Give him his crown.
Here we are a full day after the events of 'The Game Awards'. A show which, in the UK, streamed from 1:30 AM to 4:00. (So thanks for that Geoff.) Personally I have to admit that I really expected a more low-key show coming out this year than we actually got. Previous years were blessed with only a couple of brand new announcements and a plethora of DLC showcases, whilst this was still kind-of the case this year, the sheer volume of companies who wanted to co-opt the Game awards stage was incredible. (It's as though people started to realize that gaming makes more money than any other entertainment medium today.) Over the show we got to see brand new games, a grand reveal of two Next gen titles, a next gen console unveiling and a re-announcement that had me literally bouncing out of my seat.
Small disclaimer, there was a grand amount of noteworthy events that the team pulled off for the game Awards. So many that I cannot, feasibly, go through them all in this one blog if I expect to survive. (Yes, I know my prediction blog was 90 paragraphs long, but that almost ended me and I don't want to go through that hell again.) Luckily, this means that there will be a lot of content for me to explore in depth in the days to come, which is also fitting as that is likely when details will start to leak out about these titles, allowing for me to ensure that this blog remains as well-informed as I always aim it to be. So without further ado, let's get into the events of the day.
The show kicked off with another performance from the Game Awards Orchestra. Once again I felt that the showing wasn't as strong as the 2017 performance, which I think set the bench mark for eclectic video game medley performances, but I won't knock them for doing what they were told. (Which was sticking to music from titles that were directly related to this year's events.) After that, however, things started off very strong as we went directly into a brand new trailer for the 'Final Fantasy 7' Remake, which allowed us to get a good purview of some of new voice actors (who are really starting to grow on me) as well as the new remix of the classic FF7 Battle theme. (Which I instantly adore.) I'll get into specific details at a later date, but damn you Game awards more making me nostalgic/emotional from the first trailer!!
Things really kicked off in earnest here, as we got straight into announcing the very first award already, bear in mind that this was all still happening in the pre-show. Due to the influx of advertisers and game reveals that Keighley had managed to drum up, the team didn't even have the time to revel in the usual pageantry that the Awards show likes to. The Award for best Community Support, therefore, was relegated to a quick-fire award announcement. The kind that is obviously already rehearsed, given the fact that the award recipient is always just off the camera shot and ready to come on and give a small speech the second that their name is announced. For this award, the honor went to Destiny 2, which is exactly what I predicted by-the-by. Fans just love Bungie for the way that they made the choice to split from Activision, and it was no surprise that they all showed up in force to display support for Bungie in the voting polls.
The next couple of announcements were relatively small, but that actually made it all the more special that they managed to pick up as grand a stage at the game awards. I always respect the way that Keighley's show gives a voice to the unheard, and it is one of the things that really sets the Game Awards apart from E3. That trade show is more of an advertisement for the industry, and thus you are unlikely to see any smaller titles there outside of Devolver Digital's booth. (Which is typically situated outside due to the exorbitant fee associated with renting space in the hall itself.) Although one might not think of a title like Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 as small, the fact that all we saw out of it was a character DLC is the kind of small announcement that likely wouldn't see the light of day on the typical E3 stage.
What is much more commendable for the Game Awards, is the way that they go out of their way to connect viewers with small prospective developers from regions that one might never have expected them from. This is something that was quite dominant throughout the show, and yet there was only one part of these 'promos' that came attached with a actual announcement. That went to a prospective Facebook game called 'Salaam', which was envisioned by a refugee as a way of depicting the struggles of a refugee for gamers across the world. Although we personally saw little of the product, one interesting dynamic was the way in which the game's in-app purchases all went to charities that help real refugees. I.e. when you buy medicine in the game, you're also technically buying it for real folk who need it. Which is certainly a generous concept.
Next up came another big event that was relegated to a quick-fire round as the show would rather spend it's time speeding through announcements. This time the award in question was for the best score and music in gaming. An award which I predicted would go to 'Cadence of Hyrule' due to how that entire game shapes it's play around rhythmic action set to some of the most iconic music tunes of all time; The Legend of Zelda musical catalogue. Seems that I was alone in my thinking, however, as the award ended up going towards 'Death Stranding' Instead. To be fair, folk often say that the music of Death Stranding is the kind that can only really be appreciated once you play the game, so I guess I was unqualified to asses this award in the first place.
Here's a fun little side effect of being bombarded with so many announcements on the night; I can't remember what half of them actually were! Looking at my notes, I see that now was the 'World premiere' of a game called 'Maneater' and I'm racking my brain to remember what- ah. Right, so this was the title that looked like it belonged in a the bargain bucket in the best possible way. This was essentially a 'Jaws' simulator that decided to go the extra mile and allow players to turn their sharks into super powered death machines. This sort of 'silly fun' game actually looks a lot more fun than it sounds and I was pleasantly surprised with the energetic feel to the whole thing. Maybe not the kind of game for me, so to speak, but certainly a cool addition to someone's library out there.
You can tell that the team decided to relegate all the categories that they didn't care for (or couldn't feasibly get all the nominees for) into their Quick-fire segments. Point in case: the Esports categories which were all smooshed together into a whole list of 'who gives a crap'. Which isn't to say that I didn't bother to make my own predictions, I just put absolutely zero effort into picking them out. The best Esports Coach of the year went to 'Zonic', who's name alone justifies the award over my choice in hindsight. The Esports event of the year went to 'League of Legends', which is an absolutely travesty against taste. (How would they actually award the entire game show anyway?) Host of the year went to 'Sjokz', proving that I absolutely should not take up betting in the future, and Esports team of the year went to 'G2 Esports' because there is no justice in the world.
After that painful slog, the game awards decided to award those who stuck it out with a Game premiere for a title that no one was expecting; 'Humankind'. Just to be clear, this isn't 'Ancentors: The Humankind Odessey' and was apparently announced beforehand. (I feel like someone should sue.) The prevailing takeaway that everyone had for 'Humankind' was "This is the poor man's CIV", and honestly that was a hard feeling to shake. The entire trailer revolved around a tribe that evolved into a huge modern metropolis whilst being narrated in a decidedly more casual manner than one might expect from a Civilization title. The only noticeable difference that I managed to pick up is the way the civilizations are apparently not based on real-life societies but rather completely unique to the player. Meaning that people could design their own immortal leader for their civilization. Whether that would ultimately be enough to shake the 'Civilisation' association remains to be seen.
Our next reveal went for the good-old bait and switch, just like how last year Netherrealm cut through all the festivities to announce Mortal Kombat 11. This one was a little more sneaky however, with the team in question actually producing a whole deceptive trailer to throw people off the scent. We see a studio-Gibli style animation sequence with VHS stylings in order to imitate the whole '80's aethetic'. Storywise, we saw a small child and their alien pet part from each other as children before being reunited in the future wherein the alien is now buff and slightly foul-mouthed. He announces that he's a 'Goddamn hero' which is then accompanied with a title screen. Eagle eared viewers might have recognized that irreverent style, but suspicions would be confirmed once that title screen ripped away in order to reveal Travis Touchdown. That's right, this was 'No More Heroes 3' all along. (Nicely handled guys!)
The last of the pre-show awards to be handed was in in a category that I was very passionate about not very long ago; Best fighting game. This award boasted nominees from all over the shop due to the fact that there weren't enough fighting games to warrant a full list. This left us in the embarrassing scenario wherein we had to nominate 'Jump Force' in order to get the candidate number up to 4, which is so damn insulting to all the other games that were actually made with same quality assurance in mind. Be that as it may, at least the award itself went to the only title that could feasibly win it, Super Smash Bros Ultimate. (Which was my prediction, once again.)
At this point the show kicked off in earnest as we got to see that Orchestral performance that I mentioned earlier. To be fair, I may not have enjoyed this performance as much as previous years, but that doesn't mean it wasn't any good at all. 'Chvrches' came up on stage to perform a heavily 'Death Stranding' themed show with one of the key songs from the game. (I'm told.) So I didn't like the song in question, having no context to tie it too, but I will admit that it was pretty cool from a practical level, particularly in the way that they simulated 'rain' on stage and the singer went the extra mile of decorating her eyes with the 'black substance' that we see on 'The Soldier' from 'Death Stranding'.
Finally the show reached the stage that they were allowed to devote the actual stage to announcing awards, and just in time for the 'Best Narrative of the year' award. This one was hosted by the first big guest of the night, famous screenwriter Johnathon Nolan, known for his work on movies like 'Momento' and 'The Dark Knight triology' and shows like 'Westworld'. He was surprisingly complimentary to the gaming medium, considering I don't believe he has ever worked on a game himself. (I can't be bothered to do a quick IMDB search, so I could be wrong.) He shared how he believes that the best narratives of the modern world often debut in the video gaming world, and even mentioned the way that gaming influenced 'Westworld' and name dropped one of my favourite game characters of all time, Elizabeth, in reference to their Westworld star: Dolores'. Oh, and the award went to 'Disco Elysium', meaning I was wrong and I definitely have to play this game. (Okay, I get it.)
The next event was a surprise unlike any other, as Geoff managed to snag one of the biggest reveals of the year. We saw a trailer that had absolutely everyone guessing with the way that it shifted from dreamlike visuals to recognizable characters like Master Chief. Only then did it all come together, this wasn't a 'game' at all, but the debut of 'Project Scarlett', the next-gen Xbox system that no one had seen yet. Not only did we get a look at the actual box, which looked like a desktop computer, but we got to see the name that would presumably accompany the console. The 'Xbox Series X'. (Personally, I feel that's a couple too many X's for me.) This surprise reveal was followed up by a beautiful look at a title being made specifically for 'Series X'; 'Hellblade 2: Senua's Saga'. It's fair to say, the fidelity was high enough that folk in chat honestly thought this was a live-action trailer for a good portion of it. (That's some darn high praise.)
After a bombshell like that, it makes sense for the show to wind down with a whole bunch of smaller announcements. One of which was Mortal Kombat 11's newest DLC, which bought back a fan favourite character into the mix, Joker from the DC universe. (Although the VO was certainly odd for this version of the Clown Prince of crime, and I can't quite put my finger on exactly 'why' just yet.) There was also a quick showcase of the 'Expedidtions' DLC for 'Control', which looked to add a whole bunch of challenge scenarios to the game. (Which is sure to annoy the crowd who remember the cliffhanger that the main story left on.) And the awards quickly ran through the E-sports player of the year; (as announced by everyone's favourite walking embarrassment, Ninja) Bugha. Yes, I guessed him too. Bow down before my predictive might.
The next premier was one that particularly tickled me for how comparatively low key it was when compared to it's competitor. 'Godfall' is a title that was remarkable in it's ability to leave very little in the way of an 'impression' upon the viewer upon first viewing. It was your typical showcase of a variety of hero-looking folk in excessively spiky and over-detailed armour wielding swords that just seem ungainly. The scene then moves onto a giant Hydra on top of a tower that they presumably are prepared to tackle, before fading to a title screen. So far so forgettable, right? Except right there, in the corner of the screen and easy to miss, was the logo for PS5. It was so low key, in fact, the Geoff had to point it out himself in order to keep people excited. (At least it's a more sensible title than 'Series X')
The next part of the ceremonies was dedicated to three award announcements that were all handled in the 'quick-fire' style that they love so much. Best Audio design was completely stolen from RE2 and handed to 'Call of Duty: Modern Warfare', an alright game but one that doesn't wield it's sound design like a weapon in the manner that Capcom did. Best Strategy Game went to my personal pick, 'Fire Emblem: Three Houses', a well deserved win. And content creator of the year went to 'Shroud, just like I predicted, because the Game Awards weren't woke enough to nominate the actual biggest gaming channel of the year, Pewdiepie. (He literally got the most views of any channel on Youtube, you can't just ignore that.)
Once more we were gifted a 'World Premier', this time by the same team behind a particular darling of the RPG world; Octopath Traveller. That was a title that was heavily commended for it's incredible visual flair, endearing characters and gripping narrative; so any new RPG title from them was sure to be well received. Initial reactions to this reveal were similarly positive as folk commended the graphical style and wondered if this was the long awaited sequel to the DS classic; Bravely Default. Which, funnily enough, it actually was. Bravely Default 2 (Which I guess is a sequel to the 2013 original and not the 2015 'Bravely Second') will be another Square Enix RPG and Nintendo Exclusive due for 2020.
A fan favourite company stole the show from here, as Warframe's community lead (Who is affectionately known as 'Spacemom' amidst the fandom) came to announce the release of the expansion that they had teased earlier that E3, 'Empyrean'. This is the expansion that would allow for real-time space ship navigation and combat through a manner that is honestly remarkable to behold for a free-to-play title. (If only I actually liked ninjas, then I might actually be into this title.) 'Spacemom' managed to steal the wind out of the Game Awards' sails by announcing that this expansion was out that very moment, at least on PC, which I'm sure cost the event a few thousand viewers in the excitement.
The next couple announcements were very niche titles that one would either become immediately enamoured by or find ultimately boring. There was the latest 'Magic: The gathering' CG trailer, which I welcome purely so that I can stop seeing that same melodramatic trailer from last year everytime there's an ad on YouTube. Only, this trailer is every bit as melodramatic in a way that it particularly eye-rolling when you have no idea who any of the characters are. The other title was a bit more vague, as we saw a fellow alone in the woods with, what sounds like, a camera. Most immediately sighed and said "Oh god, we're getting another 'Blair Witch' game already!?", However, this was actually an incredibly vague title called 'Prologue' which is touted as a game from 'Playerunkown', which is sure to have some people scratching their heads. I'm not sure what to expect from that team, but I'm intrigued enough to keep an open mind.
The next award up for grabs was Best art Direction of the year, which is a section that featured more than a few indie titles that revolved around their peculiar art styles. I remember noting, at the time, how I felt such an award was owed to 'Sayonara: Wild Hearts' before concluding that is should likely go towards the remake of 'Link's Awakening'. Seems I was wrong on both accounts as the award ended up going towards 'Control', which was a title that I had completely discounted. In hindsight, I can certainly see where the title gets some it's love in this department, due to the weird stylings and visual approach, although I still think that 'Wild Hearts' had 'Control' beat in the 'outlandish' category. Still unsure how I feel about this one.
Fortnite's Epic games took to the stage next to showcase their relationship with Disney once more, through their upcoming Star Wars event, in which a small scene from 'Rise of Skywalker' would be shown ingame at the movie theatre. (Seems like the perfect way to line up a bunch of people for a good old-fashioned rocket launcher strafe, but then that's just me.) Epic's representative also took time to express how they want to make Fortnite a nexus title for 'all IPs' to work alongside; basically admitting that they have a lot of money but want all the money. I give Fortnite a hard time, but I guess this event is kind of a cool way to drum up excitement. Also, it was cool to see J.J. Abrams come on screen to big up the whole affair, even if it all did stink of corporate. (Put me down as 'not coming' for this event.)
I was actually quite surprised with how this next Premiere went over so many people's heads. This was a sequel to a small Steam early access title that became quite popular over it's years in development; The Forest. The game basically revolved around attempting to survive in the wilds after a plane crash whilst being besieged by an island that proved to be ever more weird than you initially thought the further that you go in. This new title 'Sons of the Forest', seemed to improve upon the fidelity of that first title immensely, to the point where even I had trouble picking up that this title was even related to the first game. Of course, only time will tell if that trailer is even remotely indicative of the final game product.
From here came an announcement that had actually been rumored for a number of months leading up to this point. You see, League of legends has remained one of the biggest online games of all time with some of the most indepth and varied lore of any online game despite only having one actual game to it's name. This was a trend that was broken at the game Awards wherein Riot Game announced their very first extended universe League game, a single player title that goes by the name 'The Ruined king'. It's unclear, as of yet, what sort of game this will ultimately end up being, but seeing as how I never liked the whole 'MOBA' game type, I'm interested enough to devote some attention to this alternative foot into LOL lore.
After that the ugly commercial side of the Game Awards reared it's, sadly necessary, head with the debut of two unwelcome adverts. The first featured Margo Robbie in her ridiculously exaggerated Harley Quinn voice, performing a mildly unfunny skit before the reveal of a brand new teaser for 'Birds of Prey'. I have no idea what that movie has to do with the gaming space, and thus am mildly perturbed by the whole affair. Then came the first in a series of Adverts directly aimed at the 'Vaping' culture, with intent to kill. Personally, I realized that the concept of 'Vaping' had got a bad rap this year, but I had no idea that things had gotten to the point where advocacy groups were forming campaigns on the matter. I mean, I've heard of a few vaping relating deaths but I was under the impression that they were down to bad vape juice rather than the act itself. Whatever, I don't vape so none of this effects be anyway, move on.
Next up came a look-in from that one title that's on everyone's 'most anticipated game' list; Cyberpunk 2077. I knew that they wouldn't miss the chance to advertise on the last big gaming show before their release, and I was right, although we didn't actually get a gameplay trailer like I was expecting. Instead CDPR opted to put together a showcase video boasting about the plethora of talented artists who were willing to work on the game and bring their own flavour to this title. (For which the soundtrack is said to be entirely Original content, by-the-by.) This was followed by a cyber-punky performance by Grimes, who managed to drag her boyfriend Elon Musk to the show, so that's another famous face that Geoff Keighley can tick off on his 'collect 'em all' quest.
Next up, one of the nominees for best performance, Norman Reedus, took to the stage in order to host the award for Best Action Game of the year. This was a decision that I actually agonized over for a while as I switched between the brilliantly cinematic action of Devil May Cry 5 and the intense immersive environments of 'Metro Exodus'. In the end my own personal preferences leaned me towards the latter and that cost me the 'told you so' point here as DMC ended up winning. I'm not too peeved about this one, as I feel that both titles were worthy of the award for entirely separate merits. I only lament that the fantastic 'Metro' franchise couldn't get the recognition that it deserved.
