A coming change

 

I have been at this blog game for a while now- and with a body of work behind me I'm going to make a change. Starting from today there will be a drastic reduction of blogs on this channel as I split my free time towards creative writing efforts and the development of more essay-style blogs up here- so I'm not going to just be abandoning this blog or anything- just toning things down quite a bit.

 I expect to keep a monthly visit quota, but anything about that can change as I move into a new cycle. Still expect reviews and the odd off-the-cuff topic blog about something that catches my attention, but don't expect this to remain my daily diary blog space. Thanks for reading.

Gaming's newest enemy has dropped

 Or a returning one?

So even though I am not of the country and pointedly never speak of it- I am very aware of who Donald Trump is and the goings-on of the Election he is currently barrelling towards with all the grace of an elephant riding a Big Wheel. Those yanks and their crazy conundrums are just across the pond from little old me, as such it behooves me to stay abreast. Not least of all because theirs is the home to 99% of the video game developers in the world right now. (Although it should be noted that many of the best are further afield.) As such when rumours start to spread that, according to the allegedly words of Donald Trump, that territory might soon be going to war with Video Games- I get a little worried. But not before I gawk at the sheer gall of such idiocy.
 

I get the need for incendiary rhetoric in a position such as his. The man is a hairs-breadth away from an election just clear of two assassination attempts that no one seems to care about and a supreme dud of a VP choice he clearly made when he thought his opponent was too much of a dementia riddled fading mind to notice. Now all of a sudden all of his directed attacks at age and how doddering Joe Biden is have bit him in the ass, and people are taking more notice of his meandering speeches that shed away the larger rally crowds, or the concentrated thirty minute dance break recess he took for absolutely no reason a week or so back. How do you convince people you're not falling out of your saddle? Double down on the rhetoric! Let people know you stand for things and hopefully it's the kind of things they will decide they care about- because that's modern democracy, baby!

Still, even with all that readily apparent in my mind- sometimes the targets he picks are so stupid you wonder if the man even knows where he is half of the time. To be clear, I'm talking about the comments Trump made about the "glorification of violence" in society which "includes the gruesome and horrible video games that are now commonplace." (I see that, once again, a popular dictator from a foreign country has slipped their rhetoric directly into his mouth- what a shocker!) Although not clear on any plan of 'banning' or taking any action whatsoever, making this not so different from his video game violence mix-tape from a few years back, he did foretell a need to "stop or reduce this substantially." Which falls just short of a promise so the man can happily forgrt about this the moment he waddles back into the Oval Office.

Now at no point does this actually rise to the point of being a 'ban', but this is the kind of talk that sends a shiver up Jack Thompson's little thompson. Still- let's take a look at this from an objective angle- shall we? Donald Trump essentially just demonised the number one pass time of a lot of middle Americans, at a time when he really needs every vote that he can score in a tighter election then anyone would be comfortable with. Then again his base is the puritanical Right- the kind of people desperate to find an enemy in anything other. Also the base that is rapidly getting aged out as they move into retirement age- mix with with a paranoia over encroaching gun control and literally anything can become a scapegoat. But let's take this a bit further.

Say Donald does start throwing down the legislature against the video game world- that would literally kneecap the single most profitable entertainment industry sector in the entire world: this from a candidate who lionizes their financial savviness. They claim that America is on the ropes and they want to revitalise the economy- though I seriously wonder how crashing a multibillion dollar industry would achieve that. Then again- I'm operating under the very weak belief that these guys are intelligent and think before they act. But uhh... well, that isn't really something you can take for granted, now is it?But just for fun, let's play out how this would go.

So first off, all of the big companies would literally just move out- basically feeding industry to other countries- not very 'American first' of you, eh Donald? Of course, you can bet that most employees won't be able to make such a jump, so this would result in a complete degradation of current industry talent- probably leading to a giant crash. Smaller to medium studios would be absolutely incapable of leaving the country and would be forced out of work. Perhaps their talent would filter into the tech sector- who can say. Either way Donald would end up making many of his own countrymen destitute in order to force a false scapegoat. And is anything more American than that?

Long story short, is Donald Trump the new bad guy of the Games Industry? Nah, but he's certainly much raking in the dumbest areas for a man who is apparently looking to score some last second votes. His base is locked in- they don't need to be catered to anymore- yet all in he goes making hairbrained promises that twist the vast majority of younger Americans out of his grasp. The further this goes on the more flabbergasted I become at the 'strategy' of the man, if indeed such a thing exists. Honestly some morbidly curious part of me would love to see what would happen if he does end up winning- watching to see if the man even remembers any of the enemies he made along the way... It would be funny, you have to admit.

I'm still waiting for 007

 

It has been actual years since IO Interactive first unveiled the fact they're working on a 007 game built off all their learnings with Hitman- and often times that can be cause to worry. We're no longer used to extended reveal, development, expanses outside of Rockstar- thus whenever a title starts to leave our mind it gradually loses it's possibility of ever reaching the finishing line. With all the backroom reporting I don't think anyone is buying it when whoever is currently holding the 'KOTOR Remake' potato promises the thing is still chugging around somewhere- despite how much of a slamdunk victory such a game would undoubtedly be with even the minimal amount of effort put in to bringing it up to snuff. But with recent titters from the IO camp that they are still very much on the grind- my passions are reignited for what feels like the perfect Bond game on the way.

Now first off, I love IO Interactive. Their handling of the Hitman franchise has been straight revolutionary to a brand that felt destined to fall off as we slid into the modern age. It's not that I don't like Hitman, it just seemed like the exact kind of formula game that would be homogenised into being 'just like everything else', in some desperate bid to become some other studio's answer to Uncharted or something, if it hadn't been picked up by IO. Heck, we already saw that attempted with Hitman Absolution, which was not bad by any stretch of the imagination- I actually really like that game- but it doesn't play into the strengths of the brand too well. IO's recent stint on the Hitman trilogy, however? Sublime.

The pursuit of ultimate replayability across their levels challenges a level design mastery I genuinely think few other studios could legitimately match- but the eye that IO interactive's staff has for the manipulation of geometry, contextual interactivity, NPC AI route coding- everything a fantastic stealth games needs- birthed the ideal Hitman experience. Those levels are near endlessly repayable, and even knowing them all as too-heart as I personally do; some remix of the traditional can still trip me up when I least suspect it. I adore the Hitman games and I just know there's a vertical for a fantastically stylish Spy thriller wrapped up in there. Heck, they literally laid out such a framework across their work on Hitman- just give them a half decent budget and let that team cook!

That being said, I will say there's not exactly a recipe for what would make a great James Bond game out there. I mean sure, you would throw up your hand and announce that literally one of the most influential games of all time was a Bond game in GoldenEye, were this a test environment- but I'll push back on that a little. Whilst undoubtedly revolutionary to the shooting genre- is the spirit of James Bond really conveyed in a full blown shooter? The intelligence of spy work, the occasional subtlety offset by bombastic explosiveness? I've said it before and I'll maintain it- the single best video game on the market right now that perfectly captures all a Bond story can be doesn't even have the brand stamped to it's cover. It's 'Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater'.

Bringing us to the beginning of James Bond's legacy is something that hasn't really been attempted since the days of Young Bond- the novel series by Charlie Higson; (Which I love, by the way.) IO really are stepping into grounds all of their own, presenting a gameplay loop of honing one's spy skills until they become that iconic superspy everyone knows. I can just picture how neatly that concept marries their 'repeat into mastery' loop of design. Revisiting the same missions, becoming more insightful, gaining new equipment, learning the extent of your ability to manipulate the world to your own ends- all whilst your own Bond builds their legacy and talents. I assume this is IO's next multiyear franchise and if they perform it right I am absolutely hear for it. Especially if they go in with some of the cooler aspects of Hitman that they started experimenting with after the series was done.

Who remembers the whole Hitman 'Freelancer' mode? A very clever rogue-like spin on the formula that gave you challenges, random targets and a death consequence built into gear acquisition - this mode deftly reworked the base Hitman game with an entirely new progression system built around the same basic loop. Getting to slowly fill of Agent 47's house with increasingly grand accoutrement's feels like entirely inconsequential fluff but it provides a fun little glimpse into the home life of a character we've grown so very close to- and getting to unwind between extremely stressful missions wherein a single mistake can scupper giant chains of planning and set-up missions is a welcome addition to the formula. I hope that can rub off on this Bond game somewhat.

Now we already know that the plan is to shoot for a trilogy with these games, similar to how Hitman was a trilogy. This actually marks itself as something of an uncommon approach to typically serialised Bond stories, and I wonder how an ongoing metanarrative will end up effecting the quality of the Bond fantasy. Sure, Craig's tint was proposed to present us with an ongoing narrative but that shaped up to little more than stapled on narratives atop each last movie creating a disjointed feeling story where at the end of the day the majority of the progress felt like it was being made in his love life... despite Bond's love life constantly being reset to zero every movie too. It was a bit of a mess, to be honest- and how funny would it be if the video game ended up nailing the narrative better than the actual movie did. Oh I would giggle!

