Keeping up with the Genshin-ians

 Just when I thought I was out-

It has been a hot minute since I've covered anything to do with Anime Zeld- well, I guess that would be, more Anime Zelda; Genshin Impact. But that hasn't been because of a lack of stuff going on altogether. I've just been terrified of falling into the hypnotic trance state where I cannot bring myself to pick up any other game because I'm stuck inside the cycle of doing dailies and spending resin and chipping away at sidequests and basically just living my life in Genshin. It's a very easy pattern to fall into for games such as this one, and it can really suck up your free time if you're not careful. But I've had some time, taken some breaks, and realised that Genshin literally jumped 5 versions whilst I had my back turned. How the heck did that happen? I mean, wow; for a game that's free-to-play MiHoYo are cranking out content like their lives are on the line; it's a wonder how such a blatant financial success of a game can get so excitable with it's updates, such that I'm starting to seriously wonder whether or not the staff over there are actually made up of sentient Androids. (Surely only beings requiring neither sleep nor sustenance can keep things running like this.)

But the whole '5 versions' thing is actually a bit of misnomer- actually it's more like a straight lie. The Genshin team got bored around Update 1.6 and decided to skip ahead to 2.0 because, hey, this is their game and they make the rules. Certainly a strange way to handle content numbers there team, but still more comprehensive than the Minecraft system of doing things so I guess you're still on a good track, huh. (I think Mojang are confused about how decimals work) But that isn't to say that those other updates, 1.5 and 1.6, were slackers in any way either. 1.5, which I missed, contained an entire housing system built in. Yeah, you know those things that most other games of this type wait until year 3 to start implementing? Genshin did that already. And it's already pretty developed, although it does suffer from simply egregious time gating. (13 real-time hours to build a bookshelf? We're working with the power of demi-god Adeptus here, can't you use that power to hop down to IKEA for an easy assembly kit?) And 1.6 introduced the concept of player outfits (which is yet to be properly developed) and a brand new boat mechanic which was introduced in a limited time playspace and has since been ported to the larger Genshin world.

"So if that's just what the 0.1 increments were holding, then what exactly warrants a full jump to the next total integer?" you might wonder. Or more likely you do not, because it's hard to avoid all the excitement over the first new region that got added to the world of Teyvat, the Japanese inspired archipelago of Inazuma. 2.0 has introduced a land of Samurai, lightning storms and scary Shogun Waifus, and you can bet I wasn't going to take the time to miss a single second of it. Heck, the very day this update launched I logged on and cleared every single main character side quest I had left so that I could enter this update clean. (Which included me meeting Eula for the first time, to which I can say thus: I understand the discrimination she endured for a family name she happens to share, but my god is she annoying. I fully understand why Amber is her only friend) So how was my time in the land of Eternity?

I think that more than any other Teyvat-ian region before it, I'm totally fascinated by the story of Inazuma's land, because it contains much more presence and personal drive than the Genshin storytellers have pulled off before. Mondstadt is more just your prototypical fantastical vaguely European fantasy setting lacking any genuine character to it, and Liyue was at the exact opposite end of the spectrum; dripping with lore about Adepti, the land of Contracts, and Ningguang: The Tianquan of the Liyue Qixing. Yeah, needless to say I tuned out at almost every paragraph of text I was force fed during the Liyue campaign, unless it was being delivered by Zhongli. (I've always got time for my main man.) Immediately Inazuma is presented as this land of contention and challenge; heck, getting there in itself is a headache because the border is closed and visitors are frowned upon, and the way they chose to expand on this has proven to be very intriguing and easy to follow; a great recipe for making the audience want to care more.

As The Land of Eternity, Inazuma is gripped by this determination to keep everything that way that is was without any remote change for a long as possible, 'so that the land can pass to the end of time undisturbed' or something like that. It reminds me of a shade upon the wild desperation of Gwyn Lord of Cinder from Dark Souls, the man who defied the flow of nature to feed his selfish greed to preserve the world he had made, unwilling to accept that all things must die. I will say that Inazuma's Archon, Baal, is certainly easier on the eyes than old desiccated Gwyn was. Her desires to keep the land static is made very real by her decree to hunt the visions, (the magical orbs that everyone who can manipulate elements needs to party except for our protagonist) a tyrannical measure that has spread fear across the islands.

See, this is the sort of plot that I can get aboard with! A enigmatic and mysterious godly dictator hellbent on defying personal freedoms in order to enforce her idea of what makes for a perfect world, a resistance both inside and outside her spheres of influence lending to clandestine actions for the player, and a natural way to really delve into the lore about what exactly a vision is, and why being deprived of one is something you really don't want happening. Some might say it's a bit of a slow note to pick up on considering the end of Chapter 1 had us confronting our Sibling for the first time, only for them to disappear and the protagonist to sulk about, acting like they don't even remember that. (It's still "I'm looking for my brother" rather than "I'm trying to understand why my Brother's a total dick now") I, however, think there's plenty of time to drip feed the overarching narrative; in the meantime this intimate, contained struggle of warring ideologies for life is much more entertaining for me.

But the story is just a part, Inazuma itself is a whole new face for the Genshin franchise and her bounties are somewhat different from the rest of the game up until now. Or 'most' the rest of the game, because you can tell very clearly that much of Inazuma's design decisions took direct inspiration from Dragonspine mountain; from the region-exclusive elemental effect that has multiple utility and combat applications, to the 'upgrade tree' providing another progression path for the curious and even the general philosophy of a smaller landscape that's more densely packed with things to find and do. The basic breadth of the land disappointed me at first glance, but since then I've been picking through surprise caves, tucked in outcrops and dangerous wild lightning zones, all of which has really bought me to grips with the more nuanced approach to world design this time around. Building up instead of around, it's a different look to be sure.

I've only just finished the story content of 2.0, as such I'm still coming to grips with what the update really has to offer in terms of exploration. (There's two whole off-islands that I've only grazed so far.) The boss fight against Baal was refreshingly tough as nails though, I'm slightly dreading how badly she's going to string me out in the inevitable follow-up for upcoming months. And so once more, I've been knocked for a loop by Genshin Impact and it's ability to flood us with things to do that are actually fun to engage with. I almost feel guilty enjoying myself, like this sort of content isn't right for a Free-to-play game, but as long as no one tells MiHoYO how none of their contemporaries tries even a fraction this hard to make their mobile games, I think we're in the tentative clear. For sheer atmosphere, however, I still personally think that Dragonspine is my favourite location, but the season of Inazuma has but only begun and who knows what crazy surprises the team might have cooking up for us in the months to come. (Like Fishing. That's been confirmed to be coming already. So yay for fishing.) Ah Teyvat, it's good to be back... 

Umbra: The Sword of Souls

 Ready for a fictional history lesson?

One of my favourite parts of The Elder Scrolls and the way it tells its lore, is the fact way a lot of the very special magical items aren't just imbued with special effects, but also with a living history which evolves and changes from game to game. It's something that I can really appreciate in the wake of all the CRPGs I've played recently, wherein you'll find plenty of named magical items with mostly forgettable effects and paragraphs of meaningless 'lore' attached to them; with stark exception given to the items of lore from Tyranny, because no game nailed 'living legend history' like Tyranny did. Perhaps the epitome of these magically enchanted weapons of legend in the Elder Scrolls universe are the Daedric Artefacts: Items of power tied to, and sometimes created by, one of the powerful Daedric Princes who influence much of the world of Nirn. These are all very unique items, tied with heavy lore, that are famous, no least of all for being collected by perhaps every player character in history; making the legend of their exploits the legend of your own as well.

Everyone has their Daedric artefact which they love the most, the one which speaks to them and their tastes, whether that be for its effect, general aesthetic, or the story written across its surface. For me that weapon is the ever-changing Sword of warfare and shadow, capable of such legendary carnage that most who came to wield it throughout history found their own names overshadowed and lost to its glory. I speak of the weapon of legend: Umbra. A dark purple blade, sometimes a long sword, at others a two handed sword, imbued with the ability to cleave away the very souls of those it fells and, perhaps consequential, always a weapon held in the hands of some nameless slaughterer very willing and confidant to challenge any who think they can claim the weapon for themselves. It's almost like the Elder Wand from Harry Potter, a weapon most feel invincible with, until they encounter that one person who is more deserving of the sword than they. (Spoilers: that person is always you.)

Some may be aware of the weapon but not even know that it is a Daedric Artefact or what significance that fact even has. Indeed, I do believe that in the game it was introduced, Morrowind, there's absolutely no indication whatsoever this is such a tool, and the relevant Daedric Prince who would eventually have it tied to his name didn't even have a questline in that game. (Even though three of his artefacts appeared in the game.) Of course I speak of the Child-god of the Morningstar, Clavicus Vile, the trickster Prince who's entire MO is trying to set people up with deals that ultimately don't go their way. Seems a strange fit, does it not? A Prince who prides themselves with their cerebral tricks and backhanded deals handing out a sword of ultimate destruction? Seems like something you'd expect more out of Molag Bal or Mehrunes Dagon. But look a bit deeper into the history of such a device, and you'll see the signature trademark of the child-god clear as day.

The Sword was created by one Naenra Waerr, (try saying that 5 times fast) a witch who took up the commission to make a sword specifically for Soul Harvesting, because apparently Clavicus Vile is too lazy to just use Soul Trap, one of the most basic conjuration spells. The Witch succeeded, but only barely for the sword she made was unstable and required some form of significant power to bring it under control. (Or at least, that's how one of the stories, the one which makes the most sense to me, goes) The Witch had Clavicus imbue some of his own power into it, only to reveal that she had tricked the great trickster himself! The Sword would siphon off a great deal of Clavicus' power and develop a sort of sentience of it's own, becoming the entity known as Umbra. Thus the reason that everyone who wields this blade becomes a war obsessed psychopath who loses their very identify to the weapon, is because they're becoming quietly possessed by the being inside of it. (There's the trickery I'd expect of ol' Mr Vile.)