Back to the premiers for the time being, as we got to take a look at the tonally confused trailer for 'Dungeons & Dragons: Dark Alliance'. A title that the developers described as being created to "Put the 'action' back into 'action adventure RPG'". If that means out-of-place rock music, ugly head-tracking camera shots and a reveal that viewers charitably described as 'crap Vermintide', then I suppose they're on the right track. We also got to see Respawn embarrass themselves and Roger Craig Smith with a cringe-worthy Christmas event announcement for Apex Legends and our bi-annual look at the still-stunning 'Ori and the Will of the Wisps'. Still looks great guys, now you're just got to bring it out!
Next came the announcement for 'Games with Impact' as announced by Beaker and Honeydew from The Muppets. (Still better than when 'Crash Bandicoot' turned up last year.) This was a title that I was a little bit dismissive off last blog, a fact that the Muppets made me feel particularly bad for this year as they announced that the award would be awarded for 'Progressive and inspirational' game making. (So I'll admit I was a little grumpy last time around and apologize.) This award did not end up going to 'Sea of Solitude' like I predicted, but to 'Gris'. A title which I guess is equally as deserving, even if I think 'Sea of Solitude' did it better.
The next award was one that I found particularly amusing given the fact that every title was published by Nintendo. Best Family game of the year boasted such contestants as 'Super Mario Maker 2' and 'Ring Fit adventure', proving that Nintendo is completely unmatched when it comes to supplying the family market. Even Geoff Keighley had a little laugh when it came to this award as he joked about how he "Liked Nintendo's chances for this one." Unfortunately, the title ended up going to 'Luigi's Mansion 3' despite how that game features a truly abominable co-op mode. (Something you'd think would be detrimental in a category built for 'family' games.)
After that there was the award that had to combine sports and racing games due to the lack of decent sports games this year. Anyone could tell that there was no way the sports titles would win as, despite Fifa's dominate numbers this year, none of the folk who settled with FIFA could muster the mental capacity it took to vote online. (Okay, I'm being mean now, I should move on.) This was really a race against the racing titles (see what I did there?) and I felt that it should go to anyone other than Crash Team Racing, due to their abominable polices when it comes to microtransactions. Of course, that means that Crash Team Racing was the only game that ever could win, and they did. (Once again, there is no justice in the world.)
Our next award was awarded in an equally as contentious category; Mobile gaming. For a very long while, mobile Gaming has earned a reputation for showcasing the worst of the worst when it comes to overbearing anti-consumer practises and their corrupt nature has started to leak into the AAA market in the worst possible ways. The Best Mobile game of the years award was supposed to showcase those mobile titles that buck the trend to deliver a worthwhile experience to the player without gouging them for everything they're worth first. And yet, 'Call of Duty mobile' ended up securing the award for it's trophy cabinet over actually innovative and intriguing titles like 'Sayonara: Wild Hearts'. Truly a shame to mobile gaming everywhere.
Working as something of a palette cleanser, the next premiere involved a whole bevy of key words that succeeded in piquing my interest. Devolver Digital, the publisher renowned for supporting creative and cool indie products, The co-creators of 'Prey' and 'Dishonored', two fantastic stealth games, and RPG, the best genre. Bring all those together and you get the top down adventure title 'Weird West', that looks to capitalize on mythology and camp side stories to depict a supernatural cowboy tale. Needless to say, this is definitely a title that I'll be keeping my eye on in the coming months.
Next up was a CG Premiere that did very little in explaining what the actual game was. Once again the folk behind 'Magic: The Gathering' proved their talent at constructing elaborate looking trailers with no substance behind them. Luckily, there was a press release around about the same time clearing things up so I could confirm that this title 'Magic Legends', is actually an upcoming MMO set in the 'Magic' universe. Because that's what we need, another MMO in a market full of MMO's and 'Live-service-MMO-wannabes'. I won't hold me breath for this title turning into anything particularly special.
Once more the age of adverts descended upon us and were greeted by the absolute worst things that humanity has to offer the world. Point in case; that absolutely abominable Google Stadia advert from a couple of weeks back made an appearance. Regardless of being an incredibly hard watch, which is something I very much expect from any gaming-related advert nowadays, the advert itself is woefully misinformed and straight up lies to people on some points. Namely, the fact that Google Stadia runs 4k 60fps, which is something that the actual service does not deliver for the majority of its newer titles. I could dedicate the rest of this blog to picking apart this advert, but I don't want to give it the time of day.
Back to announcements, we received an announcement about one title that is exclusive to the VR realm, and that would be; 'Path of the Warrior'. This trailer started off by mimicking the 'Streets of rage' pixellated style in a bar room brawl, before devolving into a much more unappealing cartoony visage as the perspective shifted form 2D beat 'em up to first-person action. Despite my hang-ups on visual design, I will admit that the title looked pretty fun, especially in the way that the environment played into the fighting, like how the player could pick up and chuck a board dart at his foes. Whether this is an actual full-blown game or just another VR 'proof in concept' remains to be seen once reviews start popping up. (Which should be soon as the game just launched.)
Back we go to the awards part of the event as we moved onwards to Best multiplayer game of the year. This was a selection that had a variety of high-profile titles, all of which were some form of a 'live service'. Once again, I allowed by distaste for developer antics cloud my judgment here, as I gave my prediction to Borderlands 3, figuring it was a title that did well enough with critics to earn a commendation. What I failed to account for was the fact that Apex Legends caused quite a storm when it launched and secured a decent fan base ever since then, regardless of their greedy machinations in the time in-between. Of course, 'Apex Legends' got the title.
I needn't remain upset, however, for the next reveal was of a title that has earned sufficient hubbub in the last year; Ghost of Tsushima. This was a title that boasted an enviable setting, feudal Japan, an exciting premise, grounded samurai combat, and a mouth watering visual appeal. The game practically oozed with it's classic Japanese film inspirations from the field of falling grass lilies from 'Hero' to the 'epic showdown' appeal of 'Enter the Dragon'. It doesn't just 'pay homage' to these titans either, nor does it decide to do some ropey send-up, rather it stands proud as it's own incredibly exciting looking product. One thing in particular I noticed was the way in which the model of the sword cut into people was actually outstandingly stable. (a credit that I don't often award for an impressive feat that I don't often see.) This game is certainly one to watch in the next year.
A couple more 'premiere's came up next, although one of these titles was most definitely announced all the way back in E3. 'Gears Tactics' is the title through which 'Gears of War' which to expand their series into the genre of tactical turn based combat, a genre that I whole heartedly support. It was a bit strange seeing that familiar Gears action taken at a much slower pace, but I know how much more it will lend to the intense reverberance of each decision and so I wasn't put off. We also got a quick glance at what appears to be a competitive action title called 'Raraka Bladepoint' which was created by a studio from China. (Yes, the chat immediately devolved into anti-China sentiments once this game came up.) This was a game that looked similar to 'Ghost of Tsushima' in concept, only in a more stylized and fantastical manner. Despite the country of it's origin, I found myself intrigued.
Back to the awards of the night and we found ourselves met with a decidedly divisive choice in best Ongoing game. Typically this award goes to the game which made the most sweeping change to it's overall structure in that year as it is a sign of the health of that game and those developer's willingness to take risks. (Providing that those updates don't break everything, Battlefield and Fallout 76.) With this in mind, I opted for Final Fantasy XIV knowing of their incredibly well-received shadow bringers update which reintroduced that most beloved of Final Fantasy Story points; a warrior of light. But this is a reward that could have just as easily have gone to Destiny 2, for their switch to free-to-play, or the game that it did ultimately go to; Fortnite, for their 'Chapter 2' update.
The next premier was 'affectionately' labelled 'Furry Fortnite' by fans at the time due to the way it showcased a army of obnoxious bunny rabbits waving guns at each other with blaring music over it all. Unfortunately, that incredibly arresting introduction was only the 'bait-and-switch' for a really dull looking military shooter called '9 to 5'. (The Dolly Parton video game is finally becoming a reality!) The Developer elaborated a little bit by explaining that this game would be a tactical online shooter (so 'Rainbow: Six Seige') built around the 'increadibly original' concept of a world that has become so entrenched in cooperate influence that warfighting has become an everyday job. (Hence the '9 to 5' title.) Let's just hope these developers never find out about 'Borderlands', 'The Outer Worlds', or 'Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots', or they'll be really put out.
The next three awards were quickly rushed through in another quick-fire segment. Which is not the kind of treatment that I was expecting for one category in particular. The Best Esports award ended up going to 'League of Legends' for any number of reasons that I don't understand, never played the game and never will. Best VR game of the year was one I was really interested in, wherever or not the award would end up going towards the title that was of higher quality or the one with more a cultural impact. Things seems to land in the latter camp (Which was where my prediction laid, incidentally) as 'Beat Saber' won the award. Much to my shock, however, the final quick-fire award was dedicated to 'Best Performance', which is an award that typically invoked much fanfare from the crowd. My working theory as to why it was demoted stems from the assumption that they perhaps couldn't lock in some of the actors that were nominated, such as he who won; Mads Milkeson. (My choice.)
Then came the award that had been constantly teased throughout the night and was the only award which I wasn't aware about before the show. I'm talking, of course, about the 'Player's choice' which I can only presume would be rewarded to the title that fans feel is the best the year has to offer. But then, isn't that what the entire voting process is for. Which also brings into question the job of all the reviewer outlets that sign up to the game awards. I don't quiet understand this award, nor it's implications, but I guess that fact that it ended up going to 'Fire Emblem: Three Houses' is commendable enough.
The final musical performance of the night (Excluding the annual 'game of the year medley') was one that Geoff Keighley clearly wanted to tick off of his personal bucket list. And so we all received a performance by Green Day as they shot through a couple of their songs and managed to get the crowd on their feet. (Quite the achievement, I must admit.) Green Day also managed to prove themselves rather unjustly foul-mouthed, which really highlighted the lack of f-bombs that I heard compared to previous years. I even remember hearing one Dev actively mention watching their language. Is Geoff attempting to clean up the awards to bring in more advertisers? Big if true. Oh, and Green Day were here because their newest album was releasing on Beat Saber via an impending song pack. So there's your gaming connection, folks.
Our next premiere was an intriguing title from Amazon Game Studios that seemed to deftly defy common classification. First we saw Romans rendered in such high quality that people immediately assumed it was Ryse 2, then we saw zombie Romans fighting 17th century soldiers in a manner that invoked For Honor 2, and then we saw typical English adventurer/colonizer garb that made us all think of Greedfall. This title was obviously none of them, but a brand new title called 'New World' that promises to be Amazon's first MMO. (Yikes, that's one heck of an undertaking there for your first big budget game. Good luck, guys.)
For the next slate of awards Reggie Fils-Aimé returned, fresh from retirement, to read out a slate of games related to the indie scene. Reggie expressed his personal love for the Indie scene, and expressed how they are the backbone of the industry, a sentiment with which I agree. The Fresh Indie Game award, which is an award delivered to a Studio rather than an game, went to 'ZA / UM' for Disco Elysium, whilst best independent game went to...Disco Elysium. (Goddamn, just what am I missing out on having not played this game?) That team received so many awards tonight that they reached the point where their acceptance speech became little more than 'Thank you'. What more is there to say, honestly.
Once more we brushed past another terrible Stadia advert, this one Christmas themed. Although it was interesting to note that they amended their language in this one by telling us that Stadia offers resolutions 'up to' 4k 60fps. (Way to cover your ass there, Google.) This was followed by two Premieres, one covering a second League of Legends game on it's way; 'Convergence', (Wow those guys are really working at pumping those out, huh.) and Surgeon Simulator 2. The long awaited (?) sequel to the YouTube darling game about having terrible control of your hands and attempting to perform surgery. Only this one is an Epic Exclusive. Yay, for needless exclusivity!
Finally we come to the stand out moment of the night. Oh sure, 'Xbox Series X' got it's unveiling here, two MMO's were announced and we found out that A$ap Rocky is making music for Cyberpunk 2077, but there was only one announcement that had me out of my seat in disbelief. Or should I say, as Geoff did, 're-annoucement'. For right there, as the night was coming to a close, the lights dimmed as we were reintroduced into a familiar faintly-neon penned world, with a familiar voice addressing a familiar detective. This was the night that THE WOLF AMONG US 2 was bought back from the dead! I'm still in shock and cannot express my adoration, but I'll likely need an entirely separate blog to properly process this amazing announcement.
The next category is one that I described as having been made with Death Stranding in mind, and that is an assertion that I very much stand behind. Best game direction was never an award that was going to go to any of the 'tradtional' games due to it's very nature. It has to go to a title that decides to buck the trend, and so the 'Death Stranding' win here was nothing short of inevitable. Of course, the real situation of note was Kojima's acceptance speech and the way in which his translator managed to keep up with one of the longest stream of consciousness that I have ever seen. (He probably made most of it up.)
As we were coming to a close it seems that the Game Awards suddenly realized that they still had a couple bits of fluff to fill in the gap, and so they finally revealed their selection for 'Tweet of the Year'. That ended up going to the "I regret nothing" tweet which accompanied a run through the notoriously difficult Mario Marker 2 map 'World 1-1 with a twist'. there was also a little cinematic for 'The Elder Scrolls Online' which was followed by a brief teaser of next year's expansion, which promises to delve back into Skyrim.
The last world premiere ended up going to honor the two final guest hosts of the show, Michelle Rodriguez and Vin Diesel. They popped up to briefly talk about their love for the gaming scene, which was nice, whilst Vin took the time to reveal that he had seen the trailer for the upcoming 'Fast and Furious 9' (Kind of a derail there Vin, but you bought us 'Assault on Dark Athena' so I'll let you off the hook.) Together they debuted 'Fast and Furious: Crossroads', which is a game that looks... rough. Not exactly the showstopper reveal that you want to go out on.
Finally came time for the big award of the night; Ultimate Game of the Year. (Which comes accompanied with Best Action Adventure game of the year as those awards often go hand in hand.) This was the one award for which I had no inclination where things should end up beyond that 'Death Stranding' shouldn't win it. (It shouldn't have been nominated, but here we are.) You may remember how I made my case for 'Resident Evil 2' to win the award, but lo-and-behold my baby was snubbed as the award ended up going to 'Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice'. No real losers here, as both were obviously deserving titles. Still though... should have gone to RE2.
And that, in a nutshell, was the entire Game Awards night summed and wrapped up nicely. Of course, this won't be the last time that I talk about them, all those premieres that I mentioned deserve their own look-over, but I'll give myself space for them as I feel like that's when I'm at my sharpest. As for the show itself, I was rather happy with how everything turned out. I already know that some folk considered it to be boring and to them I ask "What were you expecting?" This was an Awards show, it's a miracle that we get any announcements during it at all. Plus, I'm a lot more excited about seeing the 'Series X' than I would have done if I saw it at E3, and I'm not sure why. Probably because it didn't come attached with a full list of features and a price tag, allowing us all a full 6 months of speculation. I feel that Geoff did a good job this year, and hope he keeps it up for the future, I've come to enjoy this yearly tradition a whole lot more than Christmas.
Saturday, 14 December 2019
Friday, 13 December 2019
Stadia and the struggle of establishing value
I'm still worthy!
I try to embrace the future, I really do. Growing up on the edge of the 'interconnected age', on the cusp of the technological boom years, it behooves me to do such. Around me I see countless examples of those who fail to get in line with the future, who are forced watch as it leaves them behind. All those naysayers who preach the doom of society at the hands of tech have started to ring with me less and less as the years go by. Heck, after all of my research into 'transhumanism' I've even stopped buying, the most common of critiques, that 'phone-culture' is stunting human growth. I think that it subverts that growth into something more akin to a symbiotic relationship, put I suppose that falls down to a matter of opinion.
The reason I bring all this up is because my attempts to come in line with the flow of technology has came in conflict with the abject disgust that I've felt towards Google Stadia since it was first announced and I still can't put my finger on why. A sensible person might share my views because they dislike the idea of Google finding another outlet through which to mine personal data, by hosting your favourite hobbies and tracking your time with them. But I've already concluded that Google own my entire soul, therefore Stadia doesn't seriously concern me from that approach. (Even if it should.) Perhaps this is just the beginning of my age starting to show, before long I'll start falling out of the loop of things and griding my teeth whenever I see change. I'll morph into a middle age man pounding on the table shouting. "Why would they change math? Math is math!" Luckily, It seems that I'm not quite there yet as, if Google has their way with their own service, Stadia will not be 'the future' for very long.
Things have been rough for Google's fledgling cloud service system as of late. They received a decent amount of thrashing for the spreadsheet's worth of missing features at launch, several journalists called them out for inconsistent unplayable slowdown issues and recently it has come out that several Stadia titles don't even output at 4k 60fps, (Which is literally the key selling point of streaming your games through Google's hardware) instead they either settle with 1080 or go 1440 and make up the difference through upscaling. (An inherently flawed process for simulating 4K.) These growing pains were seen by a lot more folk then you'd commonly expect from such a niche product as, according to a 'behind the counter' way of viewing sales figures in light of Google's unwillingness to share data, Stadia's founder edition was picked up by over 100,000 individuals. (I'll be honest, that's a lot more than I was expecting.)
Management, it seems, are determined to ensure that this doesn't spoil Stadia's image and therefore are powering ahead with all of their plans for the platform regardless of the setbacks. This is what led them to airing that eye-bleedingly bad advert for the system which highlighted all the systems selling points, most of which are still not functional yet, most hilarious of all being "Stadia has the games your looking for." Which is true providing that you are only looking for 20-odd old games for which your willing to pay full price. Speaking of pricing, that has been a huge point of contention for Stadia over the past few week, (And, honestly, ever since this idea was first announced.) with customers and the the team both harbouring very different and conflicting ideas on how valuable the Stadia infrastructure actually is.
