next roadmap will really show if the game they've made has the potential to ever be something more. A lot of the shortcomings of Wastelanders has been forgivable given the size of the shift in direction, but I don't think the same can't be said if Fractured Steel isn't to the quality they promise. However that turns out, folk like me will be along for the whole ride, so I'll have my fingers crossed that Bethesda know which route to take this time.

The Elder Scrolls Blades: In review

Remember the 30th of Frostfall

There's a new Elder Scrolls game out. (Huh, that usually goes down with a bit more fanfare...) So I don't even know if I have to say this, I've already said so much about myself in this blog, but The Elder Scrolls is literally my fantasy game of choice. I love fantasy and the plethora of interesting and exciting worlds they confer upon us, but TES has always had a special place in my heart as my literal second home. I've played just about every single game I can get my hands on, (I never got to play the mobile version of Oblivion, unfortunately) and as such it was inevitable that, once it was announced, I would pick up Blades, even if it would be a mobile offering. And why not, afterall the game would have an intuitive 'swing with the character' system which the games hadn't seen since Daggerfall, a town building system and be completely free to play. A dream come true, right?

Well several excruciating months after it's 2018 announcement, 'The Elder Scrolls: Blades' hit it's beta period and thus landed directly in my hands, (There was no way I wasn't going to be part of the early access folk.) and things seemed pretty decent at first. The story takes place after the events of Skyrim and the reawakening of the Dragons, the influence of the Thalmor is practically absolute and as such anyone who doesn't vibe with the Elven regime is in for a rough time. That means bad days for those that worship Talos, those who respect autonomy, Redgaurds in general and, of course, the ancient order of Dragon-hunting monks; The Blades. The player is, therefore, thrust in the shoes of a runaway Blade who happens upon a recently ravaged town in the middle of Cyrodiil and through vague reasoning comes to the conclusion that they must landlord this town until the end of time. (So this isn't exactly the most driven Elder Scrolls plot, but that ain't the worst thing in the world, I guess.)

The meat of the game was formed into a 'dungeon-crawling' experience wherein players would explore randomly generated battle arenas for items. And when I say 'The meat of the game', I literally mean every single active second of playtime. (The rest is just busywork.) Now the way that dungeon crawling is handled by Blades is actually rather accessible and rewarding. As mentioned before the controls are a simple 'pull and swing' mechanic which makes use of touch screens and there's a smattering of helpful skills and spells that the player can learn as they level up. Around these generated sections you'll find limited resource nodes, secret areas and chests that reward players with cool loot, money and resources, further encouraging the crawling of dungeons. However from here arises the first problem.

It's clear that the gameplay loop of Blades is basically the same to that of a looter game; you go on quests with your gear, loot new gear, then pursue harder quests with that gear. Basically it's a cycle that encourages gathering chests on missions and opening them, but Bethesda had a sneaky idea about how they could monetise on that game easily. Basically, they ended up time-gating the opening of these chests to several hours (the more rare the chest, the longer you'd have to wait) unless you bought their premium currency in order to open it immediately. For a mobile game that didn't have an 'energy system', this shaped up as a pretty contrived way to limit player game time and ended up severely hurting this title's early reputation, likely explaining why you probably haven't heard basically anything about the game despite the fact it launched in March last year! That's right, everything I've been talking about is one-year-old news!

"But what gives? You started this blog by announcing that a new game was out!" And that I absolutely did, and that's because after all this time the title has finally left Beta and thus landed on a platform that does it's graphics and playstyle justice; the Nintendo Switch. (And that's the version that today's review will be based on) Now I stopped playing the game after a few weeks of being reminded that the beta was about as well tuned and optimised as a thirty year old dumper truck, so this was music to my ears. And I was ready to see if that year worth of tuning, fixing and hearing feedback had done anything to shape up the final product. And you know what, it absolutely has! (Although perhaps not as much as it should have.)