In 'The Elder Scrolls III: Oblivion', the latest canonical appearance of Umbra, the Blade can be retrieved for Clavicus Vile as part of his quest line in return for his Masque. (a terrible trade-off by-the-by) Typically Daedric quests are fuelled with this unknowable mystery to them so that it feels as though you're just running around in circles for the amusement of your Daedric benefactors, but this is one of those rare example where we have context. Clavicus is trying to reclaim that part of his power which ran away, and upon returning the sword, Vile tries to keep it within his realm until he can learn how to undo the trick the Witch placed on him. The only reason we know this, and the subsequent events, is through the two quite good extended universe Elder Scrolls Books 'The Infernal City' and 'Lord of Souls'. Two stories I would certainly recommend and some of the only extended universe Elder Scrolls books for some reason. Bethesda should really get to commissioning more.

After the Oblivion Crisis, the spirit within Umbra managed to solidify itself into a body and escape the confines of the Sword in which it was trapped, becoming a sort of shadow off the godling Clavicus Vile. This entity couldn't just leave the realm of his master however, because Vile had personally put safeguards up to tie the thing to his realm a while back. Instead, Umbra ended up siphoning Clavicus Vile's power and running away to claim a city from Vile's realm as his own; dubbing it 'Umbriel'. But that is far from the end of this story. You see, after the events of Morrowind and the destruction of the godly Tribunal, (Either by the Nerevarine destroying their power source or directly slaying the gods ontop of that) the many magical feats of the Tribunal began to fade from the world. One such feat would be the Ministry of Truth; the floating meteor hanging over Vvardenfell's Vicec City which the Tribunal god Vivec had halted on it's route to crushing the place. You can sort of see what problems might arise when he suddenly lost all his powers/ was brutally murdered.

One scientist devised a way to keep the Meteor in the air, through a powerful soul powered machine which required souls and also was a soul eating machine. (Why did anyone think that was a good idea? Why not just relocate?) So grisly connotations aside, the device didn't work and exploded, sending the asteroid careening through Oblivion and eventually into Clavicus Vile's realm. Umbra saw this happening and chucked his sword through the hole in Vile's realm that the ministry created before it could seal up again. This sword, through way of possession, managed to summon up some less-than-willing acolytes to build another soul machine, this one tied to the city of Umbriel and powered by Umbra's stolen fragment of Clavicus Vile's power. (Are you still following me? I feel like I'm barely following myself) The result? Freedom of a sorts, for Umbra and his city. Umbriel would be propelled across the realms of Oblivion as a floating city powered by souls until it eventually wound up in Nirn and almost caused a soul-zombie apocalypse.

Wow. That's a lot of flavour lore around what was originally just a sword with, in all honesty, a rather lacklustre enchantment effect tied to it. Who'd have thought a simple weapon that I had locked in a display case in my Oblivion castle would contain the sentient fragment of a god? Or go on to struggle against said god for supremacy, it just goes to show the real smattering of history some of these fragments of the Elder Scrolls world has. Whilst Umbra's journey may be up for the time being, with the sword being understandably absent from Skyrim, there's plenty of other tools with stories going even further back, if not with two extended universe books dedicated purely to fleshing them out. I'll see which of those is worth a summary blog too.

'The Abyss' Trope

Alternate title: It's okay to steal and why you should.

When it comes to crafting a narrative, even one that is made to be unique and explore untested waters, there are bound to be some basic themes and concepts that are borrowed from or inspired by other pieces of work; or maybe entirely separate concepts that line-up together from complete coincidence. These 'tropes' as we dub them may have a name commonly synonymous with a negative connotation, but they don't necessarily have to represent the mark of an unimaginative storyteller incapable of innovation and creation by themselves. Oftentimes, the fact that these concepts even become tropes in the first place is because they are so rich of ideas, with such range to them, that they can be used again in completely unique narratives, perhaps even to achieve a different purpose, and still be interesting. The very act of an idea becoming a 'trope' marks it as one of some value, worthy of revisiting or reconstructing time and time again. (I mean, as the adage goes: "Good artists take, great artists steal". Or something to that avail.) To celebrate and familiarise myself with that, I want to explore once such trope as it exists within a few prominent fantasy worlds; the 'Abyss' trope.

When it comes to creating various factions and world forces in a fantasy setting, purpose and function can really stretch the limits of the imagination as the storyteller can get to describing factions as mundane as trade blocks to forces as wild as governing bodies for the very laws of nature. 'The Abyss', as it most commonly exists in the examples I've noticed, generally leans towards that latter extreme; telling of a force, often somewhat conscious, made up of, or representative of, complete and total nothingness. An 'Abyss' between the material of reality whereupon nothing should exist, and yet does. Of course, it's not always called 'Abyss', that's just one of my more colourful names I've noticed for it, sometimes it has a more descriptive name in 'The Void'. A somewhat philosophical concept when you think about it: live substance representing the lack thereof, so you can already sort of see the legs of such an idea and how it gets around. Still, I've picked out four fantasy worlds who I believe all have examples of such a concept, to various extremes, to see the different ways one might approach it, and thus the variety with which any storyteller can approach any trope in general. (Savvy? Good.) 

First up, Genshin Impact. That's right, the game often accused of stealing it's very soul from Breath of the Wild, and the idea of various newer updates from other properties or games since. (I can definitely see the Windwaker comparisons for the Summer Island update) This game has it's own take on the 'Abyss' trope, and it comes in the form of the oft-ignored major enemy faction: The Abyssal Order. Rather than being anything as esoteric as a faction borne entirely from the lack of everything, there's an actual comprehensive, if still-in-process, explanation behind them that I think holds an interesting parallel to the Abyss trope. The order, as it is told, hail from the land of Khaenri'ah, the location of the upcoming penultimate chapter of the main Genshin story and the one land that doesn't actually exist in Teyvat.

That is because this land, unlike every other in the game, isn't ruled over by a god, or Archon, making it totally unique against everything else we've seen in the game so far and linking to the concepts of false god hood that keep being bought up in the story. This society ends up coming to ruin, and the Abyssal Order are it's remnants striking out at the god-ruled lands with some unknowable end in mind. For this instance, the concept of 'the Abyss' is synonymous with destruction, or even just the absence of Divinity. As though being without the guiding hand of some sort of god is to be lost, creating some interesting interpretations for the message; is freedom itself 'the abyss'? That questions like this can be even be derived by something as ostensibly straightforward as Genshin Impact speaks wonder for the effect of the trope on the narrative, although until the story of Khaenri'ah is expanded we're working purely with speculation at this point. 

Next I've bought up the Divinity franchise, classic Role Playing games that I've often lambasted for their callously noncommittal approach to worldbuilidng that leads to large swathes of the universe and the forces that govern it being rewritten on a dime. Point-in-case, it wasn't until the Original Sin series that the games suddenly decided that the big-bad entity you should be struggling against is 'The Void'. Here we're talking about a much more literal interpretation of the concept, with 'The Void' representing the absence of matter entirely, a place of nothingness between space and time wherein nothing can exist. 

Yet from that void comes agents intent on dragging all that does exist back towards nothingness, and thus the ultimate goal of this 'Void' always seem to lay down a blanket of nonexistence over everything. In this sense, the trope presents it's 'Abyss' as a force of primordial nature intrinsically opposed to all that is, almost in spite of common sense and reasoning. An approach that feels like it excludes deeper introspection but I'm sure we could wax lyrical about the meaning behind meaningless if we were really desperate to search for meaning. We're not, however, and I'd call Divinity's interpretation of 'The void' as the prototypical approach from which to compare all others.

And now onto my favourite; the world of Dark Souls. In this universe ruled by primordial flames, wisps of souls and the dark essence known as Humanity, it only makes sense that the approach towards 'The Abyss' and it's role in the overall narrative is atypical. This is one of those games that also, famously, has a highly interpretive foundation for the lore, thus nailing specific concepts such as this one are difficult without coming to one's own conclusions on the matter. 'Abyss' seems intrinsically linked the concept of 'Humanity', (otherwise known as 'shards of the Dark Soul') and seems to represent the other end of the spectrum to the 'hollowing' we see throughout the majority of the franchise. Hollowing represents someone who has lost all their souls and humanity and thus lost themselves in the process, whilst becoming consumed by the Abyss appears to be (again, up to interpretation) given oneself over to the chaos of Humanity and being overwhelmed by it's influence.

Some significant moments throughout the franchise present pockets of Abyss as this chaotic consuming force that constantly threatens to corrupt and/or swallow all around it. (Although, crucially, still distinct from the wild nature-tied force known as 'Chaos') 'The Abyss' is still represented as overwhelming darkness, but it seems to stand for something more than just total annihilation, more like pure selfish consuming greed, perhaps even the hungry tyranny of Humanity itself. There's a lot to be said for allegory and the way it works within Dark Souls, but the take away I want for this blog is the plain fact that even a trope ostensibly presented like normal can still underlie deeper and interwoven concepts and thus evolve the original trope.