The very concept of cloud gaming, owning no physical media and streaming all of your data from a host, seems to echo the model of Netflix, and so that is what people inherently expect with a service like this. The ability to pay a monthly subscription in order to get access to a selection of video games to play, perhaps on so sort of bi-monthly rotation, with no worries about system requirements, appealed greatly to this 'subcription age' we find ourselves in. Stadia Chief Phil Harrison, however, didn't opt to go that direction and instead had Stadia charge full price for their games. In an interview with the UK games press, Harrison expressed "I don't know why it would be cheaper, The value you get from the game on Stadia means you can play it on any screen in your life - TV, PC, laptop, tablet, phone. In theory, the Stadia version of a game is going to be at the highest-possible quality of innovation and sophistication on the game engine side."
The one thing that Harrison's comments fail to take into account is, well, everything. Stadia games must all be streamed directly from the servers in order to be played, requiring a stable Internet connection in order to remain firm, such actions do strain bandwidth heavily (Internet providers still haven't stepped in to save the day) and, if you're unlucky, the latency could end up making the experience unplayable. At least with home consoles and PCs our games can be played offline if we really need to. Instead Stadia takes the power of ownership, choice and management away from the player and attempts to argue that is it worth just as much to the player.
I understand this approach, I even sympathize with it, but I can't help but see it as ultimately wrong. In their eyes, Stadia is the birth of a whole new medium of gaming and Google know for a fact that every single choice they make in regards to implementation sets the benchmark for how the tech is seen going forward. There are no full blown direct competitors to Stadia currently (Project X-cloud notwithstanding) and so people have no model to compare with and predetermine the concept's worth, so it is in the hands of Google to establish that worth. If Google were to go ahead and start selling games for a fraction of their price on other platforms then the public would instinctively brand Stadia as a budget alternative to consoles, as would publishers, disincentivising those companies from working exclusively with Google in the future. (Which is undoubtedly what the team is angling for.) So Stadia is making a big play by pricing it's content the same as other consoles, essentially announcing themselves as 'standing shoulder-to-shoudler' with consoles, even if that might hurt the initial adoption rate.
There is only one big problem that Google still has overcome in the wake of all this; bringing their core product up to snuff. If the team go ahead and convince the audience that they are buying into a premium service, only for that audience to jump in and realize that it's ramshackle and unpolished, they'll just feel like they're being lied to. (Because essentially they are.) For a good example at this, just look at all this recent controversy surrounding the latest entry to THQ's Darksider's franchise: 'Genesis'. That is a rare title which managed to launch on Stadia alongside it's physical-world counterparts, but there was one key difference between the Stadia version of the game and all the others, it costs considerably more on Stadia's storefront than on any of their competitors.
When Stadia launched it offered a certain list of helpful discounts on offer exclusively to 'pro' subscribers that ranged all the way up to 50% off for older titles.That policy does not seem to apply for new releases, however, as 'Darksiders: Genesis' is currently retailing for $39.99 on Stadia's storefront whilst on Steam, GOG and Humble you'll find it for $29.99. This means that somehow, in some world, Stadia has fooled themselves into believing that their platform is more valuable than what current consoles have to offer. THQ themselves have refused to comment on this pricing situation, passing the ball directly into Google's court, and people aren't giving those poor guys a break. If this is the sort of precedent that Stadia wants to set then they'll have to start working on conjuring up those missing features sooner rather than later before they're laughed off the marketplace. (Even more than they already are being.)
There was a time when I feared Google Stadia. Feared what it might mean for the world of gaming and digital ownership rules and modding and all those things that Google try to sweep under the rug and hope us gamers forget about. But it seems that my worries were unfounded as Google are content on murdering Stadia themselves before it has any possible chance of taking off in any significant way. Can Stadia potentially turn all this around and become the powerhouse that they always intended to be? Sure. But it would take considerable sacrifice on their part as the company would have to be prepared to operate at an initial loss. (something that I feel a brand a big as Google could easily get away with.) But until the team wake up and start making the changes that need to be made, they'll continue tripping up on their own aspiration and desperate bids to appear 'valubale'. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if this Christmas marks the first and last holiday season that Stadia sees.
I try to embrace the future, I really do. Growing up on the edge of the 'interconnected age', on the cusp of the technological boom years, it behooves me to do such. Around me I see countless examples of those who fail to get in line with the future, who are forced watch as it leaves them behind. All those naysayers who preach the doom of society at the hands of tech have started to ring with me less and less as the years go by. Heck, after all of my research into 'transhumanism' I've even stopped buying, the most common of critiques, that 'phone-culture' is stunting human growth. I think that it subverts that growth into something more akin to a symbiotic relationship, put I suppose that falls down to a matter of opinion.
The reason I bring all this up is because my attempts to come in line with the flow of technology has came in conflict with the abject disgust that I've felt towards Google Stadia since it was first announced and I still can't put my finger on why. A sensible person might share my views because they dislike the idea of Google finding another outlet through which to mine personal data, by hosting your favourite hobbies and tracking your time with them. But I've already concluded that Google own my entire soul, therefore Stadia doesn't seriously concern me from that approach. (Even if it should.) Perhaps this is just the beginning of my age starting to show, before long I'll start falling out of the loop of things and griding my teeth whenever I see change. I'll morph into a middle age man pounding on the table shouting. "Why would they change math? Math is math!" Luckily, It seems that I'm not quite there yet as, if Google has their way with their own service, Stadia will not be 'the future' for very long.
Things have been rough for Google's fledgling cloud service system as of late. They received a decent amount of thrashing for the spreadsheet's worth of missing features at launch, several journalists called them out for inconsistent unplayable slowdown issues and recently it has come out that several Stadia titles don't even output at 4k 60fps, (Which is literally the key selling point of streaming your games through Google's hardware) instead they either settle with 1080 or go 1440 and make up the difference through upscaling. (An inherently flawed process for simulating 4K.) These growing pains were seen by a lot more folk then you'd commonly expect from such a niche product as, according to a 'behind the counter' way of viewing sales figures in light of Google's unwillingness to share data, Stadia's founder edition was picked up by over 100,000 individuals. (I'll be honest, that's a lot more than I was expecting.)
Management, it seems, are determined to ensure that this doesn't spoil Stadia's image and therefore are powering ahead with all of their plans for the platform regardless of the setbacks. This is what led them to airing that eye-bleedingly bad advert for the system which highlighted all the systems selling points, most of which are still not functional yet, most hilarious of all being "Stadia has the games your looking for." Which is true providing that you are only looking for 20-odd old games for which your willing to pay full price. Speaking of pricing, that has been a huge point of contention for Stadia over the past few week, (And, honestly, ever since this idea was first announced.) with customers and the the team both harbouring very different and conflicting ideas on how valuable the Stadia infrastructure actually is.
The very concept of cloud gaming, owning no physical media and streaming all of your data from a host, seems to echo the model of Netflix, and so that is what people inherently expect with a service like this. The ability to pay a monthly subscription in order to get access to a selection of video games to play, perhaps on so sort of bi-monthly rotation, with no worries about system requirements, appealed greatly to this 'subcription age' we find ourselves in. Stadia Chief Phil Harrison, however, didn't opt to go that direction and instead had Stadia charge full price for their games. In an interview with the UK games press, Harrison expressed "I don't know why it would be cheaper, The value you get from the game on Stadia means you can play it on any screen in your life - TV, PC, laptop, tablet, phone. In theory, the Stadia version of a game is going to be at the highest-possible quality of innovation and sophistication on the game engine side."
The one thing that Harrison's comments fail to take into account is, well, everything. Stadia games must all be streamed directly from the servers in order to be played, requiring a stable Internet connection in order to remain firm, such actions do strain bandwidth heavily (Internet providers still haven't stepped in to save the day) and, if you're unlucky, the latency could end up making the experience unplayable. At least with home consoles and PCs our games can be played offline if we really need to. Instead Stadia takes the power of ownership, choice and management away from the player and attempts to argue that is it worth just as much to the player.
I understand this approach, I even sympathize with it, but I can't help but see it as ultimately wrong. In their eyes, Stadia is the birth of a whole new medium of gaming and Google know for a fact that every single choice they make in regards to implementation sets the benchmark for how the tech is seen going forward. There are no full blown direct competitors to Stadia currently (Project X-cloud notwithstanding) and so people have no model to compare with and predetermine the concept's worth, so it is in the hands of Google to establish that worth. If Google were to go ahead and start selling games for a fraction of their price on other platforms then the public would instinctively brand Stadia as a budget alternative to consoles, as would publishers, disincentivising those companies from working exclusively with Google in the future. (Which is undoubtedly what the team is angling for.) So Stadia is making a big play by pricing it's content the same as other consoles, essentially announcing themselves as 'standing shoulder-to-shoudler' with consoles, even if that might hurt the initial adoption rate.
There is only one big problem that Google still has overcome in the wake of all this; bringing their core product up to snuff. If the team go ahead and convince the audience that they are buying into a premium service, only for that audience to jump in and realize that it's ramshackle and unpolished, they'll just feel like they're being lied to. (Because essentially they are.) For a good example at this, just look at all this recent controversy surrounding the latest entry to THQ's Darksider's franchise: 'Genesis'. That is a rare title which managed to launch on Stadia alongside it's physical-world counterparts, but there was one key difference between the Stadia version of the game and all the others, it costs considerably more on Stadia's storefront than on any of their competitors.
When Stadia launched it offered a certain list of helpful discounts on offer exclusively to 'pro' subscribers that ranged all the way up to 50% off for older titles.That policy does not seem to apply for new releases, however, as 'Darksiders: Genesis' is currently retailing for $39.99 on Stadia's storefront whilst on Steam, GOG and Humble you'll find it for $29.99. This means that somehow, in some world, Stadia has fooled themselves into believing that their platform is more valuable than what current consoles have to offer. THQ themselves have refused to comment on this pricing situation, passing the ball directly into Google's court, and people aren't giving those poor guys a break. If this is the sort of precedent that Stadia wants to set then they'll have to start working on conjuring up those missing features sooner rather than later before they're laughed off the marketplace. (Even more than they already are being.)
There was a time when I feared Google Stadia. Feared what it might mean for the world of gaming and digital ownership rules and modding and all those things that Google try to sweep under the rug and hope us gamers forget about. But it seems that my worries were unfounded as Google are content on murdering Stadia themselves before it has any possible chance of taking off in any significant way. Can Stadia potentially turn all this around and become the powerhouse that they always intended to be? Sure. But it would take considerable sacrifice on their part as the company would have to be prepared to operate at an initial loss. (something that I feel a brand a big as Google could easily get away with.) But until the team wake up and start making the changes that need to be made, they'll continue tripping up on their own aspiration and desperate bids to appear 'valubale'. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if this Christmas marks the first and last holiday season that Stadia sees.
Thursday, 12 December 2019
The illusion of video games cities
Trapped in a concrete jungle
We talk about about 'environments' here in this blog, and it is for good reason. The world that the player inhabits is one of the most important aspects of creating an immersive and believable gameplay experience and a well realized world can be absolutely unforgettable. Great gameplay and storytelling are only two thirds of the equation, afterall; without a world to care about it can be hard to dedicate yourself to the narrative, requiring your gameplay to be undeniably top notch to ultimately save your product. (Darn it, 'Destiny', you've got me there!) However, there is one particular aspect of world-building (That would be the physical act of world-building rather than the story telling aspect) that proves difficult even for the most skilled developers, and that is the creation of cities.
It's no wonder why, either. The commonly recognized hierarchy of settlements labels the requirements of a large city as; housing between '300,000 and 1,000,000 citizens', and there isn't a game engine on earth that can render that many NPC's complete with AI packages. (Although that same hierarchy technically means that NYC is a 'Metropolis', so don't take it as gospel.) Even using the common tricks of game development it can be incredibly difficult to create a world space that appropriately simulates the magnitude of a city in a believable way. That being said, urban settings are just too tempting for storytellers to completely write them off, so these teams find clever ways to bring their worlds to life. Consequently, I look upon the act of digital city building as an artform worthy a quick look through in this collation list.
One of, if not the, best example of video game cities in the modern age is 'Los Santos' from 'Grand Theft Auto V' and 'San Andreas'. Based on the instantly recognizable LA skyline, 'Los Santos' is a loving recreation of 'The City of Angels' complete from 'Venice beach' all the way up 'Hollywood Boulevard'. Due to the sheer level of skill and love that Rockstar put into erecting this digital masterpiece, Someone could familiarize themselves with these streets enough to give a rough tour of the actual city. Emphasis on 'rough' however, as even in 'GTA V' the city of Los Santos is only about 1/3 of the size of the actual city. (They got all the landmarks in, but cut down on the number of postcodes.) Either way, this is still an incredibly impressive achievement from Rockstar and one can only imagine how they managed to pull off such a colossal city all the way back in 2011. In fact, the only place that seems set to beat it in terms of scale is Cyberpunk 2077's own version of LA, Night City. (More on that later.) On seventh generation consoles, GTA V features a 'cone of vision' based rendering system that generates cars and pedestrians in whatever way you're focused in order to create the illusion of there being more NPCs than there actually are. Of course, there is a safety buffer to this feature to ensure that you don't accidentally ram into a freshly spawned truck, but this was a clever way of fleshing out the far away world objects without slowing down the frame rate. On Eighth Generation consoles, however, Rockstar manage to coax out enough power to stick with a standard rendering distance set-up; assembling that mammoth-of-a-city one neighbourhood at a time.
In Bethesda's RPGs there are quite a few large settlements for player's to explore, however it's only in 'The Elder Scrolls' where we see them attempt to create a fully functional and manned city. Therefore, by putting 'Skyrim' in our sights, we can get a look at the unique way that they handle 'cities'. Using this criteria, I settled on Whiterun as my ideal case-study for Skyrim cities due to it's central location and familiarity with practically every player. (Even though it is actually the third largest city in the game.) Looking at Whiterun, we see something quite peculiar, namely how the 'city' itself only consists of about 30 residents despite being the 'travelling hub' of Skyrim. This comes from the way that Bethesda's game engine renders each and every NPC with such complex stats and AI packages that it simply isn't feasible to create a city consisting of thousands. (Giving the medieval setting, a settlement of thousands would constitute a 'city'.) Despite this glaring misstep, however, we still consider Whiterun a prosperous settlement due to the way that Bethesda bought that place to life. Firstly, the city itself is scaled so that the small number of residents is enough to make the place feel crowded (something that Bethesda dropped the ball with when they made Oblivion); Secondly, their daily routines often have the people meeting up in the same spot, (The central market, the Bannered Mare. etc.) creating more illusionary crowding; and Thirdly, every citizen is realized with their own personality and story. This goes a step beyond the lifeless 'NPC's of other games because it offers so much more narrative value out of every individual. In this way, a city of 30 can balloon in your mind into a functioning city because you believe in every single inhabitant there.
Looking back towards the late 90's, we have another incredibly iconic metropolitan locale in Final Fantasy 7's Midgar. At the time of release, January 1997, this was an incredible vision for everyone to behold especially given that it was the first time that Square had used the processing power of a disk-based system on their much-beloved RPG franchise. As such, we saw 3D models on a 3D world bought to life in the image of an industrial cyberpunk revolution of blinking lights and heavy, chocking exhaust fumes. Midgar was the dystopian, mechanical monolith slapped right in the centre of a narrative which I have described as: the best possible video game adaptation of 'Fern Gully'. With this one location proving to be so important to the overall themes (or rather, the themes of the first third of the game) it was imperative that the team nailed their attempts at realizing it. However, 3D polygonal tech was still new to the Square team (Final Fantasy 6 was still entirely 'sprite-based') and so they had to figure out a way of creating a city despite lacking the technical power to do so. This they pulled off with a collection of clever techniques that would make any aspiring film maker proud. The backgrounds, for one, would be largely rendered stills that were mostly either top-down shots to establish the packed-in nature of the city streets, or brief sweeping vista shots over the majesty of it all, nailing the presentation of the big and the small. The story, too, directed players through a variety of new locations that differed enough visually to establish a sense of different districts and having travelled a great distance between them. And finally that iconic retro-mechanical music that flowed out of every district did wonders to subconsciously bring players to the right mindspace to believe in a city called Midgar.
Seeing as how we've already mentioned CDPR, we should take a look at their first attempt at bringing a huge city to life in 'The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt's: Novigrad. This was a city that was built to be the centrepiece of the second act of this game as it would be the ideal strategic point between the two warring factions and thus a veritable hotbed of interesting activities. The player would find themselves mostly visiting tiny villages in their time throughout the game, and so Novigrad is designed to be quite the system shock once you finally get there and find that the city absolutely spans the eastern waterfront as far as the eye can see. With all the power that CDPR managed to drum up to bring this particular city to life, it's no wonder that it should prove to be one of the biggest spectacles of the age. Unfortunately, Novigrad seemed to work better from afar than it did from the inside. For some reason, Novigrad never did feel particularly 'alive' in the same sense that GTA cities do, possible because of CDPR's over-reliance on uninteractible NPC's to feel up the empty space between objectives. Sure that works well enough in Los Santos, but that is because players are forever constantly aware that they can just knock out anyone on the street that they don't like and interact with the in-built crime system. In The Witcher, should you go nuts and start offing civilians, not only are you acting in a non lore-friendly way, but the game doesn't quite know how to handle it and just sends endless guards after you until you die or get bored. Novigrad serves as an example of how video game cities can be visually impressive whilst feeling ultimately empty, teaching an important lesson on balance between content and spectacle.