As it stands IO interactive are some of the best high quality niche developers on the market and as long as they stand as beautifully pro-consumer as they are I don't think anyone is going to begrudge their continued dominance of the puzzle-stealth-sandbox market: whatever you call a sub-genre like that. I shudder in excitement to see what they'll do next, how they'll expand and evolve into bringing their action gameplay up to snuff, or moving towards other forms of engagement all together! Bond is big into his cars, right? Can we except maybe a little bit of car combat? Set pieces? Role Playing? The possibilities, like their future, is bright and endless

Pokémon and the leak of the century

 

We all want to be the very best, that no one ever was- as famously uttered for the very first, and very best, Pokemon theme song. But what if I told you that Pokemon was not, 'the very best'? They were not the very best at their own genre of game having been recently outshone by a random go getter indie project so disastrously that daddy Nintendo is having to slit throats in a pathetic display of legal manipulation to supress competition. And now neither have they been the very best when it comes to computer security after suffering a leak so horrific this is has been effectively dubbed the 'Teraleak' in reference to the franchises latest gimmick-feature in Terastallization. Very droll, I'm sure Gamefreak just loved seeing that across the headlines. (I know some others are saying it's because there's over 1 terabyte of leaked info- but that's the boring explanation, live a little- will ya?)

Now this is of course considered a 'Hack', but before you start summoning up images of multiscreen hacker-men typing at three thousand words a minute, cutting through firewalls like paper- let me give you the image. According to the Discord leaker who detailed the incident, this was entirely a failure on behalf of internal security who left a big vulnerability in a very not-secure location that ended up providing a back end into Gamefreak's network. And this leak is bad. Not just for the security of whatever slop Gamefreak are planning to feed us for the next few years, but for the actual employees there because, yes, this is one of those 'personal details leaked' kind of security flubs. Always a stressful time for the people just trying to make good games out there who really don't deserve this kind of headache on them. If they wanted their personal details leaked, all they needed to do was sign up for a PSN account in the UK.

So what did people get? Everything. Literally everything. We now know the production codenames for every Pokemon title across the past twelve years, alongside what is widely understood to be the codename for the Switch 2- whenever that is expected to show up. (At this point it's going to competitively launch with the PS6) We also have the codename for the next mainline Pokemon game and a spin-off which I won't mention a single detail about not to keep it's secrecy clear but because I just don't want to invite that kind of chaos into my life. It's like letting in a vampire from the chaos realm through the front door- better off just pretending you didn't read that stuff. What is much more inline with my own personal interests are the various concepts arts and old sprite sheets that have leaked. Some of the unused art is viscously cool, and another reminder of how hard it is for studios to convey the dynamic excitement of a great piece of concept art into even a 2D animated sprite. Square Enix are the only one's who can reliably put it off, Pokemon's just make me feel sad for the missed opportunity.

Next, good lord above- Game Freak actually has an internal lore diary! I'm not sure why that surprises me but with how haphazardly new conceptual deities appeared to be thrown into Pokemon I just kind of assumed that only the fans were putting in the work to make sense of it all but no- Game Freak literally have a kabbalistic-reminiscent creation graph detailing the inner workings of the universe, including what legendary trios are ranked in the overall Pokemon pantheon. Impressive and humbling. (Feel like Rayquaza should be higher than Kyogre and Groudon considering he literally stands between them as a balance- but I understand why he would be considered betwixt the pair.)

One provision I will never understand from the corporate world is the incessant requirement to hold onto every little insignificant chunk of nothingness that literally no one would ever need to reference again in their lives, which incidentally is how the minutes of various important Nintendo meetings got leaked. One such involved the discussion to end Ash's run on Pokemon and cited the direct reasons why. Declining viewership was a factor- as well as the very reasonable approach of bringing in new characters that a new audience can connect with rather than this weirdo kid who seem to rebirth himself every few years or so. Surprsingly levelled headed of Nintendo here, I was impressed.

But where things get less level headed would be in relation to some of the 'background lore' that people have allegedly dug up. Now I will say that I have not personally delved into the leaks but rather seen several databases that has collated the important and interesting parts, which means I haven't personally seen this Typhlosion lore dump that set the world on fire- but assuming this is as real as the rest of the leak- I can understand both why people are so up in arms and why it even exists in the first place. It's a matter of the context of both the story and Pokemon as a whole- but that doesn't make it any less weird to the literal observer.

For yes, in as-of-yet unreleased Folk-lore regarding one of the dullest four legged Pokemon of all time- (Yeah, I don't like Typhlosion- fight my, Ty-heads!) people have found themselves yet again confronted in horror about how very close Pokemon and Humans actually are. And I don't just mean that personably. Within the Pokemon universe Humans and Pokemon are literally cousin species, both birthed by the first born (first made?) children of the literal almighty god. The four legged Dailga created Pokemon and the upright Palkia created humans, both supposedly in their own image but I think we've seen plenty of bipedal Pokemon who would put that under the microscope. But at least now you know what is meant by 'a time back when the line between Pokemon and human was blurred'.

And yes, within the- honestly messy and confused- story we see Typhlosion impregnate a human girl who then gives birth to... a Slakoth for some reason? The Typhlosion also shape shifts, which fits the Yokai inspiration of the creature but not the actual Pokemon itself who holds no such ability- that's Ditto's gaffe. It's just an understandably off-the-mark addendum to Pokemon lore that never made it to print. And yet remained attached to Gamefreak archives because, like I said, corporations have this annoying tendency to cling hopelessly onto absolutely frivolous junk that no one benefits from. How long as it been since they were actively writing lore for Typhlosion? And yet this story was just allegedly pinging about? Bizzare!

Overall I think the biggest take-away from the Gamefreak Leak is not some crazy reveal about their upcoming schedule. You know like how when Insomniac was hacked and their next decade worth of truly ambitious projects were leaked so we really know the heights they're attempting to reach for over the next generation and beyond? Yeah, Gamefreak have none of that. There's no ambition. No excitement. Nothing grand in the pipeline they're working towards, building up their skills to achieve. In fact, as far we can tell, Gamefreak literally plan their core games only one in advance. And doesn't that just sum up the Pokemon company perfectly? No grander plans, no rumbling ambitions. Just taking the blows as they come and shrugging with the times. No wonder Terapagos sucked so bad. 

ReFantazio tops the top

 

When it comes to ATLUS I truly do consider them to the pinnacle of modern day JRPGs, and I play quite a bit of them to make such a claim! Modern Day RPGs all throw truly commendable acts of creative fruitfulness to make their genre feel original whilst familiar, sometimes coming up with truly original spins on the basics, othertimes depending a bit too heavily on gimmick systems that don't quite achieve everything the developers want it to do for a full video game length's worth- which is why I don't begrudge it when a studio like ATLUS finds a niche and kind of just develops that, rather than trying to reinvent the wheel over and over. On it's surface ATLUS just presents the 'weakness hunt' gameplay loop, but it takes just a little bit of familiarity with really any one of their games to know that system is really just the basis for a largely foundational RPG slice they've explored exhaustively.

Though I consider them always improving, in terms of the core of the game and how ATLUS handles their RPG elements I really did think they were close to hitting something of a wall- what for the past twenty odd years of doing this. Persona 5 pretty much rewrote the trajectory of the company and how they worked- honing in on presentation and style- cranking up playability and accessibility. Persona 3 Reload really hammered down on that sensation of 'we've hit our peak', what with a lot of design concepts borrowed from 5 in UX speed and personability- as well as gameplay variety like Theurgies and Shift attacks that were introduced new into the remake. Which is probably why 'gameplay' was the last place I expected to be surprised by when it came to Metaphor ReFanazio.

What blows me away with Metaphor is all the number of what that the team essentially took what wasn't objectively broken and works on it anyway because the team simply can. Because that team feels some insatiable urge to challenge their own boundaries whether they feel their backs rubbing up against the wall or not- (Can you imagine Ubisoft ever feeling something like that? Passion for their craft? Neither can I.) The Persona formula wasn't broken, activities in the daytime and hunting in the nightime- the classic superhero dichotomy- and I very much expect that to return for Persona 6 and I would be happy to engage with it again when it does- but despite being very drawn from the same mould as Persona, with some Shin Megami Tensei mixed into the pot for good measure, ReFantazio takes the formula further.

Now we have a narrative based around forward momentum, where the team is on a world wide adventure and visiting new lands- activities are visited between day long trips spanning them out to feel like treks- the environments change, the routine feels dynamic. Of course, this is natural evolution upon the Roadtrip concept for Persona 5 that was originally scrapped, which would have seen returning locations across the franchise as well as at least one old character reintroduced as a potential companion. Metaphor takes that idea to a new world and fresh genre spin, proving their ideas relied on solid bones and not nostalgic gimmicks like some assumed.