Last but by no means least is the version of this trope that I understand least, as it comes from that font of lore just a little too deep for me to get a complete handle over it all; D&D. This Abyss, or 'The Infinite Layers of the Abyss, is actually a plane of existence, rather than just the space between planes, placing it line with other realms such as The Prime Material plane (main setting for most of DnD) and the various other 'building blocks of reality'-esque planes. This Abyss is actually full with a great deal of substance to it, being as how it's home to The Nine Hells and several other antagonist realms besides. It's not perhaps the singular source of everything bad within the worlds of D&D, but it certainly houses it's demons, and demons make for pretty tempting scapegoats in any story

Interestingly, D&D's interpretation of 'The Abyss' is a lot less matter-of-fact and passive than other contemporaries. Whereas the Abyss might still be threatening in other stories, it's usually out of unconscious compelling of nature rather than concerted malice. This Abyss, though not exactly a sentient force of it's own, still stands to represent some form of pure evil; giving us an actual tag of the antagonistic on this version of the trope.  

There we have different shades of the same concept in merely a handful examples that still manage to drastically change the form, role and even purpose of the trope in question; making the idea seem wholly distinct in many interpretations. Although the Void/Abyss always does seem to be something to fight against, perhaps indicative of that natural human desire to stave off oblivion and the call of the void, everyone had a different idea of what form that takes and even how active of a foe this Abyss/Void is. (I even suspect Genshin Impact might try to make us feel sympathetic of the Abyss for it's final chapter, whenever that eventually launches) Perhaps from that you've seen the utter deluge of complexity and choice still available to a storyteller from a single borrowed idea. In conclusion; don't be afraid to steal an idea, because the way you choose to bring it to life can rewrite it's entire identity.

Tom Clancy's Delete Squad

And the world wept

What is this, Ubisoft week or something? I keep taking shots at this poor little French company like this and people are going to start getting the wrong idea, I feel like I'm quietly revealing myself as some anti-Ubisoft sleeper agent who's slowly becoming active once more. The truth is: there's just so much happening with those guys right now and I'm invested because I just used to play so many of their games not that long ago. Heck, I remember a couple of years back having sat down and played through the entire Splinter Cell Franchise (sans Pandora Tomorrow) before adopting Ghost Recon Wildlands as my game-to-play for that year. And that was after my decades long obsession with Assassin's Creed before I grew bored with their slow delineation of the formula. So I'm a fan wronged, which I suppose fuels the desire to hear and respond to every single misstep they take in a sort of "See! I knew they were on the wrong path" way. A selfish desire for vindication, burning on a lake of, not hatred, but disappointment spilled from misplaced respect. With that context, let me tell you about 'Tom Clancy's Elite Squad'

If there ever a project that felt specifically made as a spit in the face to all your fans, it was 'Elite Squad'. Born in a time where fans where begging for a return to form from the fabulous and frugal boots-on-the-ground grittiness of Tom Clancy Prime. That's right, this isn't a new desire born from XDefiant, we've been feeling Tom Clancy lost it's way years ago and have thus been hounding Ubisoft ever since. Perhaps then all of these latest games have been reactionary on their part, a knee-jerk way of saying that they were tired of their fans telling them exactly what they want, they want to tell us what we want! I think that's a trap a lot of creative types can fall into, slipping from the totally healthy position of 'I'll do what I want because I enjoy it' into the more extreme shade of that feeling 'I'll disregard my fans because they're idiots and I know what's best for them'. 'Elite Squad' was another symptom and, even more than XDefiant, honestly rang the alarm bells for the future of Tom Clancy as we know it.

'Elite Squad' was a mobile game, thus already you can tell it was probably designed more for the financial benefits than for the love of the game itself, and it was meant to be a grand smashing together of many different Tom Clancy properties in a cross over royale. You know what that means I bet; it was a game that pretty much played itself where players had to put teams together with a high enough power score, which were best supplemented with real-money microtransactions. There's no imagination to a game like this, no artistry, just a cold dead forumla which creates the very same game time and time again, all that changes is the art style, for which this one had a polygonal low-detail look that seemed a little unfinished at least to me. But that wasn't the big insult, no that was reserved for the fact the game would be first one to feature Sam Fisher as a 'playable' character since the last Splinter Cell game. Oh, so Sam is good enough for mobile but not his own game now? We see how it is, Ubisoft, you trippin'.

This was Ubisoft big controversy of the year, before all this came out about mismanagement, harassment and all the real issues that they sweep under the rug today. Back then it was all about the sheer disrespect that Tom Clancy's franchises were suffering and the way that Ubisoft flaunted all that under the guise that they knew better. And at the end of the day how do you really argue against that? I mean, they are the one's running one of the biggest gaming companies in the world; surely they know how to make money, don't they? Even if this seems like the stupidest idea in the world and we, as the target audience, ought to know a thing or two about what we'll buy, these are experts who think they know us better than we know ourselves; who's to say they haven't found some secret formula to hack our wallets open without us even noticing? Well last week's story might be the exact proof that the team are just as clueless as we believed them to be, seeing as how it was announced after 13 months that Tom Clancy's Elite Squad is officially sentenced to the chopping block.

What's that smell? Do you smell that? Must be Vindication. Smells a little bittersweet doesn't it? I suppose that's the only real logical takeaway when we're talking about the abject failure of a venture featuring some of the most beloved tactical properties in the industry. But the sweet to offset the bitter comes in how this is proof, if ever it was needed, that the future of gaming is not always in the mobile space. I mean, sure for Niantic the millions they rake in monthly means they never have to dream about developing elsewhere, but when Ubisoft go trend chasing it's only a matter of time before they start hitting such walls such as 'unsustainability'. The soon-to-be shut down servers of Elite Squad are only facing this threat because no one was on them and throwing Ubisoft their bloodmoney, making this an victory to all those who say "If you don't like it, don't buy it". This sends a clear message, I hope, to those in charge over at Ubisoft; we're not going to buy something just because you throw the brand  we love on the marketing, you need to make a game worthy of that brand and our money.

Of course, this sends just as clear a message towards XDefiant. In many ways, given the timing of this announcement, it almost seems like XDefiant is the spiritual successor to Elite Squad. An acknowledgment that bottom of the barrel mobile trash isn't going to cut it in the Tom Clancy world, and a 'compromise' move into military-style gameplay, whilst still landing short of making an actual tactical adventure. I can't quite say for sure why Ubisoft are so adverse to just making the game that fans are willing to spend money on, but here we are with a game a decent bit closer to what fans want. But will they bite? Well, if the online response to the reveal trailer is anything to go by, probably not; but this is at least progress. Heck, this time next year when XDefiant is deemed unsustainable and shutdown, maybe then we'll be getting a Game with squad controls? Is that too much to ask? I don't feel like it is.

I'm pretty sure no tears will be shed at the funeral of the crappy cash grab that Elite Squad represented, however I wonder how this news will be interpreted to those within the company. Afterall, this does demonstrate on Ubisoft's part both an inability to select fruitful products and an unwillingness to stick to their guns; in many ways this is the worst of all worlds in regards to confidence building. Perhaps a more positive way to look at this would be Ubisoft making active attempts to change it's spots, from the company that stifles it's ambitions to the whims of one ex creative director,  to one that pursues the heights it needs to in order to get the project done. That might be edging a little too positively, however, seeing as how XDefiant is still a misjudged mismatch of maligned and misshapen malpractices. Oh, and then there's Skull and Bones which certainly seems like a waste of delayed development time given how niche it'll likely end up. And BGE2. You know what, I take it back. Ubisoft ain't changing for nobody.

At the very least this means the beaten spirit of Sam Fisher can slink back into obscurity, waiting for his next chance to disappoint his fan base with a badly conceived cameo in a game which doesn't deserve him. (At this point his illuminati subplot from Conviction and Blacklist is more likely to get resolved in the next Ghost Recon game) But don't let my cynicism mislead you, I do think there's room for a solid crossover between Tom Clancy properties at some point down the line, I just think that Ubisoft need to focus on remembering how to make each game from their respective franchises first before blundering into another mess like they've done twice now. Crossovers should celebrate the strengths of both franchises, not disregard the fundamentals of both. So let's reconvene this time next year to discuss the next ill-fated Clancy crossover; agreed? Agreed.

XCOM Legends

A 98% miss on this one

What shocking news to wake up to right out of the stark blue of oblivion, materialising fully formed and unveiled, sneaking up on you like a stealth combat round; because we have a brand new XCom game out! That's a pretty dirty way for Firaxis to let me know that I have to step up my game on my Ironman Classic playthrough of the Original, but as I said I'm taking my time so that I don't end up inadvertently hating the game, thus I will respect Firaxis to back off. Let me play the games that are out already you absolutely crazy men! Stealth releasing a new XCom right out of nowhere, who do you think you are? And with absolutely no farfare too! Even XCom Chimera Squad had a month or two of agonising wait time before launch, whereupon I watched more back-lore videos than I had for any XCom game before. It's honesty pretty impressive that they managed to hide the development of  a whole new game from their seminal franchise until launch, especially one that was made during active development for their Marvel title- wait what? That's right- they're already making a Marvel XCom-style game, or at least that's what the rumours say, so how did they have the time to make- this was handled externally? Who was the studio? Iridium Stafish? That sounds dumb, and their website is almost entirely bare except for their own logo. What is this- oh god; it's a mobile game isn't it?

Yes. And I already hear the screaming calls of defence from those Mobile diehards out there who's job it is to swing for the throat whenever anyone dare imply bad things about their platform. "There are good games, you just have to find them!" "Not everything is a Microtransaction fuelled Gacha hellhole!". And you know what? This time they are wrong, XCom Legends advertises itself as a Gacha fuelled experience and something tells me they're not going to have nearly the amount of freely accessible fun that a game like Genshin Impact does. What is that cold feeling I have running down my arteries, trailing a web across my nervousness to my core? Is that my blood running cold at the realisation that yet another studio who has, up until now, done most everything right, has given up the struggle in favour of the quick path to cheap buck? "Whore out that popular name a little bit, remember to spit on the loyal fans whilst your at it, some of them are freaks they'll like it" . It's not disappointment, because I'm not really capable of trusting game studios, it's just exasperation at this point.