Heading back to Bethesda and their other popular RPG franchise, Fallout, we have a modest selection of post-apocalyptic home steads to choose from. Unfortunately, most of Bethesda's Fallout games seem to focus on 'settlements' rather than post-apocalyptic 'societies', but there are a couple of exceptions I picked out. Fallout 4's Fenway Park (or 'Diamond City') is one such locale, but I dislike Fallout 4 so I instead want to look at 3's Rivet City. This is a settlement fashioned out of a pre-war washed up air carrier that has been irradiated to hell and cut in half, so the perfect place to call home, right? Spend any amount of time in the Capital Wasteland and you'll hear about 'Rivet City' as this well defended city of traders, which is likely enough to grab any explorer's interest. Of course, this being a Bethesda game built on a much earlier framework than Skyrim, the reality isn't quite as grand as the story, but that Bethesda formula goes into making it all work. Once again, Rivet City is a 'city' of about 30-40 residents with the majority of that number going towards the security staff, but Bethesda manage to brag that off with style. This time, the centerpiece of the town is a busy market, selling the illusion of this being a major drop-off point for travellers on the road and giving you a chance to believe in the fact that most people don't stick around. Rivet City really shines with it's layout, however, which is intentionally winding and confusing to create the atmosphere of a large living space with countless decks, rooms and shops. Once again, Bethesda have a habit of making a mountain out of a molehill. (In a good way.)
Lionhead's Fable is a series that long sought to bring a distinctive English flair to the fantasy RPG genre, to arguable success. Hence the name of the region, Albion, which is an old poetic name for the British isles that is not so commonly used today. Inevitably, this meant that the team would try their hand at parodying the industrial revolution at some point, and they did exactly that in Fable 3, as the small town of Bowerstone blew up into a light steam-punky cityscape kingdom. This is the player's home for the majority of the game and the location to which they will return repeatedly throughout the course of events surrounding the campaign, so it was in best interest of the Dev team to have the Bowerstone region feel large and real for players play around in. Once again, the key to bringing Bowerstone to life was interaction. As the game engine wasn't powerful enough to render an entire city, (instead they allowed players to visit specific chunks of the city through separate play areas) Lionhead ensured that the player could mess around with ever individual citizen using the franchises patented 'touch system'. (It's not as creepy as that sounds, but is sure is as awkward) Unfortunately, the citizens themselves as mostly just wooden cutout stereotypes, but every little bit helps when it comes to believing in a world. As another added touch, the performance of the player in the main narrative has a knock-on effect to how many folk survive the final conflict, meaning that the world actually reflects upon your consequences, which always helps the immersive-ness a bit.
Let's go back to the 90's for this next entry, as Capcom decided to up the stakes from their last Resident Evil game and elevate their zombie outbreak from a sprawling mansion to the entirety of Raccoon City. This is one of those locations that is practically video game royalty, and for very good reason as it housed one of the greatest horror/action games of all time and managed to make people feel like they were living through a city-wide zombie outbreak despite the game only having the power to render 7 zombies on screen at once. (You need those precious 450 polygons for Leon and Claire, afterall.) This time Capcom made great use of perspective in order to highlight the claustrophobia of a city that they lacked the processing power to render. That meant a lot of high angled shots of alleyways and separated screens. (allowing one area to be loaded at a time.) Of course, once the 2019 remake came along there was no need for any of that subterfuge and we finally got a chance to see Raccoon City rendered in all of it's glory.
Okay, I already did a Bethesda Fallout game, but what about an Obsidian one? Objectively the best Fallout game to date, 'Fallout: New Vegas' featured a memorable post-apocalyptic society in their depiction of the titular 'New Vegas'. This was a city that stood as the crown jewel across the wasteland as it was one of the only major cities to be mostly unharmed by the missiles that ravaged the surrounding landscape. (Or at least, The Strip survived intact. Everything else was still a little banged up.) What resulted was a revival of the hedonistic materialism that everyone loved about the old Las Vegas, only ramped up to eleven with armed robot guards patrolling the whole place. Obsidian managed to make this city feel large through a mixture of Bethesda's techniques and Rockstar's. They stuck a bevy of named NPC's around the area but spruced up the space inbetween with filler folk; helping to make 'the Strip' feel like a heavily frequented location. They also made sure to take advantage of that Vegas glitz and glamour to plaster gaudy lights and advertisements all over the city, imbuing that overwhelming sense of metropolitan capitalism. All this makes New Vegas easily my favourite place in a Fallout game to visit and one of the best examples of creating a believable town.
Finally, as I promised, we come to CDPR's second attempt to create a huge cityscape, Cyberpunk 2077's Nightcity. This is a Cyber-futuristic-dystopian recreation of Los Angeles from the aftermath of just about every terrible event that a single society can undergo. We're talking wars, recessions and at least one nuclear detonation, but through it all the City survived and thrived. (depending on your definition of 'thriving'.) Of course, Cyberpunk 2077 isn't technically out yet so it's impossible for me to determine what specific techniques the team have used to realize this city, but judging from the demo alone we've seen a vast array of thematic distinctions, impressive graphical flairs and independent variety in civilian walk cycles. It seems that the name-of-the-game for CD Projekt word is diversity and, if the demo footage is any indication, they've pulled that particular task off with flying colours.
City building is one of most complex, and rewarding, task that one could ask of developers, and it is one that is particularly revealing as to the specific talents of your team. I love analyzing all the little tips and tricks that developers utilize, seeing what works and what doesn't, just as much as I enjoy believing in these digital spaces. As we steadily trudge into the next generation I can hardly imagine what sort of ingenuity this new breed of hardware will inspire out of developers and how well it'll all translate.
We talk about about 'environments' here in this blog, and it is for good reason. The world that the player inhabits is one of the most important aspects of creating an immersive and believable gameplay experience and a well realized world can be absolutely unforgettable. Great gameplay and storytelling are only two thirds of the equation, afterall; without a world to care about it can be hard to dedicate yourself to the narrative, requiring your gameplay to be undeniably top notch to ultimately save your product. (Darn it, 'Destiny', you've got me there!) However, there is one particular aspect of world-building (That would be the physical act of world-building rather than the story telling aspect) that proves difficult even for the most skilled developers, and that is the creation of cities.
It's no wonder why, either. The commonly recognized hierarchy of settlements labels the requirements of a large city as; housing between '300,000 and 1,000,000 citizens', and there isn't a game engine on earth that can render that many NPC's complete with AI packages. (Although that same hierarchy technically means that NYC is a 'Metropolis', so don't take it as gospel.) Even using the common tricks of game development it can be incredibly difficult to create a world space that appropriately simulates the magnitude of a city in a believable way. That being said, urban settings are just too tempting for storytellers to completely write them off, so these teams find clever ways to bring their worlds to life. Consequently, I look upon the act of digital city building as an artform worthy a quick look through in this collation list.
One of, if not the, best example of video game cities in the modern age is 'Los Santos' from 'Grand Theft Auto V' and 'San Andreas'. Based on the instantly recognizable LA skyline, 'Los Santos' is a loving recreation of 'The City of Angels' complete from 'Venice beach' all the way up 'Hollywood Boulevard'. Due to the sheer level of skill and love that Rockstar put into erecting this digital masterpiece, Someone could familiarize themselves with these streets enough to give a rough tour of the actual city. Emphasis on 'rough' however, as even in 'GTA V' the city of Los Santos is only about 1/3 of the size of the actual city. (They got all the landmarks in, but cut down on the number of postcodes.) Either way, this is still an incredibly impressive achievement from Rockstar and one can only imagine how they managed to pull off such a colossal city all the way back in 2011. In fact, the only place that seems set to beat it in terms of scale is Cyberpunk 2077's own version of LA, Night City. (More on that later.) On seventh generation consoles, GTA V features a 'cone of vision' based rendering system that generates cars and pedestrians in whatever way you're focused in order to create the illusion of there being more NPCs than there actually are. Of course, there is a safety buffer to this feature to ensure that you don't accidentally ram into a freshly spawned truck, but this was a clever way of fleshing out the far away world objects without slowing down the frame rate. On Eighth Generation consoles, however, Rockstar manage to coax out enough power to stick with a standard rendering distance set-up; assembling that mammoth-of-a-city one neighbourhood at a time.
In Bethesda's RPGs there are quite a few large settlements for player's to explore, however it's only in 'The Elder Scrolls' where we see them attempt to create a fully functional and manned city. Therefore, by putting 'Skyrim' in our sights, we can get a look at the unique way that they handle 'cities'. Using this criteria, I settled on Whiterun as my ideal case-study for Skyrim cities due to it's central location and familiarity with practically every player. (Even though it is actually the third largest city in the game.) Looking at Whiterun, we see something quite peculiar, namely how the 'city' itself only consists of about 30 residents despite being the 'travelling hub' of Skyrim. This comes from the way that Bethesda's game engine renders each and every NPC with such complex stats and AI packages that it simply isn't feasible to create a city consisting of thousands. (Giving the medieval setting, a settlement of thousands would constitute a 'city'.) Despite this glaring misstep, however, we still consider Whiterun a prosperous settlement due to the way that Bethesda bought that place to life. Firstly, the city itself is scaled so that the small number of residents is enough to make the place feel crowded (something that Bethesda dropped the ball with when they made Oblivion); Secondly, their daily routines often have the people meeting up in the same spot, (The central market, the Bannered Mare. etc.) creating more illusionary crowding; and Thirdly, every citizen is realized with their own personality and story. This goes a step beyond the lifeless 'NPC's of other games because it offers so much more narrative value out of every individual. In this way, a city of 30 can balloon in your mind into a functioning city because you believe in every single inhabitant there.
Looking back towards the late 90's, we have another incredibly iconic metropolitan locale in Final Fantasy 7's Midgar. At the time of release, January 1997, this was an incredible vision for everyone to behold especially given that it was the first time that Square had used the processing power of a disk-based system on their much-beloved RPG franchise. As such, we saw 3D models on a 3D world bought to life in the image of an industrial cyberpunk revolution of blinking lights and heavy, chocking exhaust fumes. Midgar was the dystopian, mechanical monolith slapped right in the centre of a narrative which I have described as: the best possible video game adaptation of 'Fern Gully'. With this one location proving to be so important to the overall themes (or rather, the themes of the first third of the game) it was imperative that the team nailed their attempts at realizing it. However, 3D polygonal tech was still new to the Square team (Final Fantasy 6 was still entirely 'sprite-based') and so they had to figure out a way of creating a city despite lacking the technical power to do so. This they pulled off with a collection of clever techniques that would make any aspiring film maker proud. The backgrounds, for one, would be largely rendered stills that were mostly either top-down shots to establish the packed-in nature of the city streets, or brief sweeping vista shots over the majesty of it all, nailing the presentation of the big and the small. The story, too, directed players through a variety of new locations that differed enough visually to establish a sense of different districts and having travelled a great distance between them. And finally that iconic retro-mechanical music that flowed out of every district did wonders to subconsciously bring players to the right mindspace to believe in a city called Midgar.
Seeing as how we've already mentioned CDPR, we should take a look at their first attempt at bringing a huge city to life in 'The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt's: Novigrad. This was a city that was built to be the centrepiece of the second act of this game as it would be the ideal strategic point between the two warring factions and thus a veritable hotbed of interesting activities. The player would find themselves mostly visiting tiny villages in their time throughout the game, and so Novigrad is designed to be quite the system shock once you finally get there and find that the city absolutely spans the eastern waterfront as far as the eye can see. With all the power that CDPR managed to drum up to bring this particular city to life, it's no wonder that it should prove to be one of the biggest spectacles of the age. Unfortunately, Novigrad seemed to work better from afar than it did from the inside. For some reason, Novigrad never did feel particularly 'alive' in the same sense that GTA cities do, possible because of CDPR's over-reliance on uninteractible NPC's to feel up the empty space between objectives. Sure that works well enough in Los Santos, but that is because players are forever constantly aware that they can just knock out anyone on the street that they don't like and interact with the in-built crime system. In The Witcher, should you go nuts and start offing civilians, not only are you acting in a non lore-friendly way, but the game doesn't quite know how to handle it and just sends endless guards after you until you die or get bored. Novigrad serves as an example of how video game cities can be visually impressive whilst feeling ultimately empty, teaching an important lesson on balance between content and spectacle.
Heading back to Bethesda and their other popular RPG franchise, Fallout, we have a modest selection of post-apocalyptic home steads to choose from. Unfortunately, most of Bethesda's Fallout games seem to focus on 'settlements' rather than post-apocalyptic 'societies', but there are a couple of exceptions I picked out. Fallout 4's Fenway Park (or 'Diamond City') is one such locale, but I dislike Fallout 4 so I instead want to look at 3's Rivet City. This is a settlement fashioned out of a pre-war washed up air carrier that has been irradiated to hell and cut in half, so the perfect place to call home, right? Spend any amount of time in the Capital Wasteland and you'll hear about 'Rivet City' as this well defended city of traders, which is likely enough to grab any explorer's interest. Of course, this being a Bethesda game built on a much earlier framework than Skyrim, the reality isn't quite as grand as the story, but that Bethesda formula goes into making it all work. Once again, Rivet City is a 'city' of about 30-40 residents with the majority of that number going towards the security staff, but Bethesda manage to brag that off with style. This time, the centerpiece of the town is a busy market, selling the illusion of this being a major drop-off point for travellers on the road and giving you a chance to believe in the fact that most people don't stick around. Rivet City really shines with it's layout, however, which is intentionally winding and confusing to create the atmosphere of a large living space with countless decks, rooms and shops. Once again, Bethesda have a habit of making a mountain out of a molehill. (In a good way.)
Lionhead's Fable is a series that long sought to bring a distinctive English flair to the fantasy RPG genre, to arguable success. Hence the name of the region, Albion, which is an old poetic name for the British isles that is not so commonly used today. Inevitably, this meant that the team would try their hand at parodying the industrial revolution at some point, and they did exactly that in Fable 3, as the small town of Bowerstone blew up into a light steam-punky cityscape kingdom. This is the player's home for the majority of the game and the location to which they will return repeatedly throughout the course of events surrounding the campaign, so it was in best interest of the Dev team to have the Bowerstone region feel large and real for players play around in. Once again, the key to bringing Bowerstone to life was interaction. As the game engine wasn't powerful enough to render an entire city, (instead they allowed players to visit specific chunks of the city through separate play areas) Lionhead ensured that the player could mess around with ever individual citizen using the franchises patented 'touch system'. (It's not as creepy as that sounds, but is sure is as awkward) Unfortunately, the citizens themselves as mostly just wooden cutout stereotypes, but every little bit helps when it comes to believing in a world. As another added touch, the performance of the player in the main narrative has a knock-on effect to how many folk survive the final conflict, meaning that the world actually reflects upon your consequences, which always helps the immersive-ness a bit.
Let's go back to the 90's for this next entry, as Capcom decided to up the stakes from their last Resident Evil game and elevate their zombie outbreak from a sprawling mansion to the entirety of Raccoon City. This is one of those locations that is practically video game royalty, and for very good reason as it housed one of the greatest horror/action games of all time and managed to make people feel like they were living through a city-wide zombie outbreak despite the game only having the power to render 7 zombies on screen at once. (You need those precious 450 polygons for Leon and Claire, afterall.) This time Capcom made great use of perspective in order to highlight the claustrophobia of a city that they lacked the processing power to render. That meant a lot of high angled shots of alleyways and separated screens. (allowing one area to be loaded at a time.) Of course, once the 2019 remake came along there was no need for any of that subterfuge and we finally got a chance to see Raccoon City rendered in all of it's glory.
Okay, I already did a Bethesda Fallout game, but what about an Obsidian one? Objectively the best Fallout game to date, 'Fallout: New Vegas' featured a memorable post-apocalyptic society in their depiction of the titular 'New Vegas'. This was a city that stood as the crown jewel across the wasteland as it was one of the only major cities to be mostly unharmed by the missiles that ravaged the surrounding landscape. (Or at least, The Strip survived intact. Everything else was still a little banged up.) What resulted was a revival of the hedonistic materialism that everyone loved about the old Las Vegas, only ramped up to eleven with armed robot guards patrolling the whole place. Obsidian managed to make this city feel large through a mixture of Bethesda's techniques and Rockstar's. They stuck a bevy of named NPC's around the area but spruced up the space inbetween with filler folk; helping to make 'the Strip' feel like a heavily frequented location. They also made sure to take advantage of that Vegas glitz and glamour to plaster gaudy lights and advertisements all over the city, imbuing that overwhelming sense of metropolitan capitalism. All this makes New Vegas easily my favourite place in a Fallout game to visit and one of the best examples of creating a believable town.
Finally, as I promised, we come to CDPR's second attempt to create a huge cityscape, Cyberpunk 2077's Nightcity. This is a Cyber-futuristic-dystopian recreation of Los Angeles from the aftermath of just about every terrible event that a single society can undergo. We're talking wars, recessions and at least one nuclear detonation, but through it all the City survived and thrived. (depending on your definition of 'thriving'.) Of course, Cyberpunk 2077 isn't technically out yet so it's impossible for me to determine what specific techniques the team have used to realize this city, but judging from the demo alone we've seen a vast array of thematic distinctions, impressive graphical flairs and independent variety in civilian walk cycles. It seems that the name-of-the-game for CD Projekt word is diversity and, if the demo footage is any indication, they've pulled that particular task off with flying colours.
City building is one of most complex, and rewarding, task that one could ask of developers, and it is one that is particularly revealing as to the specific talents of your team. I love analyzing all the little tips and tricks that developers utilize, seeing what works and what doesn't, just as much as I enjoy believing in these digital spaces. As we steadily trudge into the next generation I can hardly imagine what sort of ingenuity this new breed of hardware will inspire out of developers and how well it'll all translate.