One thing I love about Fantazio is the renewed take on making challenging and unique boss encounters, specifically for side content. Odd wisdom led to trial and error gameplay where typically you'd be thrown into a battle, figure it's peculiarities through trial and error and then reload a save before the fight and prepare- or just grind through the mechanics. Fantazio totally leap frogs this antiquated system with a new swathe of creatively designed boss mechanics and an intractability with the world. Now you can visit an informant before you ever even leave for the hunt, who teach you about vulnerabilities and potential 'no no's. (Such as equipping a certain class that automatically rages the enemy.) Then you have NPCs throughout the dungeon, some for flavour and some for a last few special clues- such as not picking off all the adds least it makes the chief unkillable. Prep time actually feels purposeful and directed, and mechanics are fun to learn and engage with- rather than the reward to figure out after knocking up against a brick wall.  

Of course little can ever be said of an ATLUS game without bringing up the Music at this point- and I'll agree that this was the toughest sell going in. Previously ATLUS have been so good at mixing contemporary music into their world with stupidly talented artists perfectly conjuring unforgettable soundscapes that marry beautifully with the themes and mood of the game. Bringing us into the Fantasy realm would rob them of the ability to use the contemporary believably, just ask Final Fantasy's bizarre Linkin Park song in 'Stranger to Paradise'- weird. But when it came to being more traditionally orchestral and bombastic ATLUS never loses their unique edge which marks them so very different to their contemporaries in a field you'd expect to me mined dry.

Everyone is going on about the obvious thus far, the throat singing mumble rapper who accompanies the advantage and regular fighting themes- and that is because he is great. Outside of the context it might be hard to figure out why he works so very well but when you're in that moment, facing down the twisted monstrous 'humans' of this world, listening to the deep throaty drone racing alongside your heart- it's impossible not to feel the moment! But even beyond that I want to spread my praise. The background tracks for many of the dungeons you visit on your journey are unique and gorgeous to listen to. Whether it's the haunted broken arias of the Sandworm cave or the ringing cries of the castle dungeon track- the music is absolutely unforgettable once again- I can scarcely believe they pulled it off!

ReFantazio had such an act to follow considering the franchise it spawned from and I think we've all seen similar titles of it's type struggle and fail to capture the magic of their parent franchises. Bethesda's Starfield is a good game, but nothing in the face of Fallout and The Elder Scrolls- but I suppose that was never going to be the case with ATLUS, was it? They managed to effectively spin off SMT into a more successful franchise- and now they're spinning off Persona and SMT into something possibly greater than that. (I'll see how the story builds and improves before labelling any victories or successors just yet.) And I am so happy to see the unreachable ceiling that ATLUS shoots for. Good god, I need to play more right now! 

Looking towards TES VI

 

With Shattered Space out of the way a lot of eyes are not turning towards the horizon. More specifically, to Elder Scrolls VI. I think the consensus was to follow the Starfield yearly train for a while until TES VI was closer- but considering that is what the team consider billable content for their ailing game, I'm pretty sure most people have finally written off Starfield entirely. The game could be saved, no doubt- but Bethesda aren't interested enough in receiving feedback to do it. They're happy with the small base they got and consider them the Starfield fans, who are content with that level of output and thus do not require any catering to. Thus Starfield probably will never be worthy of being considered a main Bethesda franchise. Maybe when 2 rolls around in 2040- who knows? Either way, now the pressure is back on The Elder Scrolls.

Maybe pressure is the wrong word. Too light. It might be more appropriate to say that the weight of all the stars in heaven are beaming down on TES VI with an expectant glare. Bethesda seem to really struggle with developing on themselves, lovers of one of their games will find something essential missing in the next one along and it's making it very difficult for hardcore fans to stay attached to a developer that either doesn't understand what won them over to begin with, or are simply driven by some inexplicable vision that grows increasingly anathema to the rest of the Roleplaying world. I won't deny that Bethesda games truly are unique, but I'm starting to worry that in times to come that uniqueness will be best described in the way they cram endless monetised content farms into their entirely single player RPG worlds.

I was down for the idea of paid mods a long time ago- but they don't care enough to make that idea a respectable one. They've already grown tired of it and are moving on towards the next implementation of the system in the next game. It kind of reminds me of an irritable creative without expectations and deadlines, free to pick up and drop an idea at the change of the wind- never quite riding great designs and concepts to completion. All of which is why personally, I'm expecting The Elder Scrolls VI to break a lot of hearts when it finally arrive and finally tells us all what we don't want to hear- that Bethesda just don't have it anymore. That special spark which made Skyrim a generational masterpiece- which has been slipping since Fallout 4- might be finally gone from their eyes.

But then the stubborn delusional side of me wants to cast all that aside and say no- Skyrim was such a special game and you would have to be a straight fool not to see why! The tangible world space, living stories, space to paint whatever adventure you could imagine on the canvass of creativity. Even before the word 'mods' enters the conversation Skyrim was so very ahead of it's time. But let's talk about mods for a second. Skyrim was so very accessible to mod in a way that Starfield is proving... difficult on. Lacking official animation tools (cross fingers they're coming) animators are currently incapable of even porting old kits over. (Unless they use a tool that relies on the Script Extender, but Starfield's new paid modding system has literally cut a giant swathe through the community that many mod creators are avoiding third party compatibility tools so they might remain compatible with consoles. It's a whole mess right now.)

What I think The Elder Scrolls could do with, going forward, is a change up in their scenario management. Honestly, I think the assumption that a tight and excellent story can't fit into an open world RPG game in the style of Bethesda's is frank under ambition talking. Get a half decent fantasy writer on the payroll and let them go nuts, reign in the delivered product where needed and squeeze the rest of the simulation around that. The impact of a great narrative isn't just a solid boon nowadays, it's expected to get people through the door. Bethesda's best storylines have been Morrowind, which relies entirely on the quality of the world building, and Skyrim's- which is so simple and straight forward it doesn't have a chance to sag. All the others, their Fallouts, Oblivion, Starfield- all suffer under weak writing, soft scenarios or lacking commitment. They're so afraid of railroading players, when what they should be caring about is giving enough motive that players will give their RPG characters into the scenario. Ultimate freedom sounds good on paper- but few games that pursue that end up in the annals of history. 

Of course, we also need a total revision to the way combat works. First person melee combat is always a conundrum to solve- but Bethesda have never been there. Morrowind's combat was a mistake that was realised into the fall game for some reason, Oblivion's combat had some small promise but lacked commitment, Skyrim's was a regression of Oblivion's for some reason. Bethesda's latest games have shown a surprisingly solid grasp of their combat, with Starfield and Fallout's FPS touches- we can't go back to the land of noodle swinging come TES VI. It's just not possible. Give us just some of the basics. Dodges, parrying, stance breaking- I know I'm starting to sound like a Souls-nut but to be honest- Souls has established the bare minimum for satisfying medieval combat- this should be the foundation that a game like TES VI builds from. But considering modern Bethesda and their bar of 'quality', I'm just praying they even hit the industry bare minimum at this point...

 And most importantly I think that TES VI could really use some more focus. As much as Bethesda want to pretend they're making vastly different games between their three series- the truth is that Bethesda really carry the same basic bones from game to game, build upon that and then try and squeeze a new genre out of it on the backend. Most early fundamental working is fixing up the allgame under all the nonsense. Which is why I have to beg Bethesda not to get lost sticking in another superfluous settlement builder mode. It just doesn't fit The Elder Scrolls. Hearthfire was limited and focused- it was designed to fit into the world. Starfield's settlements serve little to no real purpose in the fantasy of the game- keep your focus, Bethesda- please!

I am scared for the next Elder Scrolls game, and that's because I've not really seen the hallmarks of the trendsetting Bethesda for a very long time now. But what scares me even more than that is just how delusional they seem to be internally about that. They still think of themselves as leaders within DLC, despite CDPR soundly trouncing them in that department over two of their most recent releases. They consider Starfield the best game they've ever made in some respects- which defies belief. They call Shattered Space the product of veteran talents who's work really shows on screen- which reads like an actual insult levied against them. Is this the Bethesda who has it in them to change the trajectory of their company and become a leader once again? I hope so. I really do.

The movie tie in curse?

 

Not too long past there was a time when the phrase 'movie tie in' was a curse uttered upon the gaming world. For those with more power than sense would see the production of a movie as synonymous with that of a game, and expected a full quality game to be whipped up within the year or so of filming in order to coincide with movie release schedules. This would, obviously, result in the worst possible games as developers desperately struggled to produce something working under the horrific constraints which inexplicably made a reputation and a bit of money because of the name association alone. At least, that was until they grew so bad that people knew not to waste their time anymore. Now the movie game is largely just a thing of myth, but every now and then one does pop around to surprise us and raise the question- does the curse of the movie tie-in still exist?