"But (I'm) being exasperated without giving it a chance", some very misplaced kind souls might argue, and they are right so I'm give it the rundown, for prosperities sake. XCom Legends is set during the events of the Xcom 2 timeline, so just after the failure of XCom during the initial alien invasion but before their victory in the subsequent guerrilla war of XCom 2 and the resulting rebuilding that integrated Alien races into Human society in XCom Chimera Squad. It follows a system whereupon players build a crew and fight hoards of aliens whilst supplementing their soldiers with powerful premade soldiers who cost premium currency in order to roll for in loot boxes and- god I'm so sick of these games. It doesn't even make sense, who are these 'legendary' characters from the XCom universe? Aside from the main cast and Kelly, who actually went on to become main staff in Chimera Squad, everyone else is a made by the player and thus comes their personal connections to each individual. There's no decades of comics to pull ancillary characters from, or tons of side reading material; so why even pursue a game literally labelled 'legends' if it's meaningless? Shall we ease of a bit? Sure, let's just chalk this nonsensical money-dependant progression system up to yet another aspect of core Xcom being stepped on here.

What else is being trampled out like the head of a dying wick? Oh yea, the gameplay. You know; the thing that makes XCom, XCom. You might be forgiven for thinking this would be another game laid out with tactical matches, focused on positioning and hit percentages; choosing your battlefield and playing bonus actions at the right moment. . I mean that would make sense, wouldn't it? That's exactly what XCom is about, and has been about, for nigh-on years now. I'm talking before Enemy Unknown and back to those originals; XCom core essentials go back to the turn based hit percentages. And the very fact that I'm drumming this home for you should portend exactly what I'm about to say, no? They butchered it. The gameplay has died. Look what they've done to my boy. Silly you for having hope, didn't you know that the original newage XCom game was already ported to Mobile, thus this new game is mandated to be considerably less creative. Typical stuff which makes this sort of game an absolute institution for lovers of tactics across the industry

Let me ask you a question. Have you ever played a Mobile game before? Chances are that if you have you've played one of two types of game. Either it's a city builder game, maybe with a popular property stitched ontop of the gameplay, maybe without; or else you're looking at the Shadow Legends model (which predates RAID, but I'm feeling unimaginative; just like Iridium Starfish.) There I'm talking about the gameplay model which is basically just building a team of characters who move from static encounter to static encounter, usually auto attacking the enemies in front of you. Sometimes there's an absolute basic level of tactical cohesion wrapped into the gameplay model, maybe you get to choose your target or use super moves, but at the end of the day the side with the higher 'combat rating' will win. Combat rating will never hit the heights you need without buying microtransactions, suddenly this free game ain't so free anymore; rinse repeat. If you're familiar with that latter model, as much as I hate to say it; you've already played XCom Legends.

I'm only being a little bit facetious there, this is a game that's as cookie cutter as they get and there's probably an online template for these games you can pick up nowadays. (Last time I checked there was one for the city builder type mobile game) It makes you wonder how little the licence holders must care for the integrity of their product if they'll just commission and put out a product this soulless for a quick buck. I mean even Bethesda, in all their infamy, put some originality into both of their mobile games to make them at the very least a value to the franchise instead of an abject drag. Heck, one of the key 'reasons to play' that Iridium Starfish listed on their description was the fact that the game gets resources for you while you don't play it. (Whilst likely leaving out the way the app tells you every time it collects a pebble) Those aren't features, it's a list of all the worst things to include to make your game as much as a sellout as possible.

So now comes the fun game, who do we blame for this monstrosity? Firaxis are the developers, but 2K are the publishers, so we could call this a mandate from 2K, but in my heart of hearts I'm not letting Firaxis off the hook for this one. Take 2 might hold the licence for the moment, but I just know that somewhere down the line the suggestion was raised to their offices from Firaxis. "Hey, while we're busy why don't you commission a cool spin off? That'll go great!" One of theirs pitched before driving home and realising halfway how the soulless vampires he was talking to would take such a proposition. I'm not saying they had the power to stop this, but they could have at least warned us. Maybe try to push 2K to spend more than minimum wage commissioning it? I don't know what they could have done, okay! All's I know is that there has to be a multiverse where this doesn't happen, and I don't care if Kang has already conquered that one; I want in.

But at the end of the day it doesn't really matter, does it? XCom is going to stay on ice for the foreseeable future until Firaxis are done with their Marvel engagements, and rather than having the decent Chimera Squad be the game they left us on, filled with curious memories of a fun Xcom-done-quick approach to the formula we love; instead we have Legends, reminding us that all good things are owned by bad/stupid people. And for the record I hold no- well not a lot- ill will towards Iridium Starfish. I'm sure with a name that bizarre they hold a promising future in this industry, I just hope it's one where titles like this end up as an anomaly on their future resume, just as it'll be a scratched-out blip on the XCOM release timeline. 

The Steam Deck

 The library in your hand

The history of handheld gaming is a long and perilous tale of false starts, shooting flares and almost total dominance from the Nintendo end of the market. Pretty much from the very second that Nintendo dips even the slightest foot into the handheld market they instantly become the undisputed champions of all they survey and everyone else who wants even a slice of that pie can just go wither. And a lot of that comes from Nintendo's size and market power, because creating a handheld device will always come with setbacks and limitations that require ports of games built specifically for these handhelds. Unless you're swinging the sort of income that Nintendo is, it's more likely that prospective handheld developers are going to cater to the team with the most spare revenue and audience, thus no one really had a chance in this market. The PS Vita had the staying power to hold on for a while, but distinct lack of support from Sony themselves killed off that dream. So if you want to compete on the handheld market you're going to need a console capable of securing as many ports as possible, to draw in a crowd, or simply make a machine powerful enough to play even more games than the Switch. Steam Deck, it seems, is heading the latter way.

That's right, like a Wrestling Heel in the twilight hours of that tournament bout he was eliminated from in the first round, the arbiters of PC are back around once again with a proposition that they know, this time, is going to just blow the market away. It has to, because the fact they haven't already is inexplicable. Valve have owned the PC gaming market for yonks, they know what gamers look for, putting out their own hardware shouldn't be this much of a hassle. And yet you've got the Steam Machine, a little box with limited support that, in hindsight, feels like an expensive beta test. The Steam controller, which seemed like it was poised to change the world, until it wasn't. And then there's the Valve Index, by all reports an absolute premium option to the VR world that works fantastically, but is prohibitively expensive and so will never win the common man over like the executives would want. What Valve needed was a middle ground, an affordable console with a great value proposition. And that seems to be where they're aiming right now.

Though I'm not a hardware enthusiast who can rattle on for ages and ages about 'console specs' and just how powerful my mean-bean machine is under the hood, I can at least follow along when Valve tell us that their inhouse technology has been constructed to play more than 8,000 titles. Wait, I even wrote that and I don't believe it. 8,000? Valve seems to be shooting for big AAA titles, which of course leaves room for all the smaller independent titles which, should the guys in the high tower wish it, this platform could become an absolute champion for. To their word it will run Doom Eternal, Control, Jedi Fallen Order, freakin' Death Stranding; and run these games in a screen decently bigger than the switches at a 720p resolution. The only downside being that there's no way for the footage to be instantly sent to a 1080p screen through  a dock. There is a dock, however, to which keyboards and alternate screens can be attached. (But it won't be instant and smooth, Valve wants us to 'take the initiative' or some such rot.)

That, honestly, is pretty impressive given that a lot of the games we see hit the Switch takes herculean efforts to port something that'll actually run on the piddly little thing. CD Projekt still insist their porting partners conversed with black devils in order to conjure up the Witcher 3 Switch port, yet apparently Valve can rock that game up to their machine with nary an effort. So how is it working? My first guess was game streaming, but that's apparently not the case; all these games are said to be native. (Which certainly speaks of a severe memory cap headed for excited future users) It's just a kickass machine built to run better than my gaming machine. (which isn't saying a great deal, considering my machine is held together by rubberbands and toothsticks.) And with that heft comes a hefty price, Newton laws dictate such, thus you're looking at 350 to 550 if you want PC gaming in the palm of your hands.

But in honesty, that isn't really all that bad at all. I mean, I couldn't source a PC for that money which could run all the games that this is said to be capable of, so something tells me that Steam is really taking a hit in the gut to be able to offer these prices and that makes them sort-of onpar with the recent next gen. (At least price wise. Again, not here to talk specs.) Oh, and if you're wondering why the price gap is so large, that 350 model only comes with 64 gig storage and not SSD. Basically meaning they'll be some AAA games that you just won't be able to play on it. (It's actually a little criminal that the base model doesn't have 256 gigs, anyone can see the way that game sizes have been ballooning in the past few years, this model could be practically nullified in less than two years time.) The big spenders get everything they could want, from 512 GB (still kinda skinny, I wonder if the Deck takes add-ons?) SSD, and a carry case. (As well as the longest wait, given how that version of the console is slated for late 2022)

And do you want to hear the best part of this console, at least to me? The fact that Valve are aware of potential scalpers and are making active attempts to cut them off at the pass. Can you believe that? When the big two companies are still doing nothing amid a wake of low stock numbers, Valve have done the bare minimum and made it so that brand new accounts can't mass pre-reserve copies for Ebay. I mean, that's happening anyway for whatever reason, but it's not an apocalyptic wave of resellers literally threatening to drown the market with scarcity. Now part of the reason this is possible is because Valve is handling purchases in house, but that's just more reason why it was stupid for the console developers to stop doing that. Shame on you Series X and PS5, you've been out-consoled by a PC store handler, shame on you.