Labels:
Bethesda,
Capcom,
CDPR,
Cyberpunk,
Fable 3,
Fallout,
Fallout: New Vegas,
Final Fantasy 7,
Grand Theft Auto V,
Obsidian Games,
Resident Evil 2,
Rockstar,
Skyrim,
Square Enix,
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
Wednesday, 11 December 2019
Resident Evil 3: Remake announcement!
I'm so excited!
It has been one heck of a roller-coaster couple of weeks for one so invested in the Resident Evil Remakes. Things kicked off not that long ago with rampant unexpected leaks detailing the existence of this project, how it would be 'not exactly what we were expecting', and, of course, the box art leak from the other day. At this point it was no longer a question of if we would see the game but rather when we would see it and through which big upcoming gaming event. The obvious choice was the 'Game Awards' given that it is the biggest gaming event outside of E3, but those rumors were shot down by the organizers themselves who admitted that they had no plans for revealing RE3. The spotlight then naturally moved to the 'Jump Festa' event to which Capcom were the guests of honour, surely that would be the date of announcement.
But we were bamboozled. Even whilst I mourned the extra two weeks we'd have to wait to get a glimpse of RE3, I completely forgot about another gaming event happening sooner than even the games awards. And to be fair, why wouldn't I completely forget about an event as small as the Playstation state-of-play. They are hosted regularly enough, robbing the event of it's 'exculcive' allure, and they are mostly just pimp their own exclusives, which is why it would be strange to debut a multi-platform title on their stage. But Xbox was kind enough to reveal Cyberpunk 2077 in E3 2018, so perhaps Playstation just say this as paying off the debt. Whatever the reason, the consequence is that we finally got a full reveal of the gorgeous-looking Resident Evil 3 Remake through way of developer brief, tiny gameplay snippet and full-on trailer. (Be still, my beating heart!)
As expected, Resident Evil 3's Remake leans off of the beautiful RE:Engine in order to produce a truly stunning rendering with strong, malleable lighting. We see this straight away in the reveal trailer as we flash through the events of the RE2 remake, creating that link and letting everyone know that if they liked that masterpiece than they were in for another treat. Time then flashes back to September 28th as we are put behind the eyes of S.T.A.R.S. operative Jill Valentine as she dashes away from a shrouded figure clad in darkness. Clearly invoking the image of Mister X, but those of us who have experience with RE3 know that we're really seeing something much worse. This is 'The Persuer' or as he would come to be known; Nemesis. Funnily enough the footage that has been revealed thus far has specifically gone out of it's way to not give us a glimpse at Nemesis' new mug, despite the fact that we've already seen it courtesy of those leaked box art. Still, it would be nice to see his face in action, as then we'll see just how effectively frightening it all is.
An interesting point to note at the beginning of this trailer is the way in which it all takes place in first person. The First-person approach might be popular in modern horror games, but Resident Evil famously never tried it until Resident Evil 7. Their first 5 games (1,2,3,0, Code Veronica) utilized a fixed-camera perspective, whilst subsequent entries opted for over-the-shoulder action. Even once the Resident Evil 2 Remake finally hit shelves, we saw that game had gone for the over-the-shoulder approach over the outdated fixed camera model. Indeed, we can see from the extra footage released that Resident Evil 3: Remake will follow those footsteps with the over-the-camera approach, and yet the first minute of the trailer is entirely in first person. This might have been an artistic choice, but looking at some of the movement (specifically the stabilization of the camera bob) makes it look like genuine gameplay, and that has me wondering. We know that the RE engine is capable of rendering a great First-person experience (a-la Resident Evil 7) and there were some modders who managed to get a flawed version of that working for RE2. Then there is the, still unexplained, comment about how this remake was 'not what you would expect', and I'm left with the idea that RE3 may have a choice between playable perspectives, similar to GTA V and Red Dead Redemption 2. (Or maybe I'm just reading into nothing...)
This trailer also afforded us our first look at the new Jill Valentine model rendered actively in the RE Engine. This new face of S.T.A.R.S seems to look a little different from the boxart, wherein she faintly resembled Ruby Rose, and actually a little softer in the jaw in a manner that's more similar to Chyler Leigh. (You can guess what kind of TV I'm watching these days, huh...) Additionally, out of the plethora of locations that we rushed through in the cut scenes, only the outdoor sections seemed similar to what we've seen from the RE2 remake. Which is absolutely astounding considering the fact that RE2 only came out in April of this year. For those who don't know, the original RE3 was put together a year after the original due to a tight development schedule and a recycling of a lot of the assets used for RE2 as well as the scrapped assets for what is now known as RE 1.5. Somehow this resulted in a fine game being released in an incredible time frame. Nowadays game design has become a lot more complicated so even if Capcom used the same 'reuse, recycle' stratagem for this title it would be unreasonable for them to pull of a one-year development cycle. And yet Resident Evil 3 announced it's release date as April 2020. If the team manage to pull that off and still put out a quality product, then I'll consider that one of most amazing feats of game design ever accomplished. (as well as a great way to show up the rest of the industry.)
The only problem that I see arising from this reveal has absolutely nothing to do with the trailer itself, but to do with the source material. You see, 'Resident Evil 3: Nemesis' was a fine game at it's release, but it was never as iconic as the RE2. This is due to the fact that the game itself is missing many of the iconic characters that made RE2 so memorable, there's no Sherry, Chief Irons, William, Ada, etc. I joked about this briefly when going over the box art, in the way that I completely brushed over the redesign of Carlos, but it is a problem; Jill Valentine is the only memorable character from that game. I'm unsure if the team will make any effort to amend this, like maybe giving us some more time to know and get invested with side characters similar to how they did with Marvin, but with the breakneck speed at which the original narrative moved along, I wouldn't be surprised if they simply don't have the time to dedicate to such pursuits. I suppose we'll just have to trust the team, which isn't hard seeing how talented and dedicated that they've proven themselves so far.
Resident Evil 3 isn't the only present that we shall be receiving next April, and I'm not just talking about the fact that Cyperpunk 2077 launches later that month. (Imma have a busy Birthday month, it seems.) You see, that other Resident Evil title that Capcom revealed a while back; 'Resident Evil: Resistance', is being bundled in with RE3 to serve as it's Multiplayer addendum. 'Resistance' is the game wherein players have to endure a asymmetric matchup with one team trying to complete objectives whilst the other controls various different Zombies around the map alongside a trademark 'boss' monster. This sort of thing didn't really feel like it had the legs to last on it's own, but by attaching it with RE3, Capcom might have done exactly what they need to give this title a chance at life. Alongside this reveal Capcom also unveiled two new survivors, who I don't care enough about to look up, and a new 'Mastermind': (Zombie controller) Annette Birkin. She has the ability to summon G to the field, which paints an interesting trajectory for where this game mode could expand to if it becomes a hit, which I am now hoping that it does.
As you've likely deduced, I am a rampant Resident Evil fan and lore nut who loves to devour every snippet of the zombie franchise thrown my way. With the great sobering that I have gone through these past few years, it is rare for me to fall into the familiar trap of rabid fandom, and so I embrace the feeling wholly. After watching this reveal trailer, several times I might add, I'm ecstatic beyond measure and my December has been made whole. I'm so excited, in fact, that I don't think I can wait the scant four months until the title launches and instead will be filling my time on getting up to date with the franchise itself. Sometime soon I want to launch a series of investigative blogs wherein I want to go into detail through all of the Resident Evil games (Sans 3) where I explore everything from lore, gameplay, structure, and pacing in a very methodical way. I've settled on framing these as 'play session' blogs, wherein I'll go through enough of the game until I have something worth writing about reflecting an aspect of the game and then share that with the blog. I look forward to seeing how this plays out in the future, as well as giving myself an excuse to binge my favourite horror franchise. Until then, however, I shall get to setting my calendar. Screw Christmas, only 114 days to go until Resident Evil returns.
It has been one heck of a roller-coaster couple of weeks for one so invested in the Resident Evil Remakes. Things kicked off not that long ago with rampant unexpected leaks detailing the existence of this project, how it would be 'not exactly what we were expecting', and, of course, the box art leak from the other day. At this point it was no longer a question of if we would see the game but rather when we would see it and through which big upcoming gaming event. The obvious choice was the 'Game Awards' given that it is the biggest gaming event outside of E3, but those rumors were shot down by the organizers themselves who admitted that they had no plans for revealing RE3. The spotlight then naturally moved to the 'Jump Festa' event to which Capcom were the guests of honour, surely that would be the date of announcement.
But we were bamboozled. Even whilst I mourned the extra two weeks we'd have to wait to get a glimpse of RE3, I completely forgot about another gaming event happening sooner than even the games awards. And to be fair, why wouldn't I completely forget about an event as small as the Playstation state-of-play. They are hosted regularly enough, robbing the event of it's 'exculcive' allure, and they are mostly just pimp their own exclusives, which is why it would be strange to debut a multi-platform title on their stage. But Xbox was kind enough to reveal Cyberpunk 2077 in E3 2018, so perhaps Playstation just say this as paying off the debt. Whatever the reason, the consequence is that we finally got a full reveal of the gorgeous-looking Resident Evil 3 Remake through way of developer brief, tiny gameplay snippet and full-on trailer. (Be still, my beating heart!)
As expected, Resident Evil 3's Remake leans off of the beautiful RE:Engine in order to produce a truly stunning rendering with strong, malleable lighting. We see this straight away in the reveal trailer as we flash through the events of the RE2 remake, creating that link and letting everyone know that if they liked that masterpiece than they were in for another treat. Time then flashes back to September 28th as we are put behind the eyes of S.T.A.R.S. operative Jill Valentine as she dashes away from a shrouded figure clad in darkness. Clearly invoking the image of Mister X, but those of us who have experience with RE3 know that we're really seeing something much worse. This is 'The Persuer' or as he would come to be known; Nemesis. Funnily enough the footage that has been revealed thus far has specifically gone out of it's way to not give us a glimpse at Nemesis' new mug, despite the fact that we've already seen it courtesy of those leaked box art. Still, it would be nice to see his face in action, as then we'll see just how effectively frightening it all is.
An interesting point to note at the beginning of this trailer is the way in which it all takes place in first person. The First-person approach might be popular in modern horror games, but Resident Evil famously never tried it until Resident Evil 7. Their first 5 games (1,2,3,0, Code Veronica) utilized a fixed-camera perspective, whilst subsequent entries opted for over-the-shoulder action. Even once the Resident Evil 2 Remake finally hit shelves, we saw that game had gone for the over-the-shoulder approach over the outdated fixed camera model. Indeed, we can see from the extra footage released that Resident Evil 3: Remake will follow those footsteps with the over-the-camera approach, and yet the first minute of the trailer is entirely in first person. This might have been an artistic choice, but looking at some of the movement (specifically the stabilization of the camera bob) makes it look like genuine gameplay, and that has me wondering. We know that the RE engine is capable of rendering a great First-person experience (a-la Resident Evil 7) and there were some modders who managed to get a flawed version of that working for RE2. Then there is the, still unexplained, comment about how this remake was 'not what you would expect', and I'm left with the idea that RE3 may have a choice between playable perspectives, similar to GTA V and Red Dead Redemption 2. (Or maybe I'm just reading into nothing...)
This trailer also afforded us our first look at the new Jill Valentine model rendered actively in the RE Engine. This new face of S.T.A.R.S seems to look a little different from the boxart, wherein she faintly resembled Ruby Rose, and actually a little softer in the jaw in a manner that's more similar to Chyler Leigh. (You can guess what kind of TV I'm watching these days, huh...) Additionally, out of the plethora of locations that we rushed through in the cut scenes, only the outdoor sections seemed similar to what we've seen from the RE2 remake. Which is absolutely astounding considering the fact that RE2 only came out in April of this year. For those who don't know, the original RE3 was put together a year after the original due to a tight development schedule and a recycling of a lot of the assets used for RE2 as well as the scrapped assets for what is now known as RE 1.5. Somehow this resulted in a fine game being released in an incredible time frame. Nowadays game design has become a lot more complicated so even if Capcom used the same 'reuse, recycle' stratagem for this title it would be unreasonable for them to pull of a one-year development cycle. And yet Resident Evil 3 announced it's release date as April 2020. If the team manage to pull that off and still put out a quality product, then I'll consider that one of most amazing feats of game design ever accomplished. (as well as a great way to show up the rest of the industry.)
The only problem that I see arising from this reveal has absolutely nothing to do with the trailer itself, but to do with the source material. You see, 'Resident Evil 3: Nemesis' was a fine game at it's release, but it was never as iconic as the RE2. This is due to the fact that the game itself is missing many of the iconic characters that made RE2 so memorable, there's no Sherry, Chief Irons, William, Ada, etc. I joked about this briefly when going over the box art, in the way that I completely brushed over the redesign of Carlos, but it is a problem; Jill Valentine is the only memorable character from that game. I'm unsure if the team will make any effort to amend this, like maybe giving us some more time to know and get invested with side characters similar to how they did with Marvin, but with the breakneck speed at which the original narrative moved along, I wouldn't be surprised if they simply don't have the time to dedicate to such pursuits. I suppose we'll just have to trust the team, which isn't hard seeing how talented and dedicated that they've proven themselves so far.
Resident Evil 3 isn't the only present that we shall be receiving next April, and I'm not just talking about the fact that Cyperpunk 2077 launches later that month. (Imma have a busy Birthday month, it seems.) You see, that other Resident Evil title that Capcom revealed a while back; 'Resident Evil: Resistance', is being bundled in with RE3 to serve as it's Multiplayer addendum. 'Resistance' is the game wherein players have to endure a asymmetric matchup with one team trying to complete objectives whilst the other controls various different Zombies around the map alongside a trademark 'boss' monster. This sort of thing didn't really feel like it had the legs to last on it's own, but by attaching it with RE3, Capcom might have done exactly what they need to give this title a chance at life. Alongside this reveal Capcom also unveiled two new survivors, who I don't care enough about to look up, and a new 'Mastermind': (Zombie controller) Annette Birkin. She has the ability to summon G to the field, which paints an interesting trajectory for where this game mode could expand to if it becomes a hit, which I am now hoping that it does.
As you've likely deduced, I am a rampant Resident Evil fan and lore nut who loves to devour every snippet of the zombie franchise thrown my way. With the great sobering that I have gone through these past few years, it is rare for me to fall into the familiar trap of rabid fandom, and so I embrace the feeling wholly. After watching this reveal trailer, several times I might add, I'm ecstatic beyond measure and my December has been made whole. I'm so excited, in fact, that I don't think I can wait the scant four months until the title launches and instead will be filling my time on getting up to date with the franchise itself. Sometime soon I want to launch a series of investigative blogs wherein I want to go into detail through all of the Resident Evil games (Sans 3) where I explore everything from lore, gameplay, structure, and pacing in a very methodical way. I've settled on framing these as 'play session' blogs, wherein I'll go through enough of the game until I have something worth writing about reflecting an aspect of the game and then share that with the blog. I look forward to seeing how this plays out in the future, as well as giving myself an excuse to binge my favourite horror franchise. Until then, however, I shall get to setting my calendar. Screw Christmas, only 114 days to go until Resident Evil returns.
Tuesday, 10 December 2019
This is getting out of hand...
Now there are two of them!
As of late I have been in a state of perpetual hype due to the impending announcement of the Resident Evil 3 remake. I positively adored the RE2:Remake, ship it for Ultimate game of the year, and am fully ready to commit to this next game before I've even seen a trailer. I'm so enamoured with the concept, in fact, that I'm not even too annoyed to find out that we will likely not be seeing it debut at the Game Awards like we originally thought, but will instead have to wait until 'Jump Festa 2020', which is a couple of days before Christmas. (I can still make the 'early Christmas' joke.) And I'm only slightly aggrieved at how that change of plans will likely mean that the first reveal we get of that game will be purely in Japanese, meaning we won't get to hear Jill's new voice actor until the international re-release. Or the fact that I had an entire slate of blogs planned dependant on my RE:3 coverage which I expected to start next week. (I'm not bitter I swear.)
Although, from disappointment spawns opportunity as it would appear that one of my deepest desires has been answered in the from of a rumor that was officially confirmed by 2K yesterday via surprise tweet. "Today, 2K announced the founding of Cloud Chamber, its newest development studio. This team of storytellers has begun work on the next iteration of the acclaimed Bioshock franchise, which will be in development for the next several years." Oh yeah, that's right. After all these years, rumor upon rumor have finally crumbled away to reveal once and for all that the Bioshock franchise is not, in fact, as dead as we were all once led to believe. And now I have two unbelievably exciting series revivals to live for whereas last month I had none, ain't life grand?
For those who never had the pleasure, Bioshock is one of the franchises that absolutely took the gaming landscape by storm when it landed back in 2007. Irrational Games' FPS survival horror-esque hybrid seemed to defy everyone's initial expectation and prove to be a timeless video game classic. Acting as a spiritual successor to 1999's 'System Shock 2', Bioshock borrowed the one-to-one perspective, haunting atmosphere and twisting narrative of that title and polished it to a mirror shine masterpiece. Bioshock introduced everyone to the underwater world of Rapture, an art-deco objectivist paradise locked under the Atlantic ocean and doomed to become a watery tomb for it's inhabitants. The player is thrust into this world and expected to navigate it's depths, surviving the scavengers that feed off the city's bones and uncovering it's secrets until they discover the real truth behind it all.