The early 2000's were rotten for the worst of games like these, with some coming out as little better than a mobile trash product from an amateur coder might. Of course I'm talking about the original Iron Man game- good god that disaster haunts me in my sleep and I only played the demo! Ugly, unintuitive, boring- just the worst of all worlds. At least people who fell for the 'Thor' tie in game got a terrible God of War rip off to pass the time with. Not exactly glowing- quite atrocious actually, but at least they got the Hemsworth to voice for it. And Tom Hiddleston! And the music of Inon Zur? (I need to stop reading the Wiki before I end up playing the thing.) For my money the best of that era, at least within the confines of the MCU was Ang Lee's Hulk the movie the game. Not as iconic as Ultimate Destruction, but a competant little smash 'em up action game with a totally unique narrative set after the film that touched on areas of Hulk lore I've not seen addressed outside of a comic since. Ravange, Madman, Flux- when the last time you heard any of their names?

Of course there are some genuinely good tie-in games. The King Kong game was way better than it had any right to be, presenting itself as half a semi-horror shooter game where you have to survive the mutant monstrosities of Skull Island, and the other-half a third person Kong fighting game. And then there's the king of movie licence games, a game so good it set an example that similar games tried to top over the next 14 years- Spiderman 2. What can anyone say about Spiderman 2 that hasn't already been sung from the rooftops? It was freeing, fantasy encapsulating, graphically pretty, mechanically sound, stuffed full of memorable encounters and moments, and accompanied by one of the best Super Hero movies ever made. So if you want evidence against the existence of a curse at all- those will be your best bet. Alongside Golden Eye, I guess?

But lo, just recently this very month we had ourselves a movie tie in title in 'A Quiet Place: The Road Ahead'- a first person survival game that appears to fancy itself a 'survival horror' despite featuring no significant resource management. (Are there no standards to genre picking anymore? Simply having to survive being murdered does not itself warrant the 'survival' addendum, else Until Dawn would be a 'survival Horror' now wouldn't it?) The Road Ahead is actually half decent, kind of borrowing the vibe of Alien Isolation to a small degree it mimics the core conceit of keeping super quiet by jacking into your computer mic and listening in on your breathing. (After you allow it to, of course.) All under a goofy little storyline that believes itself to be more dramatic than it honestly is. (Love a little silly horror plot now and then.) I would commend the game for slapping down the curse... but what movie release is this supposed to coincide with exactly? Day One? That movie dropped in June! (Eh, it's close enough, I suppose.)

Of course there are also movie franchise tie-ins, that are connected to a particular movie but rather a cinematic brand. Actually, there aren't many games like that because there aren't many cinematic brands that can survive past a few entries. I recall a pretty lacklustre VR John Wick game which just got a lot of people back into playing Payday 2, because that was what it played like. And more famously there was the sure-hit certain-success product Avengers which managed to bomb under the utterly moronic direction of the team who made it. Having recently actually tried to play the thing myself I can say first hand how desperately the game buckles under the weight of level gating and side content bloat it just doesn't need! Any designer worth a fraction of their paycheck would have been able to spot that giant flaw in the game's makeup, and if they failed to get that actioned upon then they failed in their role. And in doing so, Avengers failed despite all around it.

In fact, you might say the tie-in curse seems to hit Marvel the worst off. Any Marvel game that isn't directly tied to Spiderman has an inordinate chance of bombing despite the apparent permeability of the Marvel fandom and it genuinely astounds me. Perhaps it's the cynicism surrounding the very apparent over-extension of the brand- or maybe just none of these games really nailing the fantasy that people are searching for. Even Midnight Suns, which I figured to be a pretty decent game, didn't quite capture the heroism it was shooting for and ended up feeling like a half-step away from the XCOM style the studio was known for an a half-step towards something entirely different they weren't confident enough to commit to. Whatever the case- it bombed with all the others.

But could it be considered as bad as, say, Street Fighter the movie the game? Yeah, you read that right. Street Fighter the movie, an adaptation of Street Fighter 2, was adapted into a video game. And you might think- "how does that work"? Cast your mind back to Mortal Kombat and you might remember the stop-frame picture animation work which defined the bizarre style of that original game- which Street Fighter neatly avoided thanks to it's gorgeous animation work. Well the movie game took us back to that Mortal Kombat style only with pictures derived from the movie counterparts of these characters. Yes, it is visually repulsive to witness- and apparently the game plays pretty stiffly as well- which is astounding for an adaptation of a movie of one of the most responsive fighting games of all time.

The movie game curse is a warning that art is nothing to be trifled with, and that the work of making a video game cannot be condensed into the cycle of film development. It truly was born from a superiority complex that games were a lesser form easily squeezed into a Hollywood marketing schedule and it's the pig headed stubbornness of that industry which kept this sordid tradition alive for as long as it did. Maybe video games growing to such a size that they neatly eclipse films what was put an end to this. Why the potential lost revenue of a bag guy far eclipses what an entire movie marketing team can afford to commission- who is going to give them the time of day? At least nowadays those that make the plunge do so with their priorities in check and the power-balance tilted the right direction.

Clair Obscur might be getting big for it's britches

 

Out of all the recently announced games of the past year, one which stood out to be and many others is the decidedly creative-looking 'Clair Obscur: Expedition 33'. To this day I struggle to think of another video game trailer that managed to make me do a complete one-eighty from "Oh, this looks like another pretty walking simulator horror game" to "Wait, is that RPG combat? Stylish RPG combat? Almost JRPG feeling? Hold the phone!" The very initial first step was enough to sell me on the spot and since then I've had an eye out for every bit of new info that slips out of this curious little title about facing the very extinction of humanity. It's a fantastic looking game from a totally new IP not coming out of an experienced and renowned studio- a unicorn in today's age. What's even more crazy- the core staff seem to be Ubisoft refugees! (Maybe that company does need to be brought down if this is the kind of talent they've got locked up making endless crap sequels.)

And I don't seem to be the only one. In a sea of samey-looking games that seem to slip in and out of the same basic genres that the publishers deem 'profitable' comes a high quality gamble. You can tell there isn't a big spirit of caution with a game of this visual calibre, facing this interesting of a sales pitch, embracing the love of the fresh and the vibrant. And when we're talking about the games world- people respond to that kind of passion. Largely this is why I love this industry and find hit pieces against the concept of 'gamers' so out of touch and lazy. The vast majority of us just seem to gravitate to talent and quality and hold up the best of our kind- as long as we can find out. Bottom feeders and assholes dot every hobby- don't get me wrong- but when titles that have no right to become hot topics like Clair Obscur rise above the pack I know something is going right!

In response it seems to be that either Clair Obscur is raising up it's standards to meet demands or maybe the title was even bigger of a risk then we already knew because every other day I seeing headlines that make me rub my eyes and go "Huh?" I mean sure, it was a pretty looking game from the get-go, but I didn't expect the game to be headlining nameable vocal talent behind their performances, including Ben Starr (Final Fantasy XVI), Charlie Cox (Netflix's Daredevil), Jennifer English (Baldur's Gate 3) and Andy Serkis (Probably needs no introduction but I'm going to say 'Enslaved: Odyssey to the West' anyway.) We're talking powerhouse actors all of them, probably not cheap either, all lending the talents to the core staff of what was already an interesting sounding story. This isn't a 'look at the famous faces and ignore the game' situation- these are all welcome editions to a fascinating foundation! How novel.

From that heads turned to the price of the game which, again, stuns in the context. Baring in mind we're living in a world were high quality titles are now ramping themselves up to extortionate prices and arguing how justified it all is because of inflation. Ubisoft, in fact, even went so far as to overprice a special edition for their new Star Wars game to triple figures so that their $70 base game and subscription service would look like a deal in comparison! The cheek! Meanwhile, just like I predicted, that is leaving the space clear for under AAA games like this one to launch at traditional full price, $50- a totally reasonable price point- and seem like a fully respectable purchasing price. Seemingly AAA quality cast and presentation, but not AAA pricing? How is that possible?

Which is where the doubting begins. I'll be honest, I'm a doubter. Whenever something seems too good to be true there typically is a very good reason for that, can you guess what it is? I'll admit that their is a bit of prejudice in there too- Ubisoft's recent games haven't just been a failure in vision, but also in raw design and narrative talent. Assassin's Creed Valhalla was one of the most pathetically mis-matched projects I've ever seen. 10 hours of content stretched into a 100 hour game with no thought between content balancing, pacing, useful progression- any way of making the customers time feel worthwhile. It was a horrific mess. And I can't help but wonder what kind of lessons something like that imparts on it's staff.

That being said, the team appear to be self aware on that front. Already we're hearing assurances that Clair Obscur won't be stuffed to the gills with bloat for the sake of it. 30 Hour experience the say, quality seeped into what's there, guff and bloat left by the wayside. By their own reckoning. It's always better to create the kind of game that leaves players feeing satisfied but not exhausted with the sensation that their time was stolen away. That's what makes me so ashamed whenever I see devs like the COD team bragging about their recurrent player figures without asking themselves how much is that people genuinely enjoying their time and how much is that figures they've had to cajole with attention-stealers like battle passes and daily bonuses and constant jingling keys. And have those devs been around long enough to know the difference between that and genuine engagement anymore?