Of course, for others the best part of the console will be getting the chance to play their massive steam libraries in a much more comfortable setting as they take their game with them, and these games are coming off of existing libraries, so you won't be forced to deal with insane handheld prices that dragon's like Nintendo force over their ecosystems. If only something could have been done about the design to make it less... objectively boring. Maybe add some colours, a little pattern on the back, some ergonomic handels, a maliciously sentient AI personality; I don't know, just give me some reason to put this on my desk with pride next to my Switch, instead of hiding it in my beside table alongside all those classic books I'm totally going to read one day. (I'm trying Tolkien, but you put in so many darn songs!) But if you've half a mind more than me and don't care about appearance, this does seem like the handheld solution that all those third party defenders have wanted to be for so very long. I wonder how the launch will inevitably bungle the whole thing up. (it's the way of things. It is- inevitable.)

Many will tell you that the reason why the Steam Deck is going to absolutely win this time around is because it's not competing with the Nintendo Switch, and whilst I don't think that's objectively untrue, I can see the argument. Nintendo have developed their niche and Steam is welcome to seek out theirs on the same platform, so long as they don't steer to closer to the plumber man's turf. I do see competition in the Steam Deck, but beyond all that I see potential, more than has ever existed for previous failed Valve ventures and more than Google Stadia ever had. I think it ties into the response, people seem eager to embrace this new handheld, excited for a new toy to play with, and that spirit of anticipation is just infectious even to lil ol' me who wouldn't pick up one of these if they were last weirdly affordable, undeniably powerful, proposedly comfortable Valve-branded boxes on the market. At least not yet, my vote is we give the things room to market to us before we start making advanced dinner plans and go picking out the bunting. But until then, quality first moves, Valve, lets see if they can keep their good string of press up until next year and the actual launch,

New Tom Clancy game?

 Xtremely pastiche

You've stealthed your way across every type of terrain imaginable, through the most dangerous locations on the planet, all with that signature look and style which for some reason includes those goofy-ass giant three-eyed green goggles which no-one can ever see. (I know that canonically the green light is non-existent, it just looks silly is all) Over active warzones, inside the jungle, across cruise ships, heavily guarded air bases, at least one missile silo, think there was a museum heist once, can't forget Langley HQ, the Vegas Casino was pretty interesting, oh- and then there's the time you snuck your way up Pennsylvania Avenue for some reason. Some might say your achievements and contributions to the clandestine world of spyfare and discretion is second only to one man, others may say you surpass even he. (Not me though, you ain't that good) You've been a solider, a father, A hero, a jokester, a sage spirit, an undercover agent, an Avenging angel, a man clearly 30 years younger, and one of the most prolific serial killers ever to get away with it during one misjudged outing. (>cough< Conviction was weird >cough<) You, Sam Fisher, have been the head of one of the greatest series' that the diseased development animal that is Ubisoft could have ever hoped to produce. But I think now it's time to accept that you will never take to the starring role the way you so deftly deserve. Farewell, our Splinter Cell.

I think that needed to be said, for myself at least. Other Splinter Cell fans need to craft their own eulogies, say their own goodbyes, close their own books, else they'll be hung up on Sam, keeping a candle in their windows, until the heat death of the universe. (Or the Earth, whichever is sooner) That way, some of the sting will be dulled from the next time our hero's corpse is paraded around and waved in our faces like the sick monsters over at Ubisoft like to do so often. Of course, it's not just Splinter Cell fans that need this sort of closure, it's all Tom Clancy fans out there. And I know that Siege is actually worth a damn, but only in terms of raw gameplay; the narrative is largely non-existent and otherwise trash because Ubisoft's team of professional Boston Dynamic's Spot Dogs can just about keep servers running, they ain't writing no meaningful or impactful storylines manned with indepth character studies anytime soon.

And I don't say all of this because the Tom Clancy name is dead, oh no far from it, but because Ubisoft seem dead-set (see what I did there?) in smothering out everything the series stood for. I can't say I was there for Mr Clancy's Will being read out, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it didn't contain a clause where he begged Yves Guillemot to destroy his legacy with prejudice. (I could be wrong though. Afterall, recent events have shown us in great detail how Yves is a person who keeps quiet about a great many things he should share to relevant parties. Yes, that was a workplace harassment reference) Clancy was a man who created whole universes of heavily researched and grounded military fiction that stroked the egos of all those America-loving military nuts across the pond, and just made for really cool Dan Brown-esque thrillers over here. Remember those two adjectives because they are of tantamount importance to the identity of the late Tom Clancy and his work; 'Grounded' and 'Researched'.

Now let me introduce to you the new Ubisoft game which was announced at the start of last week, one month after E3 (which are two good reasons why you might have absolutely missed it. Seriously, how stupid is this company, everyone knows Friday is trailer day) XDefiant. Okay, now your gut reaction is probably to dry retch at that nakedly abysmal title, but hold off on the fits of illness until I reveal for you the real name of this game; Tom Clancy's XDefiant. Oh, we're playing a whole different ball game now, basketball turned to rugby, lets see what this all about. So we've got a team based first person multiplayer shooter. That's it. No thrills, no whistles, just that. Ubisoft, in their infinite creativity, have decided to make a COD clone. I swear I don't torture the facts to come up with the clear evidence that this company is creatively bankrupt, they just hand them to me. The aesthetic of the game is, in their words, "fast paced firefights meets punk rock mosh pit". Which is certainly a style, if you acknowledge the fact this isn't as much 'punk rock', as it is the more sterilised and bland corporate version of 'punk rock' that Ubisoft drafted up for Watch_Dogs 2. The weapons and abilities are all super drone scanning technology and futuristic shock cannon guns. The storytelling is, surprise, not there. And the model is- urg- free-to-play with customisation microtransactions.

So to be totally honest with you, I actually think the game looks pretty okay for a Free-to-play title. Most other F2P multiplayer shooters are made by smallers studios and thus haven't the team to make anything as grandiose and responsive as Call of Duty; but as Ubisoft are master counterfeiters, they were born to make a game which looks so much like COD they're lucky games can't be sued on gameplay alone. The problem is the labelling. Once again, Ubisoft have stuck Tom Clancy's name on the product when, and let's be honest here; this is not a Tom Clancy game. When he was alive and had an influence on the worlds Ubisoft were pursuing under his licence, The Tom Clancy brand stood for highly accurate tactical shooters which were all about planning, adapting and execution. Crucially not high octane murder fests across Graffiti strewn streets wielding a plasma shotgun. Not sure how Mr Clancy would feel about all that stuff.

For a lot of people it just hammers home how out of touch Ubisoft is both with Tom Clancy and the loyal fans that games under his name summoned up. Where are the experiences to feed them, because offerings have be few and utterly unsubstantial of late. Ghost Recon Breakpoint was a game with the limited tactical range of Wildlands but coupled with a misplaced gear level system so baffling that the development team themselves added in the ability to nullify it down the line. The Division is a relatively newer property under the umbrella, and caters more to vague post-apocalyptia imagery and Looter shooter aspirations than actual tactical cohesion and thoughtful planning. Splinter Cell is dead though the latest Rainbow Six, Siege, at the very least is an impassioned, if multiplayer, shooter. The new alien invasion Rainbow Six Siege spinoff, however, sort of leans into the whole 'missing the point' angle I'm talking about.

Although the team have tried to make that connection for the worried out there, to let everyone know this is Tom Clancy in someway. How have they done this? With the faction system which haphazardly shoves together factions from different games into this environment with no explanation whatsoever because Tom Clancy is as much a unified brand as Disney movies are a shared cinematic universe. (I.e. not at all) You've got the Cleaners and the Outcasts, reportedly from The Division, (I don't play) those stupid Wolves from Breakpoint and, of course, the one faction that was actually invented when Tom Clancy was alive, and the source of a lot of rolled eyes: Echelon. No news on which Echelon this is, but does that really matter? Ubisoft are using the Splinter Cell brand for free promotion again whilst just taunting fans at this point for a sequel they'll never get. (How long until they sell a Sam Fisher skin on the storefront? I'm betting it'll be less than 3 months.)

XDefiant (Stylised as XD-efiant. I'm not kidding) is essentially a self published essay by Ubisoft on why they shouldn't be allowed to run franchises anymore. They run them into the ground with repetition ad nauseum until they run out of ideas and just start bastardising the property to maintain the illusion of artistic spirit and creativity. (Assassin's Creed fans know that all too well) No, brushing the military shooter genre with an exceeding light coat of stale dollarstore rip-off 'Punk rock', is not innovative; it's just equal shades ill judged and pandering. And don't even get me started at how this is another Tom Clancy game announced by a pair of developers in an empty warehouse for some reason. They did this with Breakpoint too; are Ubisoft not paying for offices for their employees anymore? Was this a failed attempt to seem, 'grimy' and 'down to earth'? I'm on earth, I don't hang around empty warehouses. (And judging from the general hostile response to this reveal from the public, not many other people recognise the warehouse-gang way of life either) Better luck next, Ubisoft, you'll wear down your fanbase until they hold you to absolute no standards eventually, keep at it.

Skull & Bones & Never-ending Development

"You just don't know when to die, do you?"