Bioshock was a game that dragged people in with mystery, philosophy and style, just as Andrew Ryan himself would have, before punching players in the gut with one of the most poignant questions ever asked in a video game narrative, one that still rings to this day. Ever since then the series has stood for lofty ideas and incredible imagination as the scope of the vision has shifted throughout the years. Bioshock 2 bought players back to the City of Rapture but from a predominately different perspective, from the eyes of the working class that made the city run. Perhaps that game didn't have as much to say, but it was still as evocative and stunning as this series always, inexplicably, is. Bioshock Infinite bought that series screaming out of the Atlantic ocean and into the sky to the city of Columbia, through a project that was dripping in ambition. (Some would argue more ambition then the team could handle.) But whatever your opinions on the execution of that particular game, or the way it made concessions on some of it's core themes in order to remain feasible-to-make, it was still a brilliant entry that introduced one of the most iconic video game characters of all time.
After Infinite's 'Burial at Sea' DLC, however, things seemed to go south for the Bioshock brand. Irrational Games ended up shuttering their doors and Ken Levine, the visionary director credited with bringing much of Bioshock to life, moved on from gaming in order to try his hands at other entertainment pursuits. Since then the only real news we heard about this series was a few years back when a group of ex-Irrational developers banded together to form a studio and create a game which looked to be some sort of spiritual successor to Bioshock. That ended up fizzling out, however, and since then the franchise has appeared to be well and truly dead. But appearances, it seems, can be deceiving.
As soon as this announcement was made, Kotaku's Jason Schrier put together an 'I told you so' article wherein he laid out the fact that this title isn't exactly news, and in fact it was in development for a number of years. (I suppose now 2K are liking what they see enough to come out and formally announce the project.) Apparently, before this new studio 'Cloud Chamber' was officially unveiled today to be heading this project, 2K had been outsourcing the bulk of Bioshock 4 (codenamed: Parkside) to a studio called 'Certain Affinity', who are best known for providing additional support for Call of Duty and Halo development teams.
This was quite the break for Certain Affinity, as their jobs had entirely been on contracting up until now, but it seems that 2K either didn't like the rate of progress or wanted to put more effort behind the title, as they bought it in-house and rebooted the title in the process. This was in 2016, and since then the project has been quietly picking up folk from various 2K projects, including a few who worked in 'Hanger 13', the team that put out Mafia 3. (Let's hope that game isn't any indication as to their talent.) Parkside's team has been operating in heavy secrecy ever since and, despite getting outed in a report in April 2018, managed to avoid officially announcing the project until the press release yesterday.
If 2K are prepared to announce that the next Bioshock game is alive and under active development, even if it's not due for 'several years', it means that they are ready to go into full production, and that is exciting. Bioshock has never been a name that's stood for low-effort releases at any point in time, this has been a franchise that has been defined my ambition, innovation, and even a little bit of envelope-pushing when needed. And in a gaming age that is slowly beginning to welcome back many of it's storied FPS franchises for triumphant returns, (See: Deus Ex, Doom and Wolfenstien) I think there couldn't be a better time for the grandfather of the heartstopping plot-twist to make a return finally after all these years.
That being said, today's announcement was just that: an announcement and nothing more. So far we have no vestige of an idea of where this title will go in regards to story, themes, setting or even genre. (This could be a tactical resource management game for all we know.) We also have no idea who 2K has got manning this project from a creative angle, which is an important position to fill considering how influential Ken Levine was to the creation of both Rapture and Colombia, two of gaming's most iconic locations. Similarly, we cannot be sure whether or not this title will attempt to continue the 'A tower, a city, and a girl' formula of the first three games or go somewhere completely different with it all. (Personally I find myself desperately torn between the desire for something different and eagerness to see what can be done with the fertile land that has already been tilled.)
Whatever ends up happening I can speak to one truth, fans are absolutely ecstatic about the proposition of a new Bioshock and will likely happily digest anything that 2K decide to throw their way. (Unless it ends up being a live-service, guys, we may be desperate but we still have principles!) I cannot accurately convey how much the Bioshock franchise means to me, there are only two other games that have truly touched/effected me more and I'm so happy to hear that we might get a chance to see it again someday. Now we just have to see if the 2K of today can assemble a team with what it takes to do the title justice, and how the concept will evolve and morph to fit the mold of modern game development. "Constants and variables", as she says.
As of late I have been in a state of perpetual hype due to the impending announcement of the Resident Evil 3 remake. I positively adored the RE2:Remake, ship it for Ultimate game of the year, and am fully ready to commit to this next game before I've even seen a trailer. I'm so enamoured with the concept, in fact, that I'm not even too annoyed to find out that we will likely not be seeing it debut at the Game Awards like we originally thought, but will instead have to wait until 'Jump Festa 2020', which is a couple of days before Christmas. (I can still make the 'early Christmas' joke.) And I'm only slightly aggrieved at how that change of plans will likely mean that the first reveal we get of that game will be purely in Japanese, meaning we won't get to hear Jill's new voice actor until the international re-release. Or the fact that I had an entire slate of blogs planned dependant on my RE:3 coverage which I expected to start next week. (I'm not bitter I swear.)
Although, from disappointment spawns opportunity as it would appear that one of my deepest desires has been answered in the from of a rumor that was officially confirmed by 2K yesterday via surprise tweet. "Today, 2K announced the founding of Cloud Chamber, its newest development studio. This team of storytellers has begun work on the next iteration of the acclaimed Bioshock franchise, which will be in development for the next several years." Oh yeah, that's right. After all these years, rumor upon rumor have finally crumbled away to reveal once and for all that the Bioshock franchise is not, in fact, as dead as we were all once led to believe. And now I have two unbelievably exciting series revivals to live for whereas last month I had none, ain't life grand?
For those who never had the pleasure, Bioshock is one of the franchises that absolutely took the gaming landscape by storm when it landed back in 2007. Irrational Games' FPS survival horror-esque hybrid seemed to defy everyone's initial expectation and prove to be a timeless video game classic. Acting as a spiritual successor to 1999's 'System Shock 2', Bioshock borrowed the one-to-one perspective, haunting atmosphere and twisting narrative of that title and polished it to a mirror shine masterpiece. Bioshock introduced everyone to the underwater world of Rapture, an art-deco objectivist paradise locked under the Atlantic ocean and doomed to become a watery tomb for it's inhabitants. The player is thrust into this world and expected to navigate it's depths, surviving the scavengers that feed off the city's bones and uncovering it's secrets until they discover the real truth behind it all.
Bioshock was a game that dragged people in with mystery, philosophy and style, just as Andrew Ryan himself would have, before punching players in the gut with one of the most poignant questions ever asked in a video game narrative, one that still rings to this day. Ever since then the series has stood for lofty ideas and incredible imagination as the scope of the vision has shifted throughout the years. Bioshock 2 bought players back to the City of Rapture but from a predominately different perspective, from the eyes of the working class that made the city run. Perhaps that game didn't have as much to say, but it was still as evocative and stunning as this series always, inexplicably, is. Bioshock Infinite bought that series screaming out of the Atlantic ocean and into the sky to the city of Columbia, through a project that was dripping in ambition. (Some would argue more ambition then the team could handle.) But whatever your opinions on the execution of that particular game, or the way it made concessions on some of it's core themes in order to remain feasible-to-make, it was still a brilliant entry that introduced one of the most iconic video game characters of all time.
After Infinite's 'Burial at Sea' DLC, however, things seemed to go south for the Bioshock brand. Irrational Games ended up shuttering their doors and Ken Levine, the visionary director credited with bringing much of Bioshock to life, moved on from gaming in order to try his hands at other entertainment pursuits. Since then the only real news we heard about this series was a few years back when a group of ex-Irrational developers banded together to form a studio and create a game which looked to be some sort of spiritual successor to Bioshock. That ended up fizzling out, however, and since then the franchise has appeared to be well and truly dead. But appearances, it seems, can be deceiving.
As soon as this announcement was made, Kotaku's Jason Schrier put together an 'I told you so' article wherein he laid out the fact that this title isn't exactly news, and in fact it was in development for a number of years. (I suppose now 2K are liking what they see enough to come out and formally announce the project.) Apparently, before this new studio 'Cloud Chamber' was officially unveiled today to be heading this project, 2K had been outsourcing the bulk of Bioshock 4 (codenamed: Parkside) to a studio called 'Certain Affinity', who are best known for providing additional support for Call of Duty and Halo development teams.
This was quite the break for Certain Affinity, as their jobs had entirely been on contracting up until now, but it seems that 2K either didn't like the rate of progress or wanted to put more effort behind the title, as they bought it in-house and rebooted the title in the process. This was in 2016, and since then the project has been quietly picking up folk from various 2K projects, including a few who worked in 'Hanger 13', the team that put out Mafia 3. (Let's hope that game isn't any indication as to their talent.) Parkside's team has been operating in heavy secrecy ever since and, despite getting outed in a report in April 2018, managed to avoid officially announcing the project until the press release yesterday.
If 2K are prepared to announce that the next Bioshock game is alive and under active development, even if it's not due for 'several years', it means that they are ready to go into full production, and that is exciting. Bioshock has never been a name that's stood for low-effort releases at any point in time, this has been a franchise that has been defined my ambition, innovation, and even a little bit of envelope-pushing when needed. And in a gaming age that is slowly beginning to welcome back many of it's storied FPS franchises for triumphant returns, (See: Deus Ex, Doom and Wolfenstien) I think there couldn't be a better time for the grandfather of the heartstopping plot-twist to make a return finally after all these years.
That being said, today's announcement was just that: an announcement and nothing more. So far we have no vestige of an idea of where this title will go in regards to story, themes, setting or even genre. (This could be a tactical resource management game for all we know.) We also have no idea who 2K has got manning this project from a creative angle, which is an important position to fill considering how influential Ken Levine was to the creation of both Rapture and Colombia, two of gaming's most iconic locations. Similarly, we cannot be sure whether or not this title will attempt to continue the 'A tower, a city, and a girl' formula of the first three games or go somewhere completely different with it all. (Personally I find myself desperately torn between the desire for something different and eagerness to see what can be done with the fertile land that has already been tilled.)
Whatever ends up happening I can speak to one truth, fans are absolutely ecstatic about the proposition of a new Bioshock and will likely happily digest anything that 2K decide to throw their way. (Unless it ends up being a live-service, guys, we may be desperate but we still have principles!) I cannot accurately convey how much the Bioshock franchise means to me, there are only two other games that have truly touched/effected me more and I'm so happy to hear that we might get a chance to see it again someday. Now we just have to see if the 2K of today can assemble a team with what it takes to do the title justice, and how the concept will evolve and morph to fit the mold of modern game development. "Constants and variables", as she says.
Monday, 9 December 2019
The Magic of Lego Star Wars
Brick by brick.
Video gaming is very diverse and eclectic hobby that draws in folk of all walks of life. You'll find players old and young, occidental and otherwise, all drawn by the allure of interactive entertainment media, and such media is often adjusted accordingly. Be that as it may, that doesn't mean that games aimed towards a younger demographic cannot still strike a cord with all gamers due to it's quality, purity of vision and/or enjoyability factor. (And yes, I am trying to justify why it is that I still play Lego Star Wars games.)
Lego Star Wars is a surprisingly weird concept when you stop and think about it. "What if we completely retold the events of the original and new trilogy without words and using only Lego characters and blocks to make up the world?" It's the kind of concept you'd expect to be spat out in the Lego marketing room after a caffeine-fueled and unproductive 12 hour brainstorming session, the kind of suggestion that would then be immediately laughed off by the rest of the room as too incurably stupid to ever make a profit. And yet 13 years later we are looking at one of the most successful gaming kids franchises of all time, spawning a formula so popular that it has been translated to every relevant media product with a sliver of a chance to be marketable to children. We've seen Lego Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Pirates of the Caribbean, Batman and The Avengers, and next year we'll finally get 'The Skywalker Saga' to wrap up what Lego started all those years ago.
So what exactly is it about the Lego formula that has proven so effective to the public all of these years and, more importantly, can it be replicated? In recent years we have seen that the frequency at which we see new Lego games has started to let up considerably, this year all we got was the adaptation of 'The Lego Movie 2'. (Which I can only imagine disappeared with as much of a whimper as that movie did.) It's a farcry from their heyday when you couldn't go a single trade show without seeing the latest Lego game up front and centre. So what happened? Did the trend start to get old in the eyes of younger gamers or did something change in the formula to suck away at the magic a bit? I intend to look at all that today and more!
Firstly I feel that it's important to establish, regardless of how crazy it sounds, that TT games existed before Lego Star Wars. (I know, I know!) In fact, they were established a full year beforehand in 2005 through a merger between Giant Interactive and Traveller's Tales. (The people responsible for that fantastic Toy Story 2 game adaptation.) So they came from a storied history of turning movies into actually viable movie tie-ins, assisting with a few of the Crash Bandicoot games and taking the rap for Sega when it comes to Sonic R and 3D Blast. (I wish I could say that those are the worst Sonic games, but 'Sonic Eraser' exists.) The Lego company approached them in late 2005 with their idea to make a game based on their current partnership with Lucasfilm and the rest was video gaming history. TT would end up putting out a game that garnered mass praise and sales for everyone involved and their future history was sealed as them being 'the Lego games guys'. Sure, they put out a few well-received independent projects since then, but they are always dragged back to their Lego overlords at somepoint.
From a conceptual perspective, I've always thought that 'Lego Star Wars' was an ingenious idea to pursue. As a series that thrives on the audience's ability to believe in the impossible, Star Wars has always appealed to younger folk in particular. This was especially true in 2005, when George Lucas has just gone through considerable effort (and ridicule) in marketing his new movies towards kids and reshaping the old ones to the same ends. Marrying that world with concepts as innately imaginative and kid friendly as Lego and gaming, and your left with an recipe for commercial success. All TT had to do was find a way to translate all of the story of the Star Wars movies into Lego form, something that had become particularly tricky to pull off ever since Lucas leaned a bit too hard on the 'exposition' faucet when writing the prequels' scripts.
The solution that the team settled on was smart elegant and, most importantly, kid friendly. Firstly, they would make use of that iconic Star Wars scroll text to establish the pertinent information behind each and every chapter, and Secondly, they would play out every cutscene in adorable Lego mime. That means that everytime two characters needed to converse, it was done wordlessly using gestures or slapstick in a manner universal to all ages. This actually allowed for kids, like myself, to loosely follow along with the story of Star Wars which can seem impenetrable from some angles. (Like the endless trade negotiation talk that littered the prequels.) In later games this would branch out a bit, with little sound effects and grunting, mostly to humorous effect, but it wasn't until the 2010's when TT just gave up and started using soundbits. A decision which I never agreed with and still feel slightly betrayed by. (Incidentally, the soundbit decision is also directly responsible for 'Lego Lord of the Rings' being pulled from store shelves. Licensing rights can be tricky like that.)
This creative approach towards storytelling blended into their core design philosophy as TT tried to inspire the same sort of creativity that was indicative of the Lego brand. This translated into one of the key features present in every single Lego game, the ability to build. Often as you traverse through the levels in Lego games, following along the trail and breaking objects along the way for studs, you'd find certain assortments of discarded blocks that were still buzzing with building potential. The player's can then dive into these and reassemble them into useful tools or structures to assist their progress, adding a visceral sense of collaboration from the player's end.
Combat was also a factor that underwent particular consideration when it came to constructing this game. It had to feel fun and easy to pick up, afterall, so they went for the single button system which worked so well for the first two Fable games. The nuance came in the timing of button presses alongside the weapon in that character's hand and the context of the situation. Delay your lightsaber swings by a second and you could pull of a powerful combo, or press the fire button as a laser is coming at you and your character will quickly dodge out of the way. It was a system that was both simple enough to be intuitive and just big enough that player's would learn a few quirks if they played around with it. Of course, there was no real depth to combat itself, but in a game like this there didn't really need to be.
The best part of this game series for me, and the thing which has kept me coming back all these years later, is that addictive collect-athon angle that all of these games mastered. Every single Lego game is absolutely dripping with collectibles and all offer cool rewards for going out of your way for them. First there are the characters who come with unique abilities and appearances and must be purchased in the Cantina or unlocked; then there are the 10 'Minikits' in each level, which resemble Lego sets and must be hunted down. (Often using those abilities from the characters you just unlocked.) Then there are the Red Bricks, which unlock cool cheats for the players to mess around with. Later games would also bring in the elusive golden bricks which were awarded for completing other collectible sets and would go towards unlocking exclusive bonus levels. Oh, and then there is the 'True Jedi' mode which requires players to gather a certain number of 'studs' in each level in exchange for another gold brick. What I'm trying to convey here is that the Lego games are literally some of most replayable games on the market and are practically brim with content for everyone to enjoy.
Every level needs to be played at least twice to get everything (although probably a lot more times, just to be sure.) and, due to the quality level design, most players have no issue making that sacrifice time and time again. So many levels are dripping in secrets that can only be accessed by unlocking 'free play', (The ability to play through that chapter with any character, as opposed to the ones relevant to that point of the story.) and a decent amount of them have alternate pathways and areas to take advantage of. The Lego Star wars games, and all the Lego games for that matter, all exploited the 'scavenger hunt' desires of folk to keep us hooked for weeks on end, and it must have worked, seeing how successful these games were.
All things must come to an end at some point and for some reason, however, and for TT games their hot streak was ended by a mixture of their own over-saturation and the machinations of Disney. You see, TT were flooding the market year after year with their Lego games to the point where it became impossible for people to keep up with them all, especially as their core Kid audience started to grow up and seek interest in other games. Matters were not helped by the Disney acquisition of Star Wars which, due to their infamous purging of the larger canon and tight-lid they kept on the franchise, meant that TT couldn't work on as many Star Wars games as they used to. At this point they had already milked the franchise to the point where they were making their own stories for these games, so it might have seemed wise for they to start diversifying, but the audience wasn't really there. Don't get me wrong, Lego Indiana Jones and Lego Batman were still huge hits, but they didn't draw in the crowds like Star Wars did and that was beginning to become more apparent as the years drew on. It got to the point that, when we finally did get another Star Wars movie out of Disney, TT couldn't wait for a trilogy and jumped on the chance to adapt it, reasoning that they could add the newer movies later as DLC. (A plan which didn't, ultimately, pan out.)