Now believe it or not the pricing has actually somehow ended up being a little contentious on this game. A listing was actually taken down from some consoles making people believe that a revision was being done to ramp this game up to the prices we see elsewhere- however a spokeperson has seemingly debunked that. "The price from your local retailers is accurate" they say, which is something of a sad announcement to have to make- telling your consumers that they absolutely are looking to not squeeze every buck out of you for this game. They also seem to acknowledge scepticism from people like my assuring that they are a small studio just trying to make a big game- which is commendable to be sure! I support it.

I do think we're heading towards a new golden age in turn-based RPGs, if we're not there already. With powerhouses like Baldur's Gate 3 feeding the tabletop crowd and seemingly-masterpieces like Metaphor Refantazio catering towards JRPG tastes- that an open bench for developers catering towards the single player crowd and the role playing genre. Clair Obscur feels like it might be bringing something new to that world and I'm always excited to see passion and creativity enter into the world- particularly when it feels like we're not always inundated with as much of that as we'd like.

Preying on the downfall

 

Oh Ubisoft- dost thou know how oft thy name touches these lips? How thy form and art enshrouds in my dreams? Dost thou shudder with a start, with the patter of my words when I call to address? Does thou even know why? Does anyone really understand why- why they come to hate? I mean it has to be a difficult thing to accept for anyone- no? To be fair and honest perhaps even the most robust and affirmed person of sound heart and fair mind would struggle comprehending the singularly outward expression one would need to drum up to drive such a fervour as could be described being 'hated'. That's no simple distaste afterall- no sir! It takes passion, it takes effort- it takes love turned rancid and sour. To truly understand oneself enough to comprehend hatred one would need to take that very hatred into themselves, and become of it in some small way. Few are that sturdy, it surprises me little that Ubisoft is not.

But why do I speak of them? Simply because Ubisoft is up against a wall of late, as I'm sure you are at least passingly aware. I think that the direness of the situation is oft exaggerated- I don't think the U from France is really facing the abyss about to tumble off into insolvency- but I do believe they are in a bit of a pickle that is about to prelude another disastrous turn of trite that will be oh so profitable and oh so toxic in the mouths of quite literally everyone else operating this industry we love so dear. Assassin's Creed Valhalla made all the money Ubisoft could ever want and that game was a frank disaster on wheels remembered fondly only by those who dropped it after a couple of weeks or those who literally play nothing else but the franchise. Those with perspective and enough self-hatred to stick it out- know the game for the war crime it is. But still it made the money. More than that, it made all the money. Assassin's Creed Shadow will not be a flop. Doesn't matter how much controversy it digs up- it just ain't happening.

But that doesn't mean Ubisoft itself is safe- well, at least not in the way that I sure Yves and his posse would like, at least. Because Ubisoft have been on a bit of an edge of late- from disastrous decisions that made them look like total clowns in the public eye, to incredulous flops that still baffle my mind to this day. The apparent revelation that Star Wars Outlaws sold only a million copies in it's first month is nigh-on unbelievable to me- I cannot imagine a franchise like Star Wars selling so poorly with that much marketing behind it. And I mean a million sales is not bad but I can just imagine my face if I was an investor behind a Ubisoft collaboration with Star Wars looking at numbers like this and I can imagine the disbelief. (Thank all the gods I'm not.)

Ubisoft are being hounded of late, by internal forces who are absolutely the worst-case scenario for everyone involved and without- and then some, apparently welcome, investor money from China looking to swoop up ownership. And all the while fans, former and current, are looking on in fascination and in some cases, excitement that Ubisoft might be undergoing the one thing it's bitterly avoided for over ten years now: Change. For some that change comes in the form of walls being teared down and structures being rewritten- and that is an end they cheer on. And maybe some even further just want to see Ubisoft suffer and burn. Honestly, I see shades of myself in all angles of that conversation. Even the conservations who just want everything to stay the same.

But what is it- to prey on the downfall of another? Cruel? Vindictive? Twisted? All of them above, of course, and more. One such Ubisoft spokesperson commented as much in a speech that went viral on the topic. Cutting it down for the sake of brevity, he essentially bemoaned a disgust at being part of a community like ours, where Ubisoft are looked down upon and disgraced simply because they make products that aren't to our tastes. Also he claimed the discourse went beyond gamers and stretched to other industry players looking down on poor Ubisoft- he sees it himself on LinkedIn. Wait a second... on LinkedIn? What kind of non-psychopath uses LinkedIn as social media? Who is this guy?

Oh, it's the head of Ubisoft monetisation. Literally the very reason himself why Ubisoft is so despised. No wonder he would strawman an argument with all the wit of a class clown trying to argue with the teacher about why he doesn't deserve a fail for the test he refused to hand in. What kind of actual simpleton thinks Ubisoft is disgraced because of 'games that aren't made for us', Ubisoft don't make genre games- they make their titles for everyone: that's kind of the problem! The reason why Ubisoft sees hatred even from their peers, is because they are the Mister Beast of the video game world. They denigrate the entire art form with big budget, big audience, lazy wastes of talent, time and money infused with the worst practices, cementing the worst development trends and monetised like a dictator fuelling a war of conquest on the mainland. 

What makes this worse is that the man in question, the very one clutching his pearls talking about how toxic the industry he is actively trying to ruin is to him: that man is the problem. His job is one of the most important in the industry- he has to balance the extremely delicate relationship between commercialism and artistic integrity that allows this culture to thrive and survive. Yet with single player time savers, over-priced special launch editions, braindead NFT trend chasing- he and his ilk have screwed it up again and again. We're looking at a man incapable of performing his job, unworthy of continued employment, complain about unfair treatment. Buddy, if the world was fair you'd be on the streets- so wind in your chin a bit, eh?

In full honesty, I don't want Ubisoft to collapse. I think a company the size of Ubisoft suddenly going bankrupt would literally cause a crash in the game market, and I don't want that. What I want is for Ubisoft to learn and improve- but over the past years they have implicitly demonstrated an unwillingness to improve internal or external practices unless held to the fire. They would still mistreat their own workers if their conduct wasn't plastered across headlines and brought to courts, and they will still grind this market into dust if they don't fall down on their face and taste the dirt now and then. It's a shame, no one should have to fail utterly in order to learn a lesson. But when you're dealing with monsters, sometimes seeing their own reflection isn't enough to drive the lesson home- sometimes you have to rub their face with the muddy water until they get the message- and I won't apologise for that.

Velma and franchise hijacking

Recently the fires went out. The blood drained from the sky. The nasties withdrew back into their caverns and the air tasted not of acid, but of sweet honey, for the briefest of moments. The clouds broke and heaven rays of gold cut through like steel curtains, basking warm life on a cold field. The wearer paused, their hardships and toil forgotten, and greedily they drunk of this moment, this innocence, this bask-worthy light. For in that moment all the world might know that the beast was slain. That the evil had dissipated. That Velma had been cancelled. And then the light ceased. The curtain drew. Colour drained the world again and that the last of the warmth dried up and withered. That was when we all knew the horrid truth. Somehow- Velma had returned.

To be truthful the 'cancellation' was an ill-sourced jump of the gun spurred on by a bizarre post from an artist of the show who basically just lied and later called it a mistake. This artist has no idea if the show will get another season, and thus the hope for all those that love uninspired commentary on 'modern society' poorly slathered on a half-assed mystery show parading around with a bad Scooby Doo cosplay- can be happy. The show is probably coming back. But the reason I even mention all of this is actually rather pointed beyond Velma itself- because to be honest- I actually like the show. Not it's quality, god no. I like laughing at it, and I was actually a little sad for that brief moment when it was cancelled in the hearts of us all. It's not harmful to art- or at least, not specifically. What it represents however- yeah, that actually is harmful.

Because what is Velma, if we're honest with ourselves. A Scooby Doo show? No. Not even nearly. It borrows none of the charm, formula, characters or occasional wit of the show. (Very occasional- I will never forgive 'Get a clue'.) What Velma actually is- is a generic adult animated comedy that someone, probably looking through the graveyard of similar uninspired adult animated crap that never make it past their second season; figured would have a better chance of making it if they tied it to the Scooby Doo franchise. They essentially hijacked a popular franchise to better shore up the profitability of a dull idea. And it's not the only recent entertainment product to do this. Just look at the Halo show, which spent it's entire first season stubbornly trying to not be Halo in ever conceivable way, but kowtowing where needed to suit marketing. Or Netflix's Witcher- especially where 'Blood Origin' was concerned!

Now from the cold mind of a corporate marketer there is absolutely nothing wrong with this whatsoever. In fact, being able to recycle franchises that have run their course with the uninspired talents of mediocre writers incapable of conceiving new content of a comparable quality is cost effective work! Just as The Rings of Power team, they owe their careers to this kind of finagling! But what is the cost on the art of entertainment? Well now it's becoming even more impossible for new ideas to break through into Hollywood. Old franchises are being squeezed dry to the point where they're no longer appealing. (Star Wars Outlaw's underperformance demonstrates that. As does 'The Acolyte's failure.)
 