The first thing that's gone is the timer for opening up chests, that was removed just before I stopped playing so I remember it. That change alone makes it one of the few 'mobile' games that you can play practically indefinitely, level-cap willing, so that's pretty nice off-the-bat. (Although you could argue how that feature should never have existed in the first place.) Secondly the game has released it's arena PVP mode alongside a PVE arena themed questline. And that's it. In an entire year worth of content 'improvements' and the like; one was a walkback and the other was a polishing off from a teased launch feature. (To be fair; apparently there's also some high rank questline involving a dragon or something but I don't have the patience to grind for that.) 

And that's the biggest setback for 'The Elder Scrolls: Blades'; it's natural essence as a grindy mobile game just eventually starts to wear on any potential enjoyment the game might have. Once you start hitting the levels around the twenties and randomly generated daily quests start spawning 4 levels above you (great algorithm, guys!) You start to realise that you can't play quiet as freely as you wish you could and must rely on that pity 'Same-level' quests that RNJesus grants you every day or so. Even the main quest takes odd difficulty spikes in order to lock itself off from being completed too quickly. However, you'll start finding every dungeon getting increasingly drawn out as the game whittles down your sanity more and more. But that's why the loot aspect is in the game, right?

Let me tell you something about the loot; it all sucks. Coming from a franchise borne from traditional RPG roots apparently had a bad knock-on effect for 'Blades' as they tried to turn it into a looter-title; because the laws of the TES universe won't abide by whacky crazy stat rolls. Sure, you can have an enchanted weapon but by Elder Scrolls rules it can only really hit an elemental effect or buff your resource pools. (There aren't even base stats to buff.) This is a world wherein we can't scatter in cool pieces of loot like a weapon which grants a damage shield with every hit, or one that buffs resistances when wielded, severely limiting the allure of chasing the RNG boxes. (This could have been solved by adopting TESO's approach to loot, but Bethesda like to pretend Zenimax don't exist for some reason.) Whatsmore, all of the items that you can loot in the game can be crafted using the ingame town building system, which is great for a traditional RPG but for a looter-wannabe it's so dumb I cannot even fathom it. The literal only reason to farm chests is to scrap armour for the raw materials to make your perfect set at home, there's no endgame in that gameplay loop.

Speaking of the town system, I'm going to be straight with you; I don't get it. Once more, from a role playing perspective I can understand it's pretty cool to manage the rebuilding of a town. (That's probably why the first big quest mod for every Bethesda game usually invokes rebuilding a town. 'Kvatch Rebuilt' 'Helgen Reborn' 'Nipton Rebuilt') But when the ebb and flow of your core metagame relies on the town building mechanic you need a little more than RPG 'goodfeels' to keep the player hooked. As the system works right now you can use the lots of the burnt town as the bedrock for your new buildings, whether they be a brand new house or a utility station. Of utilities you have Blacksmiths, which allow you to repair equipment and forge new stuff, Alchemists, who let you brew potions, Enchanters, who enchant, and workshops, who let you build cosmetic items if you care about that for some reason. As for the houses, they're just there. (They fill in the gaps, I guess.) The idea is that the town will become more livery as you build more houses and people start to move in, but the random NPCs that dot the town are so uninteresting that I'm not sure what's the point of even bothering. (Animal Crossing, this is not) Wait, that's a lie, I do know the point. It's in order to provide points to the town's overall 'prestige' which will allow you to upgrade your utility shops to the same level, thus expanding their usefulness. (I.e. the town must be at level 7 before you can upgrade the blacksmith to level 7. And every level the blacksmith increases allows you to craft a new tier of tools.) On paper this doesn't seem to bad, and in practise it isn't too bad either, but I can't really say it's the be-all end-all of gameplay experiences either. It basically makes the building of houses entirely perfunctory and draws out progress to such a point where it becomes a chore; again, this game is grind city.