The last big fork in the road for TT was the fact that their target demographic, kids, have all recently been stolen by a new titan of the kids gaming world; Fortnite. Ask any kid under the age of 13 what Lego Star Wars is and you'll probably be met with a blank stare before they go back to playing Fortnite on their phones, that's because TT's brand has lost all of it's visibility. Now that Fortnite is here to stay, it seems to be sucking all the air out of the room for child targeted games and that has been an absolute nightmare for potential competition. Lego Star Wars slipped from the spotlight for a few years, but that was enough for their throne to be co-opted, and I don't think that Lego has the ability to reclaim that seat.
Come 2020 we will get the chance to see once and for all how much the Star Wars brand is worth in the land of the plastic, as everyone gathers to see what is next for the world's fifth largest franchise.(behind Mikey Mouse, Winne the pooh, Hello Kitty and Pokemon.) Unfortunately for TT, I don't think that the success of their next game lies in their hands at all. Star Wars as a brand has lost a lot of reverence due to the performance of recent movies and despite the success of breakout shows, like the Mandalorian, many see this next movie as make-or-break for the franchise. If 'Rise of the Skywalker' (terrible name, by the by) does poorly then it might spell disaster for TT who are riding on the viability of the brand, or it might not, one can never be certain with these things. If I'm right, however, then it might behoove the heads at TT to construct a plea to J.J. Abrams to do all he can to get this next movie right, he just might be their only hope.
Video gaming is very diverse and eclectic hobby that draws in folk of all walks of life. You'll find players old and young, occidental and otherwise, all drawn by the allure of interactive entertainment media, and such media is often adjusted accordingly. Be that as it may, that doesn't mean that games aimed towards a younger demographic cannot still strike a cord with all gamers due to it's quality, purity of vision and/or enjoyability factor. (And yes, I am trying to justify why it is that I still play Lego Star Wars games.)
Lego Star Wars is a surprisingly weird concept when you stop and think about it. "What if we completely retold the events of the original and new trilogy without words and using only Lego characters and blocks to make up the world?" It's the kind of concept you'd expect to be spat out in the Lego marketing room after a caffeine-fueled and unproductive 12 hour brainstorming session, the kind of suggestion that would then be immediately laughed off by the rest of the room as too incurably stupid to ever make a profit. And yet 13 years later we are looking at one of the most successful gaming kids franchises of all time, spawning a formula so popular that it has been translated to every relevant media product with a sliver of a chance to be marketable to children. We've seen Lego Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Pirates of the Caribbean, Batman and The Avengers, and next year we'll finally get 'The Skywalker Saga' to wrap up what Lego started all those years ago.
So what exactly is it about the Lego formula that has proven so effective to the public all of these years and, more importantly, can it be replicated? In recent years we have seen that the frequency at which we see new Lego games has started to let up considerably, this year all we got was the adaptation of 'The Lego Movie 2'. (Which I can only imagine disappeared with as much of a whimper as that movie did.) It's a farcry from their heyday when you couldn't go a single trade show without seeing the latest Lego game up front and centre. So what happened? Did the trend start to get old in the eyes of younger gamers or did something change in the formula to suck away at the magic a bit? I intend to look at all that today and more!
Firstly I feel that it's important to establish, regardless of how crazy it sounds, that TT games existed before Lego Star Wars. (I know, I know!) In fact, they were established a full year beforehand in 2005 through a merger between Giant Interactive and Traveller's Tales. (The people responsible for that fantastic Toy Story 2 game adaptation.) So they came from a storied history of turning movies into actually viable movie tie-ins, assisting with a few of the Crash Bandicoot games and taking the rap for Sega when it comes to Sonic R and 3D Blast. (I wish I could say that those are the worst Sonic games, but 'Sonic Eraser' exists.) The Lego company approached them in late 2005 with their idea to make a game based on their current partnership with Lucasfilm and the rest was video gaming history. TT would end up putting out a game that garnered mass praise and sales for everyone involved and their future history was sealed as them being 'the Lego games guys'. Sure, they put out a few well-received independent projects since then, but they are always dragged back to their Lego overlords at somepoint.
From a conceptual perspective, I've always thought that 'Lego Star Wars' was an ingenious idea to pursue. As a series that thrives on the audience's ability to believe in the impossible, Star Wars has always appealed to younger folk in particular. This was especially true in 2005, when George Lucas has just gone through considerable effort (and ridicule) in marketing his new movies towards kids and reshaping the old ones to the same ends. Marrying that world with concepts as innately imaginative and kid friendly as Lego and gaming, and your left with an recipe for commercial success. All TT had to do was find a way to translate all of the story of the Star Wars movies into Lego form, something that had become particularly tricky to pull off ever since Lucas leaned a bit too hard on the 'exposition' faucet when writing the prequels' scripts.
The solution that the team settled on was smart elegant and, most importantly, kid friendly. Firstly, they would make use of that iconic Star Wars scroll text to establish the pertinent information behind each and every chapter, and Secondly, they would play out every cutscene in adorable Lego mime. That means that everytime two characters needed to converse, it was done wordlessly using gestures or slapstick in a manner universal to all ages. This actually allowed for kids, like myself, to loosely follow along with the story of Star Wars which can seem impenetrable from some angles. (Like the endless trade negotiation talk that littered the prequels.) In later games this would branch out a bit, with little sound effects and grunting, mostly to humorous effect, but it wasn't until the 2010's when TT just gave up and started using soundbits. A decision which I never agreed with and still feel slightly betrayed by. (Incidentally, the soundbit decision is also directly responsible for 'Lego Lord of the Rings' being pulled from store shelves. Licensing rights can be tricky like that.)
This creative approach towards storytelling blended into their core design philosophy as TT tried to inspire the same sort of creativity that was indicative of the Lego brand. This translated into one of the key features present in every single Lego game, the ability to build. Often as you traverse through the levels in Lego games, following along the trail and breaking objects along the way for studs, you'd find certain assortments of discarded blocks that were still buzzing with building potential. The player's can then dive into these and reassemble them into useful tools or structures to assist their progress, adding a visceral sense of collaboration from the player's end.
Combat was also a factor that underwent particular consideration when it came to constructing this game. It had to feel fun and easy to pick up, afterall, so they went for the single button system which worked so well for the first two Fable games. The nuance came in the timing of button presses alongside the weapon in that character's hand and the context of the situation. Delay your lightsaber swings by a second and you could pull of a powerful combo, or press the fire button as a laser is coming at you and your character will quickly dodge out of the way. It was a system that was both simple enough to be intuitive and just big enough that player's would learn a few quirks if they played around with it. Of course, there was no real depth to combat itself, but in a game like this there didn't really need to be.
The best part of this game series for me, and the thing which has kept me coming back all these years later, is that addictive collect-athon angle that all of these games mastered. Every single Lego game is absolutely dripping with collectibles and all offer cool rewards for going out of your way for them. First there are the characters who come with unique abilities and appearances and must be purchased in the Cantina or unlocked; then there are the 10 'Minikits' in each level, which resemble Lego sets and must be hunted down. (Often using those abilities from the characters you just unlocked.) Then there are the Red Bricks, which unlock cool cheats for the players to mess around with. Later games would also bring in the elusive golden bricks which were awarded for completing other collectible sets and would go towards unlocking exclusive bonus levels. Oh, and then there is the 'True Jedi' mode which requires players to gather a certain number of 'studs' in each level in exchange for another gold brick. What I'm trying to convey here is that the Lego games are literally some of most replayable games on the market and are practically brim with content for everyone to enjoy.
Every level needs to be played at least twice to get everything (although probably a lot more times, just to be sure.) and, due to the quality level design, most players have no issue making that sacrifice time and time again. So many levels are dripping in secrets that can only be accessed by unlocking 'free play', (The ability to play through that chapter with any character, as opposed to the ones relevant to that point of the story.) and a decent amount of them have alternate pathways and areas to take advantage of. The Lego Star wars games, and all the Lego games for that matter, all exploited the 'scavenger hunt' desires of folk to keep us hooked for weeks on end, and it must have worked, seeing how successful these games were.
All things must come to an end at some point and for some reason, however, and for TT games their hot streak was ended by a mixture of their own over-saturation and the machinations of Disney. You see, TT were flooding the market year after year with their Lego games to the point where it became impossible for people to keep up with them all, especially as their core Kid audience started to grow up and seek interest in other games. Matters were not helped by the Disney acquisition of Star Wars which, due to their infamous purging of the larger canon and tight-lid they kept on the franchise, meant that TT couldn't work on as many Star Wars games as they used to. At this point they had already milked the franchise to the point where they were making their own stories for these games, so it might have seemed wise for they to start diversifying, but the audience wasn't really there. Don't get me wrong, Lego Indiana Jones and Lego Batman were still huge hits, but they didn't draw in the crowds like Star Wars did and that was beginning to become more apparent as the years drew on. It got to the point that, when we finally did get another Star Wars movie out of Disney, TT couldn't wait for a trilogy and jumped on the chance to adapt it, reasoning that they could add the newer movies later as DLC. (A plan which didn't, ultimately, pan out.)
The last big fork in the road for TT was the fact that their target demographic, kids, have all recently been stolen by a new titan of the kids gaming world; Fortnite. Ask any kid under the age of 13 what Lego Star Wars is and you'll probably be met with a blank stare before they go back to playing Fortnite on their phones, that's because TT's brand has lost all of it's visibility. Now that Fortnite is here to stay, it seems to be sucking all the air out of the room for child targeted games and that has been an absolute nightmare for potential competition. Lego Star Wars slipped from the spotlight for a few years, but that was enough for their throne to be co-opted, and I don't think that Lego has the ability to reclaim that seat.
Come 2020 we will get the chance to see once and for all how much the Star Wars brand is worth in the land of the plastic, as everyone gathers to see what is next for the world's fifth largest franchise.(behind Mikey Mouse, Winne the pooh, Hello Kitty and Pokemon.) Unfortunately for TT, I don't think that the success of their next game lies in their hands at all. Star Wars as a brand has lost a lot of reverence due to the performance of recent movies and despite the success of breakout shows, like the Mandalorian, many see this next movie as make-or-break for the franchise. If 'Rise of the Skywalker' (terrible name, by the by) does poorly then it might spell disaster for TT who are riding on the viability of the brand, or it might not, one can never be certain with these things. If I'm right, however, then it might behoove the heads at TT to construct a plea to J.J. Abrams to do all he can to get this next movie right, he just might be their only hope.
Sunday, 8 December 2019
When games die
Memento Mori
You wouldn't know it from speaking me, but I'm not always the most staunch realist. Why? Because I could never come to terms with the concept of death. Don't get me wrong, a large part of me takes comfort from the fact that there is a finite time for everything, a promised end for all things, and yet a small part of me can't help but pine for the impossible. For immortality. I suppose it comes with the human condition, to believe in myths. And that is largely the reason why I could never wrap my old noggin around the concept of purely online games, because those are titles that are ultimately destined to die.
When I read news about how Xbox's project Scarlett might be entirely disc-less it does make my stomach churn, because I know that the second all of gaming becomes digital is the second we, as game players, lose any and all control over the software. Sure, we can download games from the aether, but we can't pop them in and just play them like the old days. I know that way of thinking is particularly redundant in today's day and age, (wherein games all require considerable online downloads anyway, even when acquired as disks) but I still can't shake those nagging doubts from my mind. (And then there's the conversation about the death of second-hand, something I use to buy 90% of my games, but that's a topic for another blog.)
These are the kind of thoughts that come rushing back everytime I see a game have it's support dropped and it is ultimately left to die. (Something I am forever in fear of considering the fact that my Father's favourite is a 10 year old online EA game.) I had those pangs of fear when I heard about Anthem letting up on development, although the fact that are planning a huge resurrection does cheer me up a tad; I mourned when news broke that Battleborn's servers would be shutting down in January next year, despite not really liking the game and feeling that it tried too hard to be Overwatch despite possessing nowhere near as many memorable characters; and I was darn near having an attack when I heard about Bethesda dropping support for the Elder Scrolls Legends yesterday.
This 'announcement', if you can call it that, was unceremoniously dropped upon the world via an innocuous Reddit post in the dead of the night. In this post, Bethesda provided an 'update' wherein they essentially threw up their hands and admitted that their 'Roadmap', which promised a new expansion's arrival anyday now, was being revised to the tune of removal. That new expansion alongside it's promised 'misc changes' had been scrapped and that choice would "inform our decisions on content and feature development going forward." So far so foreboding, but no one ever explicitly said that the game was dead, right? Wrong. "We will also continue to support the game with monthly reward cards and regular in-game events. New expansions and other future content, however, are no longer under active development. We will continue to provide ongoing maintenance support." If that ain't a farewell, I don't know what is.
Let me be abundantly frank with you; this news does spell the end for ESL. Being an online game, and a card game at that, The Elder Scrolls Legends counts on the ecosystem being supplied constantly with new updates to card values, new cards pack and, occasionally, new mechanics. It is what is know as 'shifting the Meta' and it's how all the people who follow the game can keep themselves entertained by doing their best to account for new variables. If nothing changes then 'winning' decks never change and people get bored as they have nothing to keep up with. Additionally, when a game admits to having no more updates it upsets potential newcomers from getting involved as none one wants to dedicate their time into a game that is already on it's way out the door.
Personally, I think this announcement hit me so hard because I was actually invested in this title at some point. I never believed in Anthem in the firstplace and I only ever played Battleborn for the first few days after release, but ESL was something that I actively dedicated hours of my life trying to improve at. (I never did, by the by.) In another life I even had the chance to play this game with other people, which makes this an especially rare game in my book. Sure, I may have dropped off in recent years but that was just because I was awful at it, I still enjoyed the game and planned to try my hand at it again sometime. (Guess those plans are null and void.) As an inherently anti-social individual, this is the equivalent of finding out that an old acquaintance has passed away and thinking "Damn, never got that £5 he owed me."
What's more, I just can't wrap my head around why exactly all of this is happening, I mean I never thought that things were this bad. Early pundits who have covered the issue usually default to bringing up Steam charts to point out how the game was never doing well in all its life time, with an all-time peak of around 8000 concurrent players, but this metric vastly misses the point. Not only was ESL's major debut on the phone, but the game was first debuted on Bethesda's own launcher; Bethesda.net, which, say about it what you will, does not offer up it's user stats to be counted along Steams. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that this means Elder Scrolls Online was really a powerhouse in terms of player concurrency, just that things couldn't have been as dire as people are initially thinking.
The game was even well received once it actually came out. Sure, initially people rallied against the thing for not being The Elder Scrolls 6 (Just like they did with The Elder Scrolls: Blades) but after launch the title did pick up praise from regular players. Those who instinctively accused the game of being a 'Hearthstone clone' picked it up and realized that there were some cool differences which kept things familiar but still changed them up. Heck, the game even won some accolades in it's time, with it being hailed as the second best online card game. (although I feel that list was missing a couple major players like 'Magic the Gathering') Bethesda didn't let the game rot either, dedicating a trailer for the game once every E3 as well as semi-regular streams of playing the game with Pete Hines.
And yet, for whatever reason it all just wasn't enough and now it seems that Bethesda are counting their losses and packing bags. They're still yet to bring the game to consoles (They're a year late on that) and the team have still thrown in the towel. I've heard a few folks guess that this is a decision with next year in mind, ease off their slate of games in 2019 in preparation for their new IP 'Starfield' which is rumored to launch in 2020, but I still don't think that requires killing off a decent card game this unceremoniously. Even Fallout 76 is getting more of a chance and that game is hot trash.
But nothing I can say on the matter will change things. The decision has been made and the doctors have called TOD on ESL. In the next year or so the team will wind down as player numbers slowly dwindle down to nothing, at which point the plug will be pulled on the servers. Their final sputtering as the light leaves their LEDs will mark the last moments of a once-promising project. This is the fate that awaits all online-only games sooner or later, and indeed us all. It's a situation that never fails to get me all melancholy and torn up in the feels. It's never pleasant to feel your own mortality. Memento Mori.
You wouldn't know it from speaking me, but I'm not always the most staunch realist. Why? Because I could never come to terms with the concept of death. Don't get me wrong, a large part of me takes comfort from the fact that there is a finite time for everything, a promised end for all things, and yet a small part of me can't help but pine for the impossible. For immortality. I suppose it comes with the human condition, to believe in myths. And that is largely the reason why I could never wrap my old noggin around the concept of purely online games, because those are titles that are ultimately destined to die.
When I read news about how Xbox's project Scarlett might be entirely disc-less it does make my stomach churn, because I know that the second all of gaming becomes digital is the second we, as game players, lose any and all control over the software. Sure, we can download games from the aether, but we can't pop them in and just play them like the old days. I know that way of thinking is particularly redundant in today's day and age, (wherein games all require considerable online downloads anyway, even when acquired as disks) but I still can't shake those nagging doubts from my mind. (And then there's the conversation about the death of second-hand, something I use to buy 90% of my games, but that's a topic for another blog.)
These are the kind of thoughts that come rushing back everytime I see a game have it's support dropped and it is ultimately left to die. (Something I am forever in fear of considering the fact that my Father's favourite is a 10 year old online EA game.) I had those pangs of fear when I heard about Anthem letting up on development, although the fact that are planning a huge resurrection does cheer me up a tad; I mourned when news broke that Battleborn's servers would be shutting down in January next year, despite not really liking the game and feeling that it tried too hard to be Overwatch despite possessing nowhere near as many memorable characters; and I was darn near having an attack when I heard about Bethesda dropping support for the Elder Scrolls Legends yesterday.