We were witness to a legendary example of this very thing with the recent Borderlands movie- a practise in 'how bad can we possibly make our adaptation' fielded by a team who had literally no care for the source material aided by a team who lost their connection with the source material. Whatever corny action sci-fi snorefest of a plot they originally had on their desk was stuffed with random characters across the Borderlands franchise that barely resembles the original cast dragging a weak concept down into abject parody. It was a mess, to say the least. And it shouldn't have happened. There was no talent, no passion, no purpose. That's the worst part- no purpose to the thing! Every piece of art needs a purpose.

Maybe that's what has bred this age of cynicism where I can no longer trust the franchises I love to resemble the kinds of stories and experiences that they used to- because it's all to easy to commandeer them and then ride off the total change in everything that matters as "a change in direction!". "What are you, stuck in the past?" All the while the try to bamboozle the world with blatant smothering of an old brand over unrelated work. No care put into to recognising the original, building upon it's strengths, improving that earlier work with a worthy successor- it's all about making the most amount of money by jumping on a profitable brand.

And perhaps that it why I'm so suspicious of everything that the new Dragon Age game presents. Nothing I've seen has been offensively bad, even that original trailer was just wildly off-base instead of objectively awful- but similarly I've not seen anything that speaks to the Dragon Age I know. The in-depth world building, the iconic yet grounded characters, the evolved tactical gameplay- I don't recognise the brand I grew up with. And with how long it's been since Bioware last put out a good game, and how many changes to staff they've undergone in that time, it kind of feels like a totally new team coming in with their own ideas to make a game that is being squeezed under the Dragon Age new for profit's sakes.

Thankfully, unlike Hollywood the Game's Industry isn't nearly as cooked with this stuff. Sure, we still get our fair share of remakes and sequels and the like- that's just the way of things- but there are plenty of brand new strike-outs that score too. Wukong has been a smash hit that made back it's investment and is shooting straight into profit after month one, Metaphor Refantazio has been ATLUS' fastest selling game of all time (helped in no small part thanks to that demo) and one sequel that did actually do it's original vast justice, Space Marine 2, has soared to such a surge in the hearts of the gaming public that Game Workshop are having a near Baldur's Gate level jolt to the system to ramp up their general output of product. As long as the spark to create new franchises breathes, as it no longer does in film and TV, we can stay above and ahead of the creative bankrupt hijackers.

The rebirth of Halo?

 

Come to me but a handful of years back and ask me what I think about the current state of Halo and I would stare you blank in the face until you just assume that I died and left the room- but since then I've availed myself of the entire Halo saga short of Infinite- simply because Infinite wouldn't load on my computer for some reason- otherwise I've played them all. And to be honest with you, even lacking the multiplayer experience for these games which are half known for their online community, I can taste the downfall of quality. Genuinely. Those first few games hold up incredibly, I still get the itch to go through Combat Evolved to Reach every now and then- but from the very moment that 343 took the reigns- the games started to stink. And remember- I went in thinking that 343's first game was Guardians- I hated 4 before finding out they worked on it! That ain't bias, that's straight game, baby!

The truth is that ever since Bungie left Halo the franchise has been on a downward trajectory that has coincided rather roughly with the collapse of Microsoft as a super power in the video game space. Super sad, all round. Oh, and now Bungie is currently being fed through a wood chipper by their new Sony bosses- with Marathon as their only saving grace providing it is a slam dunk mega hit... which it actually might be because that Studio is a generally trustworthy sort that can slap together a decent title even when they're on the backfoot. (You know, providing that Sony left enough remaining staff after the layoffs.) Which is to say, there ain't no 'call back the parents' to try and breathe life into Halo once more. Heck, a decent chunk of 343 were Bungie staff branching out to dedicate themselves to the Green man. Didn't turn out too well.

Halo Infinite is where the ball was supremely dropped, however. After game after game of disappointment, usually followed by some sort of broken promise around post launch support (Not that anyone was crying about the lethargy inducing Spartan Ops being quietly downsized)- they decided to put all their eggs into a Live Service focused Halo entry... and then forgot the live part. Seriously, Infinite's Support was glacial ontop of being underwhelming, and it resulted in a confused audience that very much wanted to engage with the solid foundation provided- but with precious few avenues through which to do so. They led with gregarious predictions of years worth of support, earning the name infinite- only to peter out within a few months and drag themselves the rest of way to achieve the bare base requirements to make a complete Halo product. Again, big shame.

And in the face of something like that, knowing that Halo is no longer really worthy of being called Xbox's flagship: honestly, I'd want to change my name too. Then leave the country and take up a new profession serving sweet treats in a mall, before my ever-present self-destructive thirst for excitement wrapped in a veneer of false-greed calls me to a series of petty heists that end up getting my back on the radar of those I was trying to escape from all this time... what was I talking about? Oh right, so 343 literally changed their name to 'Halo Studios'. And it makes sense- there hasn't been a single good Halo game with 343 printed on the box art. I think. (Did 343 manage to get their name on Creative Assembly's Halo Wars 2? I can't confirm.)

Still- that's a little cyncial- wouldn't you say? "New name, new me"? As if! Still, it's heralding a slight change in leadership and a capitulation to the gait of the industry in that Infinite's heavy investment custom made engine (which won't run on my bloody computer) has been scrapped in favour of the single most over pivoted-to engine in Gaming right now. That's right, Halo 6 is going to Unreal Engine! Of course it is- have you seen how many rendering triangles that thing can fit onto a single screen? Witchcraft I say! Automatic LOD? Sign me the heck up! And I'm sure Master Chief will look all nice and pretty with the cutesy new ray tracing bouncing majestically of his dome visor as realities slowest Sci-Fi plot lurches forward another few inches before flopping down and hibernating for the decade. That seems to be the 343 MO, afterall. 

But the game looks so pretty now, doesn't it? I mean- from the sweeping vistas they showed off... well, rock formations and... Combat Evolved locations? They look good, I guess... is this a remake? Nah- there was one Flood locale they showed off- this is new stuff... why does it look so retro then? Is it Chief's Armour? I think it's the armour. regardless- the question is whether or not 'making the game look good' is the end goal of this change up- because there are so many more questions when it comes to what would make a good modern Halo game. What kind of interesting sceanrios can you cook up, how can you make the conflict with the Covenant still feel fresh, will this be the first time in the past 10 years the core narrative takes a significant step in a direction without walking it back? Can we please never see the Prometheans again, pretty please- that faction and all their weapons suck.

In all seriousness- It is nice to see there be some sort of recognition from the former 343 that something has got to give, and making some sort of effort to detail out a then and a now indicates awareness and planning that is, sadly, uncommon admits spiralling game developers. That might because they no longer have an auto-sell evergreen franchise on their hands anymore, they might not even have a Microsoft exclusivity deal anymore if things are going the way they seem to be- Halo Studios may no longer be the face of Xbox- which means these games need to stand on their own merit and to achieve that is going to take some effort. And giving off the bulk of the bitch-work to Unreal Engine whilst you focus on the actual designing- that's a sensible place to start.

More Anime-bait please

You know by now that I'm an eclectic gamer- I pick up any and everything and don't allow the concept known as 'Genre's to stop me unless they truly are reprehensible- such as the survival game genre. (That concept has only ever thrived as an addendum towards other more complete genre ideas and I will die on that hill.) But recently I have to admit to being blown away by a few of the action games that we have been gifted as of late- a couple in particular, that speak to the scale of big budgets that we except to be realised. It isn't often I have to sit back to take in the insanity of the spectacle, and you can kind of start longing for that sensation after a while. When you don't get it from the grandest TV or the most exciting movie- I guess that's just another way that gaming leapfrog's traditional entertainment.

Black Myth Wukong has been on everyone's lips who gave it the good old shot, and I think that might be because of the blockbuster energy that the game just exudes- not in the tired 'game large for the sake of being big' Ubisoft trite; nor the 'we literally hold our consumers hostage with our entrenched multiplayer systems then brag about the player retention' Activision method; but rather the 'everyone shut up and listen- this game is the one' kind of way. And we've had actually a few games like that this year, funnily enough. It's not perfect and it doesn't do everything, but that it does set out to do it performs exceptionally at- but what take the cake for me with Wukong is the presentation.

From the very first cutscene you know right away that the name of the game is 'taking the action to the limits of extreme' in a manner you only really get out of the most bombastic anime. Wukong and Erlang, themselves inspirations for some of the most iconic anime rivalries out there, literally fly through the air propelled by the the force of their colliding staves- like a Wuxia movie, only with stunts that are animated and therefore don't feel stiff and on wires. The gigantic scale of the Heavenly Kings leering down on the battle are just the cherry atop the cake. And you know what- that isn't even the best that the game has to offer.

Action games that can transfer the energy and excitement into both their gameplay and their storytelling are far and few between- and off the top of my head I can only really think of Devil May Cry from 3 onwards as a definitive comparison. In those hands you get the kind of set-piece moments that hang around in your nogging for months even years after in fond reminiscence- and that is by no means an easy feat to achieve. Particularly in gaming- big set pieces can be so very difficult to make land as well as they did on the paper when first conceived- and maybe it's the years worth of those pretenders and attempters that made me so very unprepared for moments that would send me back to the giggling glee of childhood just like Black Myth is stuffed with.