The grave seems full of projects that outpaced the ambitions of their creators, the wallets of their producers, or just the patience of their investors. For every game that makes it to market there are at least 9 that fell off somewhere along the way, they usually just fall off so early that they never make it to pre-production, let alone to marketing. But I suppose if your name is Ubisoft and you make your games by recycling your previous ones, it must be pretty easy to throw yourself down a development tract too quickly and rush to the silver screen before you even know what you have. That's the only reason, at least that I can see, for Ubisoft currently being the only Modern Day company juggling 2 ludicrously delayed AAA projects that are still up for debate regarding whether they're even still alive or not. Just when you write one off and finish the eulogy, it bursts out the grave like a zombie and snatches a quick headline before sinking back into obscurity for another 12 months. Not too long ago that game was Beyond Good and Evil 2. Today it's Skull and Bones.

Skull and Bones, if the years have made you forget, was a proposition by Ubisoft: How would you like to see that comprehensive ship-combat from Assassin's Creed Black Flag wholesale lifted and dropped in a multiplayer competitive environment? (Albeit, without the disembarking and boarding which made that system so revolutionary in the first place) Now of course there are plenty out there with as-of-yet unfulfilled pirate dreams bubbling in their core and thus this game seemed somewhat destined for a cult following ever since it's first announcement. Personally I thought that, whilst the system was brilliant upon it's first reveal (which was actually Assassin's Creed III, but people forget that) it had become significantly less impressive each and every entry it appeared in, and the idea of being forced to work with it for an entire game without any normal Assassin work to distract sounded torturous. But I am a self confessed spoilsport, so I'll accept myself to be the outlier in this case. Most people want the pirate game and a pirate game they shall get. Or at least, they were supposed to get.

Even as an amateur observer with no real concept of the sorts of lengths that go into game design, how long do you think it would take to put together a game like this? Based upon systems that have already been built, in the same engine as those systems, most of the work is really going into building working net code and some newer assets and map building. Certainly it's not a game that's going to make itself by any stretch of the imagination, but you're not exactly working from scratch, now are you? With that in mind, I'd say around two years seems like the upper limit, to make something working and enjoyable. It's been four years! And that's four years since the announcement, so it probably has been worked on just a little bit before that as well. (Unless Ubisoft have gotten into the habit of publicly announcing the start of preproduction- which would actually explain a lot now I think about it.) So the question must be asked; what in the ever-loving heck is going on with this ostensibly simple game?

Well recent reports have arisen regarding the 'progress' of Skull and Bones and let's just say they've been more than a little illuminating for why this game is steadily reaching FFXV levels of delay without a modicum of the ambition to show for it. Firstly, I was right about the development reaching back further than 4 years; apparently this game has been in some form of 'development' for 8 years, and has only now hit Alpha. Secondly, Skull and Bones has fallen victim to one of the most predicable demons I can imagine all Ubisoft projects are subject to: Indecision about what the heck they were even making. What was once a Multiplayer mode for Blackflag turned into a standalone project and is know a rare unicorn across the development mythos, rivalled in legend only by that 'Lego Star Wars The Skywalker Saga' game which I've been waiting on forever. (I refuse to see episode 8 and 9 until I've played them in Lego form.)

I would think that when you're studio ethos is formed around the retreading of your own steps time and time again, the very prospect of doing something slightly out of the norm is enough to hopelessly gum the works and send teams spiralling. Not to mention that this game would have been in development around about the time that infamous wastrel we've talked about before was still in charge of greenlighting projects based on his pin-prick view of the industry trends. In that light it's actually remarkable this Multiplayer spin-off-kinda game is still in production at all, even if not entirely commendable when you think the amount of wasted work must have gone towards the several remakes the staff have had to weather. Oh yeah, the report also details several total revisions this game has undergone. (This whole thing just reads like step-by-step directions to development hell.)

Some of my favourite highlights from these the revisions was the almost philosophical question that kept team up at night, (and which undoubtedly held up development on those notes) to the tune of "Do you play the pirate or the pirate ship." (Oh, that's a brain teaser!) To which the answer should have been pretty obvious, it's a vehicle combat game thus you play as the ship, but when it comes to where the focus perspective of the game is and how customisations are crafted and sold, you can see why it's still a conversation that needed to be had. Apparently there was even one version of the game, the one that was teased in the 2018 gameplay footage, wherein there world be an exploration zone between competitive battling. But that was scrapped? Wait, hang on- that was the game which Ubisoft advertised up until now, the one they've provided no indication of having changed... then what the heck even is Skull and Bones nowadays anyway?

Teams have come and gone from the game and it seems like there's more former developers than active ones at this point, which may be why it's so easy to come across waggling tongues I suspect. At the end of the day these troubles come down to a lack of unifying vision at the heart of this project, which is what I feel like has been Ubisoft's problem for more than a decade now. They haven't made anything original because they lack anyone with the leadership and authority to helm a ship, and thus have retreated to following guidelines drawn out by a Ubisoft of the past, a Ubisoft that knew what it was doing. Still, this game has managed to hold on through a tempest of turmoil and though it lacks a release date, or any recent official news for the past two years, it's still listed on the official slate. Right next to Beyond Good and Evil 2 however, which got it's first original trailer 13 years ago; so take that for what it's worth.

Inexplicably, Ubisoft are still deadset on backing this horse, like they've put their heart and soul behind a game which, let's be honest, is pretty niche anyway. I can't imagine this game having much of a life to it in the best case scenario, unless it really takes off by the unknowable winds of internet favor, so this almost decade long development cycle almost seems doom-ridden at this point. But as one developer noted, if any other studio were involved this game would have been killed off 8 times over, and I have to agree: were I in the position I would have killed development before the first trailer. Whether through obstinate determination or, more likely, rank incompetence on the part of Ubisoft leadership, this little game has been the title that could, and now that it's finally hit Alpha I'd say chances are very good this game will actually make it to market! (I shouldn't be as shocked to say that as I am.) Now I feel, through the law of Anime underdogs, inclined to actually route for it; thus I'll be devastated when, after all this effort, the game doesn't pick up a following and shutters after one year. (I jest, that won't happen. Probably.) 

Lost Judgement: The last of it's kind?

Dig two holes

The Ryu Ga Gotoku series, better known under the name 'Yakuza', is a very important series of games to a lot of people out there, not least of all me. It is a crime drama, semi open-world, combat-ridden extravaganza that is a feast both of spectacle and outright lunacy in equal degrees. A long while back, when I still thought that open-world games were the pinnacle of the industry, I remember lamenting the loss of that perfect balance between silly and serious which I thought Saints Row 2 had coveted all those years ago. Were I but a bit more cultured, I'd have know there were another series who mastered that formula far before Volition, and who could replicate it with far more reliability. RGG Studios are unchallenged at this craft, in my eyes, and it's what makes their games a simply irreplaceable boon to the video game landscape. Slowly and slower still, people are beginning to open their eyes to how truly magnificent this franchise is, and that is something I must laud every opportunity that I can. However, the games themselves have changed of late.

You see, besides the balancing-act of a story tone and the compelling nature of the characters and their narratives, one of the key components of the Yakuza formula is the bombastic, explosive and so very responsive combat system which has evolved for better and for worse throughout the years but has never deviated too much from being just a blast to play with. Beating up Thugs, Men in black and 'Menacing men' using the variety of weapons, techniques and super powered heat moves at your disposal never fails to be a thrill; and the ludicrous martial styles some characters have (Majima's Breaker style comes to mind) reinforces the over-the-top eccentricity of Yakuza franchise. In many ways, the brutal but silly fighting is a part of the Yakuza identity that it is impossible to be divorced from. Until it was, for 'Yakuza 7: Like a Dragon'. Don't get me wrong, it's not as though the entire cast suddenly became conscientious objectors for that game, but everything about how the series was played changed for that game.

As the legend goes, the team put out an April Fools video in the year before release showing off the new Yakuza game but as a turn based RPG rather than a real-time fighting game. It was meant to be a big "haha, imagine if that actually happened..." sort of scenario, but then something strange happened... people actually liked it. They really responded to how the mock-up video looked, the way a simple street fight could utilise mechanics to become an RPG boss showdown and they really wanted to see this game made. And in a move that you would never see in any other industry, or by any other producer backed development studio, that's exactly what they did. They made that April fools video into the RPG 'Yakuza: Like a Dragon'. (And people seem to think it worked really well) For my part I'm not sure if I completely buy that story, if for no other reason than the short amount of time between the April Fools video being released and the actual game coming out. You're telling me they rebooted development in that time and still got out a great final product? Either RGG are lying and they were working on an RPG from the start, or they tore their hair out working overtime to make sure that Yakuza in RPG form would be successful.

Whatever the case the deed is done, Yakuza now has a successful RPG under it's belt and many were left wondering what comes next for the games? Back to realtime action? Apparently not, SEGA themselves confirmed that Yakuza is an RPG franchise from now on, and all the realtime fun would instead go towards the spin off franchise Judgement, the first of which just came out the year before Like a Dragon. Judgement takes much of the world and mechanics that we'd come to love from Yakuza and turned them completely on their head for now the main character was a cop. You know, instead of a Yakuza family man so magnanimous that he'd probably have been better off being a cop. (No offense, Kiryu. But how does someone go several decades in the Yakuza without killing a single man? You were clearly meant for something else.) 

However, now even this new order seems in for disruption only two entries in as of the Judgement Sequel, Lost Judgement, there's already rumours flaoting about that it's going to be the last in the franchise thanks to, of all things, a likeness dispute. (Of all the stupid reasons to kill a series, that has to rank up there with the head-slapping dumbest.) If this really ends up playing out like some think it will, that will spell the end of realtime Yakuza combat games as we know it, ending a Sega institution. The name will live on, and the new games will undoubtedly attract a whole new audience, but something inexplicable will be lost along the way. And what is the catalyst to all this turmoil? What was the stick that broke the camels back and woke the sleeping dragon all in one? Well, according to reports, it was the PC market.