Of course, if you're like me then there is one key question that you'll be wondering around about now. "This was a mobile title, wasn't it? So where does the monetisation come in?" And the answer is actually really confusing to me. There's this premium currency called gems that you can buy within the in-game store that'll allow you to purchase stuff, but nothing is really worth buying. All that I've seen in the weekly rotation is cosmetic decorations for the town and emotes. (which can only be used when you win an arena match against another player.) I mean, I'm sure this stuff ropes in a few sales but there's no way it's enough to make this free-to-play title profitable. (maybe that's why it seems so sparse in content) Another purchasable are the lootboxes that you can find in the game, but the purchase price is so ridiculous that you're better off just playing the game for them. Besides, those chests will give you a random pick off lame loot anyway, so what's the point of paying for that? And the icing on top of the cake? You get gems for playing the game too. It's not enough to get any of the cosmetics, unless you live and breath this game, but it's enough to pay the blood money toll to insta-revive whenever you die. (Yeah, that's another typical use for gems. As well as quick completing town construction tasks.) So that in mind, what exactly is the premium currency worth? I just do not understand this business model for a game.

I've seen a few reviews from outlets out there that label this game as 'pay to win' but honestly I do not see that at all. It's more 'pay to grind' and with the amount of artificial progression walls that'll be thrust in your face, you'll be dishing out a whole lot if you're that kind of person. Of course, I've been leaning at a slightly negative stance this entire review but there are some positives too. When you're not being level-gated the dungeons are pretty fun to go through and if you want a long-form experience that'll keep you coming back for a while then I suppose the level walls might not be too much for you. (It's certainly better than a lot of other artificial walls that mobile games usually pull.) At the end of the day, however, I do not recommend The Elder Scrolls Blades for the casual fan or someone looking to kill time. This is the sort of thing that the obsessive fan might play in order to sate their Elder Scrolls lust until news about the next title drops, (I.E. Exactly me.) but it's just too much of a staggered and drawn-out overall experience with little ultimate payoff to appeal to really anyone else. (Oh and the story sucks. That too.)

Chorus: the space game to revive the genre?

An space adventure

Okay, if it wasn't immediately obvious to you guys I didn't actually watch the Inside Xbox event when it aired. I had no idea it was on and I totally missed it save for some of the closing announcements, and so I had a hell of a time collecting all the games together for later review. That being said, my lateness cost me dearly when it came to looking up this particular title here called 'Chorus' but stylised as 'Chorvs'. Instead I found myself faced with a completely different game called 'Chorus: An Adventure musical', which looks to be this magical retelling of Greek legend wherein all the gods look like club-rats. But the thing which really struck me about that game, which was not the game I was looking for, is the use of 'An' in its title. Why is it 'An adventure musical? It's grammatically sound, sure, but it thuds against the tongue so badly. There is no flow in that title whatsoever and someone should have stopped them. But that tangent has absolutely nothing to do with the the 'Chorus' I'm talking about today, so I'll just interrupt myself right here.

Chorvs is a real, next-gen, space-combat shooter and I cannot believe I'm saying those words right now. If you thought that the Battle Royales were getting played out, or that FPS games had been practically done-to-death, than let me assure you that neither of those genres were beaten-to-dust quite as severely as the space shooter genre was back in the day. Although when I say 'back-in-the-day' know that I mean in the days of the Atari. Ya'll probably remember 'Space Invaders' and 'Asteroids' but believe when I say that they are the just the precipitation emanating from the air atop the tip of the iceberg. Every single imaginable combination of spacey-words has been stiched together and stuck onto a space shooter for the Atari, and most of them were absolutely terrible. Now, I know that was a very long time ago but that sort of legacy does leave a bad taste in the mouth, and as such the industry dropped space games hard when they figured out how to make literally anything else. The only time when first-person space games became popular again was when Chris Roberts literally bought the genre back from the dead by transforming it into a simulation-type game, where the focus is away from combat and more towards simulation economy and all that jazz.