Another contender has been my time with Final Fantasy XVI which, true to it's recent processors, is full of eye-popping spectacle moments that regularly blow you away as you sit back in sheer awe. This is actually nothing new for Square Enix or Final Fantasy, it seems this style of cinematic excitement has been their go-to since at least the days of Final Fantasy XII if not before. In fact, some describe the style of Final Fantasy as a bit desensitising in their more hyperactive throes- and to that I will say: there were moments during Final Fantasy XIII where I literally did not know what I was looking at one screen. Cluttered designs are no stranger to the halls of the Enix.

But XVI manages to bridge the gap between spectacle and gameplay which we don't always see teased. Even more so than Final Fantasy XV before it. Give us a big Kaiju fight and we'll remember it- let us partake in a Kajiu fight and we will love every second of it! There's something novel and cool about taking control of giant country-side destroying mega-forms for a brief amount of time to really stand-out through an otherwise jam packed adventure story. And even beyond that we get to face up against the very forms of godlike power themselves- playing against the man-versus-goliath visual often. There's even some great main story boss fights against aggressive and spectacular monsters with the kind of attack sets that make you just want to zone out and appreciate the intensity of it all.

I like to call these 'Anime Bait' moments, because they do tend to cater to the standards of excessive maximalism when it comes to action set pieces that Anime champions. A design standard of 'if I can imagine the coolest still frame moments for a conflict, then all I need to do is transition to those moments as smoothly as possible to get cinematic signatures'- and it proposes the kind of thrill-based eccentricity only really successfully catered to by animation. We're talking set-pieces that are all about embodying something primal, from pure crackling energy to effortless weightless grace to dying beauty and birthing monstrosity: these are the moments that memories are made of.

And I want more of them. Yes I do, I love this times. More than any action movie, no matter how expensive the budget- these are the kinds of visuals that speak "big budget blockbuster" to me. The only case in which such features don't tick off my 'possible embezzlement' alarms. 'Anime-bait' may sound vapid, and some times it can totally be, but even in their most infantile and blunt- the best anime astound in the understanding and manipulation of visual art- much more so than any other genre in the medium. Matching that in the 3D realm is that step beyond the pale that video games can trail, and modern AAA games lacking that can of visual excellence just don't sell it to me anymore. So for the next $70 'premium' title I see on the shelves, those are the kind of visuals I'm going to be on the hunt for. Like a true Anime weeb. 

The forbidden remake

 

Anticipation is a potent spell. This magic is known well to any marketing executive across the planet- it's their very reason for being- to deftly place the pellets that lead an audience to "ohh" and "ahh", ideally over a promise not spoken. Otherwise I consider marketers little more than glorified showgirls, putting up lavish displays of actual achievements. No, it's those that conjure tapestries from mist and rumour from direction which earn my respect. Anyone can make a great looking game shine if they have enough pool, only a talented marketer can sell the essence of a game on whispers and hype. Of course at some point the world become receptive to their techniques and then the conversation changes. No longer do we assume the unspoken is unbidden- because now what is unsaid must be charged! Why not speak of a much requested product. Because you make it in secret of course!

And this way of thinking doesn't stem from nothing, mind you- we have precedent. Hollow Knight Silksong fans have been led by the neck for years on the promise of a sequel that seemingly will never be made. Each passing day expanding the gulf between anticipation and deliverance. Then we have the Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic Remake which entered horrific production troubles but all behind the scenes away from any official word. Just recently we heard that whoever caught the hot-potato of development responsibilities promises with their pinky out that it's still being worked on- trust! And let us not forget about Beyond Good and Evil 2- a game delayed so horrifically long that every interesting idea it once presented has been outstripped by various other titles across the two console generators since. We used to dangled promises from the abyss.

Which is why I can presume there is an inexplicably movement out there utterly convinced of the single most unbelievable production ever- the secret development of a Bloodborne Remake/Remaster from the Sony devs. Now of course, Bloodborne is a much beloved Souls game that is considered to be among the best by those who had the fortune enough to play it during that original release for the PS4. But seeing as the game has never once been ported to newer platforms, nor to PC, nor patched to run above 30 frames per second- it might seem as though the franchise has been abandoned by any and all. But don't tell that to the faithful. They'll call you a liar and forge forward with the belief of madmen- emboldened by the viscous, saccharine syrup called 'Anticipation'.

It doesn't matter that Sony have rather aggressively avoided maintaining anything related to Bloodborne as part of their image unless they're really pulling for scraps, such as for Astrobot. It doesn't matter that the literal creators of the game themselves, FromSoft, claim to not have any control over the franchise and what happens to it. It doesn't matter that Sony's goto remake developing studio, Bluepoint Games, are currently wrapped up on what they insist is an original title; (and they aren't really of the size to be multi-tasking) people will accuse them of making Bloodborne 2 if it'll aid the anticipation! (Which is utter nonsense; who would be insane enough to make a sequel to a FromSoft game without Fromsoft? Madness!)

At this point people are willing to conjure any reality imaginable, just so long as within that fantasy space they have a semi-modern release of Bloodborne to keep them busy- but Playstation's hold of the franchise in a limbo state seems less like 'playing with anticipation' and more like 'fumbling the bag.' What I think truly has Playstation's nuts in a vice is their simply insatiable thirst to ruin the playability of their ports in order to squeeze out pointless subscriber numbers that they can flaunt for investors. So why haven't we got a Bloodborne port yet? Because Playstation are on a totally different wave than we think they are right now.

You'd think this is all a business and it's about making money- so just give us our port and make that bread- but whilst that makes sense to literally anyone else within this spinning globe of ours- Sony want something else. They're not just putting out games to make a buck, they're putting out investments on PC to spruce up their numbers. Forcing players to sign up to PSN for literally no benefit- sometimes even lying about 'moderation' or 'user experience' to secure their bag and then making off with your information. In some places that makes these products straight up impossible to buy because of no PSN coverage- in England that means that Sony are literally scoping for our damn Passports so that for their next hack our country can see a handy spike in identity thefts- thanks for that one! And for everyone else this adds an 'always online' functionality to otherwise entirely single player games that Sony have no right messing with.

Bloodborne, on the otherhand, is this antiquated little niche title that didn't even sell gangbusters when it originally released and would struggle under the weight of forced online requirements. (Even though all FromSoft games have some form of optional online anyway.) It just doesn't slide in neatly enough with Sony's image to warrant doing. Does it matter that they've been hassled about it forever at this point? How about the fact that Souls-Like's have ballooned into big business? Well... maybe they would have considered changing their view if the Demon Souls remake had taken off- but whether due to poor PS5 sales or just general disinterest; that didn't pan out too well either. More and more, as they rise, the bottom line is really starting to form the heart of Sony.

It's just a shame how Sony grew from this allusion to player first attitudes into this voracious beast that everyone has to struggle against in order to get the basic most morsel of food. That's what happens when you give a studio no competitors, allowing their greed instincts to take over. And Bloodborne fans join the ranks of us Silksong clowns, beating our head against our computer screens every big event praying for an impossibility out of the cold husks we call companies. It's a self defeating circle of embarrassment. 

   

The final word on Shattered Space

 

Now the reason I struggled so much with getting through Shattered Space after the first few hours of genuine promise that I was really excited for was not because the content was horrible- it was actually the crushing realisation that Shattered Space might have been the single least ambitious pieces of DLC content that Bethesda have put out since Oblivion- and it is galling to see them bold face call this great high quality content worthy of the fee they charge. It's almost as though we're watching a delusional man with a missing limb swear-down that he is completely uninjured as the blood literally cascades out of the giant whole in his body. You can expect this to go on for years until Starfield is behind them before Bethesda will admit they didn't maybe perform to their best- and by then it will obviously be too late. Take it from Fallout 76- they react like a cocky anime villain after the protagonist's music starts swelling: overconfidently and not effectively enough.

Shattered Space felt like cut content with a little bit more on the package, a definite break from the rules that founded their least interesting modern game- procedural generation and small content pockets, but lacking in any overall purpose to define it's existence. Not that purpose is a must-have for every single questline in any wandering Bethesda game but for a major DLC in a recent struggling release that seems like a huge omission! Take us back to Fallout 4- their DLC's both attempted to address a vertical of the gameplay experience. Far Harbour was an answer to those that found Fallout 4's roleplaying options severely lacking, Nuka World was an answer to those that thought there wasn't enough evil play options- therefor Raider-cosplay DLC! And Shattered Space... was to answer those that found procedural generation lacklustre? Is that really all it tries to do?

Okay so sure, that's a purpose no matter how you cut it- but does that really add the gameplay formula? I'll admit- I actually enjoyed seeing the sights of... the new location who's name I can't remember and won't look up: I liked walking about and seeing what was there- even if none of it was exactly Bethesda at their A-game of world building; despite the relatively constricted space they had to work with. (Remember when 'Shivering Isles' did the same and managed to contain some of Bethesda's best world building?) Shattered Space doesn't really achieve the same level of quality, nor the level of scale of a traditional Bethesda game- so it just goes to demonstrate a direction that Bethesda could have gone in if they decided to put a bit more of themselves into creating their worlds and trusted less to the generation machine. Which just makes me feel sad because they didn't.