This 'announcement', if you can call it that, was unceremoniously dropped upon the world via an innocuous Reddit post in the dead of the night. In this post, Bethesda provided an 'update' wherein they essentially threw up their hands and admitted that their 'Roadmap', which promised a new expansion's arrival anyday now, was being revised to the tune of removal. That new expansion alongside it's promised 'misc changes' had been scrapped and that choice would "inform our decisions on content and feature development going forward." So far so foreboding, but no one ever explicitly said that the game was dead, right? Wrong. "We will also continue to support the game with monthly reward cards and regular in-game events. New expansions and other future content, however, are no longer under active development. We will continue to provide ongoing maintenance support." If that ain't a farewell, I don't know what is.
Let me be abundantly frank with you; this news does spell the end for ESL. Being an online game, and a card game at that, The Elder Scrolls Legends counts on the ecosystem being supplied constantly with new updates to card values, new cards pack and, occasionally, new mechanics. It is what is know as 'shifting the Meta' and it's how all the people who follow the game can keep themselves entertained by doing their best to account for new variables. If nothing changes then 'winning' decks never change and people get bored as they have nothing to keep up with. Additionally, when a game admits to having no more updates it upsets potential newcomers from getting involved as none one wants to dedicate their time into a game that is already on it's way out the door.
Personally, I think this announcement hit me so hard because I was actually invested in this title at some point. I never believed in Anthem in the firstplace and I only ever played Battleborn for the first few days after release, but ESL was something that I actively dedicated hours of my life trying to improve at. (I never did, by the by.) In another life I even had the chance to play this game with other people, which makes this an especially rare game in my book. Sure, I may have dropped off in recent years but that was just because I was awful at it, I still enjoyed the game and planned to try my hand at it again sometime. (Guess those plans are null and void.) As an inherently anti-social individual, this is the equivalent of finding out that an old acquaintance has passed away and thinking "Damn, never got that £5 he owed me."
What's more, I just can't wrap my head around why exactly all of this is happening, I mean I never thought that things were this bad. Early pundits who have covered the issue usually default to bringing up Steam charts to point out how the game was never doing well in all its life time, with an all-time peak of around 8000 concurrent players, but this metric vastly misses the point. Not only was ESL's major debut on the phone, but the game was first debuted on Bethesda's own launcher; Bethesda.net, which, say about it what you will, does not offer up it's user stats to be counted along Steams. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that this means Elder Scrolls Online was really a powerhouse in terms of player concurrency, just that things couldn't have been as dire as people are initially thinking.
The game was even well received once it actually came out. Sure, initially people rallied against the thing for not being The Elder Scrolls 6 (Just like they did with The Elder Scrolls: Blades) but after launch the title did pick up praise from regular players. Those who instinctively accused the game of being a 'Hearthstone clone' picked it up and realized that there were some cool differences which kept things familiar but still changed them up. Heck, the game even won some accolades in it's time, with it being hailed as the second best online card game. (although I feel that list was missing a couple major players like 'Magic the Gathering') Bethesda didn't let the game rot either, dedicating a trailer for the game once every E3 as well as semi-regular streams of playing the game with Pete Hines.
And yet, for whatever reason it all just wasn't enough and now it seems that Bethesda are counting their losses and packing bags. They're still yet to bring the game to consoles (They're a year late on that) and the team have still thrown in the towel. I've heard a few folks guess that this is a decision with next year in mind, ease off their slate of games in 2019 in preparation for their new IP 'Starfield' which is rumored to launch in 2020, but I still don't think that requires killing off a decent card game this unceremoniously. Even Fallout 76 is getting more of a chance and that game is hot trash.
But nothing I can say on the matter will change things. The decision has been made and the doctors have called TOD on ESL. In the next year or so the team will wind down as player numbers slowly dwindle down to nothing, at which point the plug will be pulled on the servers. Their final sputtering as the light leaves their LEDs will mark the last moments of a once-promising project. This is the fate that awaits all online-only games sooner or later, and indeed us all. It's a situation that never fails to get me all melancholy and torn up in the feels. It's never pleasant to feel your own mortality. Memento Mori.
Saturday, 7 December 2019
Wasteland 3
One hero falls and another rises.
Yeah, I know that I'm slow on the uptake for this one, but I'm a busy guy some of the time and things just slip through the cracks. That's not to say that I don't consider this game important, just that there has been a lot of other gaming related events that have required more pressing attention from me. That and the prep I have to do for some of my longer form blogs, you know how it goes. I pushed it back for a day, then a week, and now it's been several months and I'm only just getting around to it. Whatever, the point is that I'm here now to take a look over the game that many call "The Fallout that we should have had" (Sigh) Wasteland 3.
For those unfamiliar, all the way back in 1988 one of the earliest RPG developers of all time, Interplay Entertainment, created a post-apocalyptic role playing game in the traditional style of the time. (I'm talking mostly text boxes with a little window pop-up when you come across something noteworthy or hostile.) It was a mostly simple story about 'Desert Rangers' battling robots and bandits all in an effort to bring sanity and order to a world gone feral. In 1997 that concept would get picked up again by them when they translated that world into a fully rendered environment in 'Fallout', which they produced. This time the world had more of a satirical style to it, leaning off the aesthetic of the American Nuclear age with a tongue in cheek approach. Of course, that style wouldn't be 'perfected' until 1998's Fallout 2 wherein Interplay let their full talents be shown and dazzled the budding RPG world. After that, work began on a Fallout 3 which ended up falling apart and the rights for the franchise would end up being sold to Bethesda who turned the isometric turn-based franchise into a action adventure RPG and ended up murdering the whole thing in 2018 with Fallout 76.
Interplay's co-founder Brian Fargo still wasn't done with post-apocalyptia, he founded Inxile and in 2014 they created and released a sequel to their old Wasteland game in 3d rendered glory. This time the game played a lot more like 'X-Com: Enemy Unknown', with players having to manage battle positioning and taking shots based on percentage advantages. The game was full of old RPG throwbacks whilst simultaneously taking full advantage of all the evolutions of the modern age in terms of game development. Many who had become disillusioned with Bethesda's approach to Fallout consequently looked to Wasteland 2 as an example of what they had been missing for all of these years. Nowadays it remains something of a cult classic amidst traditional RPG fans who have been waiting on a promised sequel for a good long while now, one which seems set to arrive next year.
At X019, that event which I definitely watched and didn't completely forget about again, (That's my story and I'm sticking with it.) Inxile delivered a full gameplay trailer for their next game, taking place in the snowy wastes of Colorado. (Didn't know it got that cold out there, but I'll buy it.) From a timing perspective, there honestly couldn't have been a better point to drop this trailer. As sad as it is to say, a lot of the love for Wasteland 2 was fueled by a pointed anger towards Bethesda and their 'dumbing down' of the Fallout franchise, which is was so many old RPG heads adopted Inxile's game so readily. Now that Bethesda have stuck themselves in the dog house with all the rest of their fans, it only makes sense for Wasteland to come along again and promise all those fans the world. Obviously, I'm not accusing Fargo of planning this all out, that would be literally impossible with how development cycles work, I'm just pointing out how this timing proved serendipitous.
This time around it seems that the rangers, who are typically from the deserts of Nevada, have strayed to the East in order to deal with a budding threat from the locales. Apparently the so-called Patriarch of Nevada has lost control of his territory as his three children, who are "even more ruthless than he is", have torn up the land. Therefore the Rangers have been courted by the Patriarch himself to restore order and, presumably, put down his children as they go. Obviously, this seems like a situation ripe for subversions and it wouldn't be a Wasteland title if there wasn't some sort of huge decision to be made somewhere down the line. I suspect that these 'wild children' will each have their own opinions on how the land should be ruled and the player's will have to eventually choose between them to ultimately stabilize the land. Or kill all 4 and watch the place fall about. Wasteland is the sort of franchise to allow that level of choice afterall.
The big evolution from a gameplay point that I see right now is the introduction of vehicles that is sure to change the balance of power in the game. In Wasteland 2 there were a significant number of huge deadly robots to threaten your party as you moved further into built-up areas, but you were always expected to deal with them in a 'David vs Goliath' fashion. All players had at their disposal were explosives, ballistics and the occasional energy weapon, so it should be interesting to see if this new focus on vehicular combat will even up the odds somewhat. And, I should add, although the X019 doesn't show any actual combat in the truck, the reveal trailer from 3 years back certainly did tease that, so I suspect the Inxile are probably just nailing down the visual effects for that feature.
I've also taken a look at some Alpha footage of the game that has been floating around and been interested to see some of the evolutions there. (I really am heavily behind on things.) One feature I've noticed is the way that squad members now have equip slots that seem specifically tailored to fit in any of the 'class specific' items that they would require. By that I mean that a medic might have some extra slots for his supplies and so forth. This will be particularly helpful seeing as how previously one just had to keep loading up the right supplies to the right individual and try to remember who was the medic at all times. (Which usually meant a lot of scanning the stat sheets to remember who you made good at what.)
Additionally, there appears to be a influx in the variety of equipment that the player has at their disposal, implying that there will be vast array of enemies to deal with. Must notably I saw in the boxart that there was a minigun (Which should be helpful for situations requiring heavy crowd control) and a flamethrower. (for which I'm less sure how situation appropriate that it will be.) Wasteland 2 was one of the few RPGs that made it genuinely necessary to plan out every single tool that you have at your disposal and so I expect that Wasteland 3 will do the same. Does that mean that the icy setting will have an actual tangible effect on the gameplay? I haven't found anything concrete on that matter but I certainly hope so. Even if that doesn't materialize as a 'freeze' meter, or the possibility of being beset by an obfuscating snowstorm mid gameplay; I'd at least like the ability to set off a mini avalanche on someone's head.
One thing that I haven't noticed in any of the footage regarding Wasteland is any combat-based action that isn't directly shooting someone. That may sound strange to point out, but I've always argued that this 'turn-based' style of gameplay would be perfect for contextualized actions. Just look at the way that such is handled in 'Torment: Tides of Numenera'. In that game you'll find old technologies around the battlefield that can be used against your opponents in surprising and effective ways. All I want for Wasteland is the ability to grab and chuck an adjacent glass bottle at someone if the situation presents itself, maybe cover them in potentially flammable liquid in doing so. I just feel that would be the next step in evolving this gameplay to the height that it's meant to reach, bringing a much more visceral twist to combat as players will pay more attention to their surrounding environment, but I digress.
Wasteland is a bitter reminder of how far Fallout has fallen, but it also doubles as a damn fine replacement in the interim whilst we wait for Bethesda to get their act together. Personally, I positively adore the 'tactical-turn-based-shooter' genre and gobble it up wherever I can, so naturally Wasteland 3 is already on my wishlist. For now I suspect we've heard everything about this title that we're going to until E3 2020, so we can wait with bated breath. (And maybe give 2 another playthrough in the meanwhile)
Yeah, I know that I'm slow on the uptake for this one, but I'm a busy guy some of the time and things just slip through the cracks. That's not to say that I don't consider this game important, just that there has been a lot of other gaming related events that have required more pressing attention from me. That and the prep I have to do for some of my longer form blogs, you know how it goes. I pushed it back for a day, then a week, and now it's been several months and I'm only just getting around to it. Whatever, the point is that I'm here now to take a look over the game that many call "The Fallout that we should have had" (Sigh) Wasteland 3.
For those unfamiliar, all the way back in 1988 one of the earliest RPG developers of all time, Interplay Entertainment, created a post-apocalyptic role playing game in the traditional style of the time. (I'm talking mostly text boxes with a little window pop-up when you come across something noteworthy or hostile.) It was a mostly simple story about 'Desert Rangers' battling robots and bandits all in an effort to bring sanity and order to a world gone feral. In 1997 that concept would get picked up again by them when they translated that world into a fully rendered environment in 'Fallout', which they produced. This time the world had more of a satirical style to it, leaning off the aesthetic of the American Nuclear age with a tongue in cheek approach. Of course, that style wouldn't be 'perfected' until 1998's Fallout 2 wherein Interplay let their full talents be shown and dazzled the budding RPG world. After that, work began on a Fallout 3 which ended up falling apart and the rights for the franchise would end up being sold to Bethesda who turned the isometric turn-based franchise into a action adventure RPG and ended up murdering the whole thing in 2018 with Fallout 76.
Interplay's co-founder Brian Fargo still wasn't done with post-apocalyptia, he founded Inxile and in 2014 they created and released a sequel to their old Wasteland game in 3d rendered glory. This time the game played a lot more like 'X-Com: Enemy Unknown', with players having to manage battle positioning and taking shots based on percentage advantages. The game was full of old RPG throwbacks whilst simultaneously taking full advantage of all the evolutions of the modern age in terms of game development. Many who had become disillusioned with Bethesda's approach to Fallout consequently looked to Wasteland 2 as an example of what they had been missing for all of these years. Nowadays it remains something of a cult classic amidst traditional RPG fans who have been waiting on a promised sequel for a good long while now, one which seems set to arrive next year.
At X019, that event which I definitely watched and didn't completely forget about again, (That's my story and I'm sticking with it.) Inxile delivered a full gameplay trailer for their next game, taking place in the snowy wastes of Colorado. (Didn't know it got that cold out there, but I'll buy it.) From a timing perspective, there honestly couldn't have been a better point to drop this trailer. As sad as it is to say, a lot of the love for Wasteland 2 was fueled by a pointed anger towards Bethesda and their 'dumbing down' of the Fallout franchise, which is was so many old RPG heads adopted Inxile's game so readily. Now that Bethesda have stuck themselves in the dog house with all the rest of their fans, it only makes sense for Wasteland to come along again and promise all those fans the world. Obviously, I'm not accusing Fargo of planning this all out, that would be literally impossible with how development cycles work, I'm just pointing out how this timing proved serendipitous.
This time around it seems that the rangers, who are typically from the deserts of Nevada, have strayed to the East in order to deal with a budding threat from the locales. Apparently the so-called Patriarch of Nevada has lost control of his territory as his three children, who are "even more ruthless than he is", have torn up the land. Therefore the Rangers have been courted by the Patriarch himself to restore order and, presumably, put down his children as they go. Obviously, this seems like a situation ripe for subversions and it wouldn't be a Wasteland title if there wasn't some sort of huge decision to be made somewhere down the line. I suspect that these 'wild children' will each have their own opinions on how the land should be ruled and the player's will have to eventually choose between them to ultimately stabilize the land. Or kill all 4 and watch the place fall about. Wasteland is the sort of franchise to allow that level of choice afterall.
The big evolution from a gameplay point that I see right now is the introduction of vehicles that is sure to change the balance of power in the game. In Wasteland 2 there were a significant number of huge deadly robots to threaten your party as you moved further into built-up areas, but you were always expected to deal with them in a 'David vs Goliath' fashion. All players had at their disposal were explosives, ballistics and the occasional energy weapon, so it should be interesting to see if this new focus on vehicular combat will even up the odds somewhat. And, I should add, although the X019 doesn't show any actual combat in the truck, the reveal trailer from 3 years back certainly did tease that, so I suspect the Inxile are probably just nailing down the visual effects for that feature.
I've also taken a look at some Alpha footage of the game that has been floating around and been interested to see some of the evolutions there. (I really am heavily behind on things.) One feature I've noticed is the way that squad members now have equip slots that seem specifically tailored to fit in any of the 'class specific' items that they would require. By that I mean that a medic might have some extra slots for his supplies and so forth. This will be particularly helpful seeing as how previously one just had to keep loading up the right supplies to the right individual and try to remember who was the medic at all times. (Which usually meant a lot of scanning the stat sheets to remember who you made good at what.)
Additionally, there appears to be a influx in the variety of equipment that the player has at their disposal, implying that there will be vast array of enemies to deal with. Must notably I saw in the boxart that there was a minigun (Which should be helpful for situations requiring heavy crowd control) and a flamethrower. (for which I'm less sure how situation appropriate that it will be.) Wasteland 2 was one of the few RPGs that made it genuinely necessary to plan out every single tool that you have at your disposal and so I expect that Wasteland 3 will do the same. Does that mean that the icy setting will have an actual tangible effect on the gameplay? I haven't found anything concrete on that matter but I certainly hope so. Even if that doesn't materialize as a 'freeze' meter, or the possibility of being beset by an obfuscating snowstorm mid gameplay; I'd at least like the ability to set off a mini avalanche on someone's head.
One thing that I haven't noticed in any of the footage regarding Wasteland is any combat-based action that isn't directly shooting someone. That may sound strange to point out, but I've always argued that this 'turn-based' style of gameplay would be perfect for contextualized actions. Just look at the way that such is handled in 'Torment: Tides of Numenera'. In that game you'll find old technologies around the battlefield that can be used against your opponents in surprising and effective ways. All I want for Wasteland is the ability to grab and chuck an adjacent glass bottle at someone if the situation presents itself, maybe cover them in potentially flammable liquid in doing so. I just feel that would be the next step in evolving this gameplay to the height that it's meant to reach, bringing a much more visceral twist to combat as players will pay more attention to their surrounding environment, but I digress.
Wasteland is a bitter reminder of how far Fallout has fallen, but it also doubles as a damn fine replacement in the interim whilst we wait for Bethesda to get their act together. Personally, I positively adore the 'tactical-turn-based-shooter' genre and gobble it up wherever I can, so naturally Wasteland 3 is already on my wishlist. For now I suspect we've heard everything about this title that we're going to until E3 2020, so we can wait with bated breath. (And maybe give 2 another playthrough in the meanwhile)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)























