Hey wait, what? I literally wouldn't have been able to play these games if it hadn't been for the Steam release, I fell in love and have continued to finically support every single Yakuza launch on Steam, and now apparently I'm to blame for the death of the series? (subseries, whatever) Apparently this goes to the lead actor of Judgement, one Takuya Kimura, who's said to be a big star in Japan, and his talent agency. They keep a close reign on the rights to his likeness and want to make sure that, for whatever reason, his face stays on consoles. As such, the talent agency have been actively trying to stop Sega from pursuing a Steam release for Judgement, which obviously doesn't go in line at all with their business strategy, which has seen great success for the Yakuza series since touching Steam. So you can see the conflict, even if you can't understand all the side involved.

I will say it's a little bit drastic on Sega's part to just go "Well, if we can't have the games on Steam then we're cancelling the whole franchise, screw you", but perhaps this is a power play on their part, I don't know. Either way, as things currently stand, some Talent Agency out of Japan is stopping PC gamers all over the world from meeting and coming to appreciate their actor and in doing so might be costing him a series he's working in. This just seems like such a self sabotage move which I'm struggling to come to grips with. Some have inferred that this could relate to a general dislike for PC gaming over in Japan, but I don't see why that affects this actor's likeness rights. I sense that someone, somewhere, isn't telling us the whole story right now, and it's making everyone look dumber than they supposedly are because of it.

And so that's where we are right this second, the future of Judgement hangs in the balance of a nonsensical power struggle between two utterly distinct industries that seem not to understand each other's business. Of course it's the consumers who end up getting the raw end of the deal, because that's just the way business works nowadays. Unless there's someone down our end getting stiffed, they aren't doing their jobs right. On Mr Kimura's end there's been some talk that he is rather disappointed that the series could be over, so perhaps star power might sway the pendulum towards the hand of the reasonable, but if these guys run their businesses anyway like how Konami run theirs, we're probably looking at business men who would sooner watch their entire family slowly drown in a vat of hot sauce before admit they were wrong about anything. Seems no matter which way of the entertainment industry you turn, it's always the one's in suits ruining the fun for everybody else, huh?

Baldur's Gate Review

 Paying deference to the Grandfather

Chalk that one off of the bucket list whiteboard because I've finally done it. After years of hearing this game revered and praised and sung from the high heavens as the all-mighty godfather genesis of western roleplaying games as we know it, I've finally had the chance to play Baldur's Gate. Or rather, Baldur's Gate Enhanced Edition, which is mostly just a remaster with some significant touch-ups under the hood, so for all intents and purposes I have played the original Baldur's Gate to competition. That is total competition, by the way, as in- the main game, Tales from the Sword Coast, the Blackpits and even the homebrew 1.5 DLC which Beamdog cooked up in 2016, Siege of Dragonspear. I'm telling you, I didn't want to miss a single slice of the Baldur's Gate pie just in case there was something there that I ended up really liking. And was there? Well you'll just have to read this review to find out, won't you?

Baldur's Gate is a Classic RPG dating all the way back to 1998, and the series is often cited as one of the best two Bioware series' ever made. (I tend to lean more towards the other candidate: Knights of the Old Republic.) The premise sought to take the 2nd Edition D&D ruleset and transfer it into a game with realtime pauseable combat, the likes of which hadn't really been executed in this way ever before. Even now when you look at these sorts of isometric RPGs, realtime combat is usually reserved for ARPGs, and those games generally won't allow the player to up and pause the minions of hell coming to carve off your face so you can sit around and have a think. This is also an RPG that featured the coveted 6 companions limit which it feels like every team-based role playing game has been judged against ever since. ("What's that? You've got a whole cast of lovingly fleshed out companions in your RPG? Well that's cool and all but how many can I hire at once? Only four? Meh, you should've worked harder")

Coming to this game after all this time is sort of like facing the final boss of my CRPG discovery tour, although that's not to say it'll be done after this. (I'm literally downloading 'Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire' as I write this.) Everytime I'd dive into Dragon Age, or The Elder Scrolls or any of the other number of RPGs that owe their linage back to this game, I'd feel it's presence niggling at the corner of my subconscious, goading me to pay respect to my elders. Well it took some time, but I've fulfilled the prophecy; and in doing so I feel like I've had a decent number of revelations regarding why many of these games play the way they do, what it is that had people so entranced for years after the series went defunct and why some people can't bring themselves to look on Larian's Baldur's Gate 3 as a true sequel. (Although that last point is honestly worthy of a blog on it's own. I won't be touching that.)

The story of these games is what really interested me, for in my younger days I always looked upon Bioware as being master storytellers and thus assumed that a renowned game from their early days would similarly shine with that effortless narrative spark. An older version of myself can look back and see how a lot of those Bioware stories I championed were pretty tropey, but I still attest that they're good for what they are and certainly still have punch for anyone coming to them today. (How else could Mass Effect Legendary Edition sweep up the Internet by storm a few weeks back like it did?) And yet even acknowledging all that, I came away from Baldur's Gate 1 feeling a little disquiet at a narrative which seemed closer to Black Isle Studios Fallout than it did later Bioware. Not to say that it itself was bad, I actually found the story itself to be hugely compelling. Rather the presentation wasn't what I was expecting.

It's a curious approach wherein most of the key narrative points are placed into the world to be discovered by optional observers, not so much told to the player directly so that they are aware of the rising stakes at all time. It's a hands-off and irregular method for telling a story, but one that I honestly respect and feel the effect of when done right. Going to bars and buying some drinks in order to hear the rumors surrounding the diseased iron and then overhearing conversations on the street about the nearby nation of Amn and the possibility of their impending invasion, it all felt a lot more involved and active on my part. The downside of this being the point at which factions and ideas are bought up to which I feel unequipped. I didn't know what the Iron Throne were for half of the game, which is insane given how important they are to the story and their role within it, I just didn't see that first story hook where I was supposed to be introduced to them and thus wandered from quest objective to quest objective a little bit bewildered. I was also unaware as to what The Time of Troubles was, something which I think had an able chance to be naturally explained to the player thanks to the setting of the intro to the game. (A library of scholars? Just have the game start in the middle of a history lesson, that way even players who aren't paying attention will have the information passively relayed to them.)

Once the actual meat of the story gets going and the players are set into their roles, the journey of Baldur's Gate is actually a really wild ride, taking the player all the way up the Sword Coast in a tour that did a fantastic job of just familiarising me with the world before I even touched Baldur's Gate proper. In fact, I was actually a little disappointed when Baldur's Gate showed up, because it just felt like another stereotypical fantasy city, at least in raw appearance. (Although I might be saying that because a lot of fantasy cities from then onwards owed their inspiration to Baldur's Gate) I kept coming back and thinking "This is the famous city they even named the game after? Feels like a little bit of a wasteland". Perhaps I just found a little more charm in the various residents of the Friendly Arm Inn, or the town of Beregost, which I took to affectionately naming 'Inn City', for it being a town with no less than five competing Inns within streets of each other. And hardly a day's walk from Baldur's Gate itself. (How does anyone remain in business?)

I really did fall for the quirkiness of this world and the characters you find here, especially the various companions and their very distinct personalities. D&D character creation always dictates people be created with their 'moral alignment' squarely stated from the getgo. I always felt this was a weakness of character creation, serving as a nudge to less devoted role players in helping them give themselves to the fiction perhaps, but reductive in the overall symphony of character driven storytelling wherein a person can start as one thing and evolve to be something completely different by the end. Seeing how Baldur's Gate uses these very alignments as basis to create a simply humungous cast of detailed characters with predilections and duties leading them to all corners of the moral compass, made me release how powerful a well oiled alignment meter can be. These characters might perhaps be a little bit unrealistically eccentric, but that's what make the bunch just so darn loveable. (I found myself wishing the companion cap was bigger so I could spend quality time with more of them.)

Speaking of Character Creation, Baldur's Gate did a decent of job of streamlining this aspect without leaving players completely confused as to what they were doing. I was a little disappointed by the number of races available, you couldn't even play a full Orc, let alone a Dragonborn or Tiefling. (I just want the chance to play a somewhat interesting race sometime, you know?) My character ended up being a Neutral-Evil Gnome Cleric called Knud, and the tooltips were very handy in explaining how my character should be built in order to properly advantage those choices. With an exception towards telling me that all weapons, even those made for clerics, have a mid-level strength requirement, instead of a Wisdom one. Now you could say that is a mistake caused by my own hubris, not realising that stat improvements are nigh-on impossible in base D&D, but the result was me going around the entire game with no weapon better than a club. (Thank god I picked a support class)

The quirky nature of an avaricious Cleric not brawny enough to pick up a Morningstar fit in great among the cast of character that make up the 25 companions that this game has to offer. Yes, 25! You might think that's a tad too much, and truthfully it sort of is, but that does mean I always felt like whatever challenge I went up against I'd have enough people in my back-up roster to handle things. I can't say I had the pleasure of experiencing all of these companions, or even most of them for that matter (I only played with around 15 of them) but amidst those I did pick there were a good number of memorable and great characters. Such as Minsc, (the Barbarian of questionable sanity with his pet Space Hamster Boo) Dorn (the Half-Orc Blackguard who lives up to the 'evil mercenary' persona and then some with his unfiltered brutality) Neera (the Half-elf Wild mage who can literally turn the tide of your battle eitherway on the whim of a die thanks to her unpredictable magic) and Imoen. (The ever supportive childhood friend who's your rock no matter what bad choices you make.)