What about arguably their best title- Skyrim? Heathfire introduced constructable player housing that fed into the simulation loving audience, Dawnguard played into their alternative playstyles and made Vampires the most interesting they'd ever been in the franchise, Dragonborn expanded the adventure- Dragonborn abilities and played to nostalgia. All of these felt like honestly directed experiences with a direction and a goal- I'd even extend the same virtue to Starfield itself- though I feel the direction might have not perhaps hit everything it wanted to. Shattered Space, predominately, feels like content for the sake of content. Like you might get in a live service where a land expansion is mandated for this year even though no one really has an inspired idea on what they want to do with it- that's Shattered Space in a nutshell.

And I think it's apparent even in the name. 'Shattered Space'? Evocative, but empty in the face of context. 'Shattered' is clearly suppose to refer to the incident that befell the the Va'ruun which ended up breaking reality around them and seeping in creatures from some other form of reality into this one. (Don't get excited, this isn't Star Trek. They're just mindless teleporting bugs- no creative imagination required.) As for Space... where? What does this have to do with space? The DLC is rather pointedly landlocked throughout it's duration. With a title like that you would expect some kind of implicit shift to the foundations of the normal Starfield tries to set- that of Space Travel. Something about that has become 'Shattered'- it's wrong, broken and fits together differently now. But what we got feels a bit more like content designed to fit the title rather than a title conceived to label the content. Does that make sense?

Perhaps the enemy design best highlights the sheer lack of heart here- because outside of the teleporting bugs which are fine- not scary like the team tried to build up- they're just fine. We also get humanoid void enemies. Their thing? They shoot and they teleport. Kind of like the Starborn then? Eerily like the Starborn. Not quite. See, these guys are treated like infantry and so you'll come across them in chunks, and they seem to have basic grunt AI which means they charge you- constantly. So yes, the flagship new enemy of Shattered Space are basic grunts with a blue ghost effect slapped on them and the ability to teleport behind you- which they spam endlessly. How does that sound to you? Fun? Honestly, it's a bit annoying. And it becomes more frustrating the higher you attune their deeply unbalanced difficulty scales. At basic 'Extreme', which is one below the highest setting, you feel like you're beta-testing a broken mod from a first year game designer. I feel like how I imagine the testers for 'Fallout: The Frontier' felt- like my brain was melting along with my patience.

Need I even bring up comparisons? The new lord Vampires from Dawngaurd with their crazy cool design, new abilities and an entire league of smaller mob redesigns to buff up their faction. Alongside the creepy Chaurus Hunters. And the entirety of the Forgotten Vale with it's unique Fauna? Shattered Isles entirely unique enemy set (with a lot of reskins, to be fair- but that was back in 2006.) I know I'm delving deep into 'petty' here but it's the only way I can try and identify all the ways in which this one DLC from Bethesda has totally shattered my belief that there is a company I recognise in modern Bethesda. But there has to be, right? There haven't been that many gigantic staff overhauls- the creative powerhouses are still there, aren't they? So what are they doing?

It isn't a total disaster. The beginning mission for Shattered Space is fine, and the finale is actually uniquely cool. One of their better faction finales. But that is pretty much all it was. A fun start, a cool end and a middle so utterly bland I could not tell you what happened if you held me at gunpoint. Terribly boring characters, a script begging for rewrites and cuts, mostly uninspired quest design, (the dam one was alright) and- of course- horrifically short. Vague consequences that are hinted at but displayed nowhere. Shattered Space was the worst it could have been- a total waste of time. For me and Bethesda. And that's all I have to say on it- and it's probably the last I'll think of it too.

The paradox of Paradox

 

So oft do we discuss the machinations of the titans of our industry it can sometimes escape mind that the backbone of gaming is more commonly everything but. The indies, the AA's- those who entreat the niches of our niche and not just the big crowd seekers that seek the every expanding splash. And admits them there is none that I am coming to respect ever more in my advancing years than Paradox- a publisher who exists to squirm annoying in the face of those that insist gaming is and always has been solely for children. (Yes, I read that Metro article- inflammatory and reductive though it was.) Theirs has been the realm of 4X tactics games, Simulation titles, city builders and maybe even a life sim if we lived on a different timeline. But alas- that particular cancellation is the topic of today.

Life by You was the topic of many a thought piece not that long following their rather sudden cancellation just a few short weeks before the supposed launch of their Early Access- and in that void questions have sprung up as hearts sored for what they never had. Personally I saw Life By You as little more than an overly ambitious pipedream fed out of a little bit of a ropey-looking Unity project- but in hindsight I came to appreciate the spirit of what the game promised which everyone else seemed to grasp so much more readily. It wasn't about the individual quality, but having the desire to try and challenge and remake the stagnant life sim genre- wresting a monopoly out of the hands of Sims 4- a game which disappointed in scope back when it first launched- let alone to this day!

But how does a game go along the track to imminent publishing before getting pulled out from under someone like that- to such a rapid degree that even the development studio didn't expect it? Following the cancellation a lot of questions hovered around regarding the game, why it was canned- even by the developers themselves! Well, that was before they, Tectonic, were shut down by Paradox in a move which I think can only be described as 'shocking'. Then again, with the space of hindsight, I suppose Tectonic were founded with the sole goal of creating Life By You, therefore without it there's no objective reason to keep them around- but outside of objectivity it's just kind of a dismissive way to treat your studios. As though we don't already have enough systemic wrestles with self worth in this day and age- you know?

Now I think a lot of unfortunate circumstances have come crashing together for Paradox of late, creating a kind-of miasma of despair they've unfortunately fallen prey to. I'm talking about the general dissatisfaction with City Skylines 2- the complete and utter failure of Lamplighters league, (Wait, that was a Tactics title? Like X-Com style tactics? Might have to check that one out...) Oh, and then there was the split with Double Elven- creators of the cult classic 'Prison Architect' (A game I tried desperately to get into several times) causing the sequel to be delayed into eternity. This has been a bad year for the company all around- and I hate to see it because honest- at their best Paradox published titles hit the kind of itch no-one else can. Stellaris, Crusader Kings the first City Skylines- I love those games for what they are. I'd hate for their publisher to find themselves in jeopardy. 

Paradox Interactive recently went in front of their investors to be appropriately upfront about what they see as being 'the problem'. Overconfidence, in a word. The deputy CEO spins a tale about going into projects too hard, investing early in ideas that might have ended up not panning out the way they wanted them to and this feeds into a lot of problems we see effecting the industry at large. Bigger teams with longer tails end up circling the wagons more on simple tasks. We've recently been inundated with excerpts from Jason Schierer's upcoming book on Blizzard that relay similar confusions, where team members end up working on assets that had been completed by someone else months prior. Even just arguing about the direction of a game can hold of months of pay, muddy an idea or entrench viewpoints that fail to reflect the realities of the outside world. Long story short- it's tough out there for scaling up production.

For Paradox it seems they claim their confidence applied blinders, maybe something akin to the sunk cost fallacy, where ideas that really weren't working were allowed to fester because to say otherwise would be to admit having wasted time and money. That explains how a Life by You would have made it all the way to the week before launch until someone sat back and went "This game really isn't going to do well at launch". It sounds harsh, but bare in mind Paradox recently went through City Skylines 2- a game which had the entire genre-type in a chokehold during marketing only to realise as a poor shell of the original title that sought innovations in areas that few to no player really appreciated in exchange for taking liberties in places that players really cared about- such as accessible performance. Skylines still has a sore reputation in the community after years and that rubs off on the developer and the publisher- maybe Paradox saw the exact same situations approaching with Life By You.

Of course we're never going to get specifics, that would be 'unprofessional' or something- but you don't really need everything written in bold ink to figure the heart of it all. We hear about them 'trusting the devs' before realising "Everything will be worse if we keep going, so we have to stop." It seems a good guess was made by the community in the assumption that the cost required to make this game a true competitor to Sims 4 was more than the publishers realised that they could fund- and in the current state the Early Access would embarrass more than it would impress. And that's a really hard thing to see from the inside looking out, to be honest. Getting to that point requires some real introspection that can become muddied in the big picture of a team project.

Where they are right now, Paradox has really burnt up a lot of that consumer trust they had- which is significant given how much a publisher their size relies on that trust. Sure, on one hand you might argue they have a stranglehold on games of this type built to this size, but on the other- a lot of their popular titles are enfranchised. All those popular hitters I named are years old supported by infrequent DLC drops, you can't really support a growing publisher off of that. You need new games that people buy, expanded IPs, eggs in more baskets. But as I said for 343, recognising the problem is the first step to fixing it- and I hope Paradox really knock it out the park in the years to come because, to be honest, their a unique little star in our industry I want to see shine more.