In recent generations there hasn't really been a combat-focused space gem that has received anymore than the cursory amount of attention from the big companies. At the start of this gen I remember one Japanese game that was a space-hybrid with Mech-combat, but it was pretty ropey and I think I'm the only one who remembers it. Chorvs looks to be a return back to the days of pure space-combat fun, and whatsmore, it looks to be a concerted effort for the teams involved, with real development funds behind it! We have big-shots like Deep Silver getting involved at a development level with this game and Microsoft taking the time to host it in their 'gameplay' reveal event, that's some high places to be boasting friends from, and I hope that reflects well on how this title is treated by the gaming audience.

But I've spent enough time marvelling at this game's mere existence; perhaps it might behove me to talk about the title itself, and I would if there was much to say. Unfortunately this is one of those titles that people point to when they are referring to 'games which didn't really show any gameplay', and this isn't the sort of title that can brag off something like that. Don't get me wrong, there are snippets, but for the first space-combat game in a generation, heck in several, we could really have done with a more coherent break down of what we're looking at. That being said, for a trailer that I can only presume was more worried about showing off the strengths of the Series X hardware, this title does put on a pretty impressive show.

Things start brazen with a close up shot of the main character, Nara's, face. Oh, I know what you're doing there, Deep Silver, trying to use dramatic close-ups to hide how proud you are of your face textures! There's no need to hide, however, because they are darn impressive and applause worthy for the team. I mean, perhaps not to the same level as Hellblade 2 is boasting, but this still ain't nothing to shake a stick at. That visual commendation extends to some of the space scenes as well which look pretty at their tamer moments and eye-wideningly impressive at their most ambitious. That shot of the scarlet nebula exploding over that planet is the kind of thing I want as a screen saver! Fill your game with moments like that and you'll have a visual treat on your hands.

From what I can tell from the provided video, the game will put us in the shoes of some legendary hero called Nara with your typical tortured past. She's leading her people in a deadly conflict against a (presumably) huge galactic threat known as The Circle with the help of her sentient ship, Forsaken. (Well they sound like a match made in heaven, now don't they?) From what little gameplay we saw it's impossible to tell if this set-up means we'll be partaking in huge space battles (which has always been a dream of mine in a game like this) but there's certainly room for such with this story. The focus will be less on being 'one of the resistance' and more 'the fist of the resistance' as the player starts upgrading their unique vessel to the point where they can take on battleships man-to-man. So that might not be exactly what I look for in a space game, but it still sounds pretty darn badass.

Knowing Deep Silver's history, the scope of this game and the obvious production value going into it, I'm honestly wondering whether or not this game has the potential to be marketed as an epic, because all the ingredients for such seem to be there! You have the protagonist hellbent on her redemption ark, huge 'survival of the race'-style stakes, and the potential for absolutely stunning set-pieces. I truly think in the right hands this game could be something special. And even if it doesn't hit the big leagues, this game still promises to be one of the most immersive story-based space titles we've seen in years, and that's worth some attention in my book. Simply skimming through the trailer and the weirdly in-depth Youtube description is enough to get my imagination for this title racing, now all I need now is an extended gameplay reveal to prove this title has some bite behind that bark. (Fingers crossed for something next month!)

Personally I'm not the sort of fella who drops his money at every single space game that comes his way, but I'm a sucker for an epic experience no matter the genre behind it and Chorvs is giving me those vibes already. If this game turns out to be everything that it's promising, it could spell a very interesting trend for the next generation as tech reaches a point where grand ideas become commercially viable, and that's quite the milestone to reach. Who knows what kind of revolutionary new genres and game-design trends could launch from that bedrock? This could be the age of the new gaming renaissance! (Who knows, maybe even Chris Roberts will finally see this and decide it's time to actually finish 'Star Citizen'... Nah, that'll never happen.)