The sheer number of companions is perhaps necessary given the way that Death works in Baldur's Gate, which is a mix of my least favourite parts of D&D alongside some of their own twisted choices. First of all, I hate the fact that most forms of death can be reversed with a simple spell in D&D. Okay, it isn't exactly a simple spell, but it isn't a rare or unheard of one, any church cleric can do it. It removes a lot of the sanctity of death and makes one wonder why you don't see regular enemies popping up to get revenge more often. (There's some rules in there about keeping the body intact and the soul untouched, but I still don't love it.) In Baldur's Gate, there is no unconsciousness state, meaning that anytime your HP reaches 0 that person instantly dies. If they die in an unlucky way (i.e. Get immolated) They're dead forever. Although, honestly, it's usually just worth reloading if someone dies anyway because they drop all their gear and that's just a hassle to re-equip again.

I thought that Pillars of Eternity's system was broken for the way it rarely ever contributed to actual dynamic gameplay moments and just meant that you had to hoof it back to an Inn every now and then; but Baldur's Gate gives that a run for it's money. Suddenly, every fight could lead to a reload or heavy backtrack because your mage was standing at the wrong place and got swarmed before getting out of the way. I can't help but feel like there must be a better CRPG system for handling death out there somewhere, between Tyranny's overly lenient 'wounds' mechanic and BG's hardedge 'total death' approach. Surely someone found an accord somewhere!

Now that we're onto gameplay, I must say that I was surprised how similar this game played to the CRPGs of today, proving how timeless this style of game can be. It essentially comes down to throwing your band of adventurers at the band of enemies and waiting for them to bash each other to death, maybe taking a pause to reposition someone every now and then. Of course, as things grow more complicated other factors come into play, and soon you'll be managing spell slots and throwing up buffs before fights. (Although the rest mechanic for recovering spell uses and healing was far too spammable. They try to throw up the odd ambush to put you off but those were just annoying. I usually slept 8 hours after most significant encounters, which isn't very D&D-like at the end of the day.)

One issue I had with Pillars was the way in which magic casters were inundated with far too many spells with effects that I never learned, but in Baldur's Gate this is negated significantly to the point where I knew what pretty much every effect was and could build my clerics and mages to the situation. (Which was important for some of those endgame challenges) I don't know whether this was a simple effect of my growing familiarity with the genre or if Baldur's Gate really did just throw less new cleric spells at me upon level-up, but by the end of game I had a really strong grasp on how everyone played and for boss fights I typically wouldn't let the AI whole-sale manage anyone, it was all stop-n-start strategy for me.

The difficulty curve of the game can be largely attributed to another strange quirk of the D&D ruleset, one which got excessively annoying for the harder encounters in the game. Essentially everything comes down to armour class and the fact that if the behind-the-scenes dice rolls (aided by stats, buffs and the gear you equip) doesn't pass some arbitrary value, your character doesn't hit. It invokes, predictably, Morrowind levels of helplessness where you come across enemies you simply cannot hit no matter how much you swing that darn wooden stick. At these points you're not simply facing off against Goliath vs David odds, but total massacres where no matter how many buffs you throw around your fight is useless, because you haven't got this one specific +3 weapon yet. I prefer simply staring at a too-long healthbar and slowly chipping it away over dealing literally no damage because the giant monster has a THAC0 of -2 or something stupid. For the main game this isn't really a problem however, and I actually found the challenges presented to be very fulfilling to resolve, even if there wasn't a great many of them.

Where things really kicked into gear was with Legends of the Sword Coast, the expansion for the original game which added a few new very fleshed out questlines which were all real playthrough standouts on their own merits. However, they each featured at least one encounter which I feel crossed the boundary of 'tough' and entered into plain 'unfair' territory. The island quest was incredibly fun, but contained one boss fight against monster that can only be hurt with three weapons in the entire game. Two of which can only be found in the room with him. (How often do you loot a room before clearing it out?) Another is a spectacularly long and involved dungeon which easily eclipses anything the main game had to offer as a truly unique epic dungeon trekking adventure. However the end of quest fight, upon returning the dagger, is simply wacky for the amount of rules it introduces and expects you to just know. (Like the fact that every NPC in the room needs to die before the boss lest that creature is reborn through one of them. What the heck?)

My main problem with those difficult fights is that key mechanics aren't explained before you're chucked into them, leaving you helpless. Such is not the case with 2016's DLC, Siege of Dragonspear, which similarly features endgame-level threats but lets you know all the chips before you commit, so that you're not stumbling around for ages and resorting to forums just to figure out how to go about the darn fight. In fact, I really liked what Beamdog did with a lot of Siege of Dragonspear, and now do hope they get the chance to one day make a fully fledged D&D-based CRPG of their own construction because they could likely do something special with it. I'm being serious, I may have grown to like Baldur's Gate, but I actually loved Siege of Dragonspear and felt it actually told it's story better than base BG did. (Even if base BG has a better actual story to tell. If that makes any sense.)

Envisioned as a 1.5 entry, bridging the weeks-long gap between Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, Siege of Dragonspear exists to answer the question "What exactly led to the 'dark circumstances' that drove the Bh- I mean Gorion's Ward-" (Keeping spoilers to a minimum here) "-to flee Baldur's Gate?". In this pursuit, Beamdog, who worked on remastering Baldur's Gate 1 for the Enhanced Edition before this, really pushed the Infinity engine to it's limit on impressive set piece scenes and more modern game design philosophies, some of which fit Baldur's Gate and some of which stuck out like a sore thumb to a new player like me. One example of the latter would be the enemy group compositions, which went from the small groups of base Baldur's Gate to instant giant hordes of death, much more indicative of the group compositions you'd see from games like Pillars of Eternity. (I used Fireball a lot more in Siege of Dragonspear)

For the DLC, Beamdog abandoned the free exploration in favour of a more linear progression of events with concentrated content and quality in the handful of locations shown off at one time. This allowed for the narrative to be much tighter, for cool game setpeice moments to drive the world along in a meaningful sweep and for the pace of the narrative to be keenly felt. Especially with how your home camp physically moves each chapter, mimicking the campaign across the land leading towards Dragonspear. I feel like there might have also been more opportunity for action and consequence to be in the story, albeit this was still limited in comparison to modern RPGs through plain merit of the base game engine's age. I think the main reason that I took to this DLC so much, however, comes in the raw setup. Because just like my favourite CRPG, Tyranny, you enter this world as a known quantity and have a place within it, thus giving weight to the character you choose to play in this position. Of course, in Baldur's Gate you're just the Hero of the city, a role given for beating the base game no matter how much of a monstrous heathen you were whilst doing it; rather than the brilliant customisability of Tyranny's protagonist. But anything that gives me even that slightest hint of Tyranny is getting extra points in my book.

Although if I'm being critical, much of the adventure which characterised the actual Siege of Dragonspear is inconsequential in the grand scheme of things, and only really the final chapter does the work of linking Baldur's Gate 1 to 2. However as with any great D&D campaign, there's nothing wrong with going on a complete tangent for some sessions with a cool new villian, Caeler Argent, in order to do something super cool if non-progressive to the main plot, stop a crusade. Perhaps one might look at the meat of Siege of Dragonspear and call it a side quest, but when it's that fun of a sidequest, is there anything really to complain about? Also, I would be remiss for not commenting on how witty and fun all of the writing became for this DLC alone. I mean, it borders on overly sardonic at times, but for the most part it really breathed life into the character of the Ward that wasn't necessarily missing from Baldur's Gate, (I happen to think the original was written rather well actually) but was perhaps a little muted.

I saved The Black Pits for last, despite it being another expansion for Enhanced Edition that released before SoD, because it's entirely unrelated to the main game and in fact demands a new party of characters entirely. It tells the story of a death arena built by another entertaining companion from the main game, Baeloth the Entertainer, and you as a group of adventures that have been kidnapped to 'play' the games here. That being said, there's not a whole lot of story and the expansion pretty much consists of fifteen straight arena fights with a little bit of spending money to work with in the meantime. I found the whole thing to really be an exercise in how to test builds, and it helped me really familiarise myself with those last nagging tactics I needed to become a true asset to the tactical field. The Black Pits are fine, I don't think anyone would be missing anything by ignoring them in favour of the main game parts.

Overall, I seriously did enjoy my playthrough of Baldur's Gate and just know that going forward it's going to form my bare minimum basis of what CRPGs need to achieve to be worthwhile. At it's best times I truly felt like I was in throes of my very own D&D campaign, high on the endless adventure of the open road and at it's worst I was just frustrated by a poorly set-up encounter or badly explained mechanic, never was I bored. The Sword Coast, though basic, appealed to me as a game world in that 'blank canvas for adventure' sort of way, and the actual details of the narrative were genuinely thrilling during some parts of the climax, even if the execution was lacking. I would give base Baldur's Gate a B+ Grade, for a game that shows it's age a little bit but still holds up very well against the contemporaries of it's field. I give The Black Pits a C Grade, for something that didn't need to exist, and is a little buggy for having existed, but for what it is proves inoffensive. Siege of Dragonspear was actually the highlight of my play experience, mounting an excellent adventure with solid new characters and a compelling tie in for Baldur's Gate 2 tucked away at the end. Making it easy to attribute it an A Grade for it's trouble. Overall, then, I'd have to rank Baldur's Gate a mean of a B Grade, with the stipulation that I seriously enjoyed my time and look forward to moving onto the next game. For my 130 or so hours I gained a new appreciation for CRPGS and old school Bioware whilst getting saddled with a burning desire for this campaign I already know doesn't get resolved. (Might as well enjoy the heck out of the journey, then.)