Dota 2 (2013) by Valve

I finally feel qualified to write a review of Dota 2, since I'm just exiting the stages of being an absolute beginner in Dota 2 and finally progressing into the "novice" stage.

After nearly 1,500 hours over a period of 6 years.

I remember reading a news story a while back during the release of the hugely popular Witcher 3 in 2015 that was speaking about how many other games had lost thousands of players, all of whom had flocked to the big new game and were engrossed by it. Except for Dota 2 players, who continued to play to their normal numbers and weren't distracted by another game releasing. The writer came to the humorous conclusion that Dota 2 players are probably just not aware of the existence of other games.

Although I love other video games, that's still easily understandable for me, because Dota 2 is by far the best competitive game I've ever played. It sucks people in and devours them, dominating their every waking moment. I know people who don't play any other games, just Dota. And I understand why.

The sheer amount of variance between games and the bevy of differing mechanics enables the player to continue playing for thousands of hours—as I have—and still feel utterly amateurish. There's so much to learn, and so much to think about while you're in the game. The game isn't so much a test of how mechanically skilled you are, or how fast your reflexes are, but your ability to multitask and make a multitude of complex decisions in a small amount of time. Do you have vision? Are smokes of deceit available? What's your next item? Who is killing you in fights, and what can you do to prevent that? Have you used your shovel when it's off cooldown? What about midas? If you win a fight, should you Rosh, or take objectives? When's the proper time to split up and farm? And those are just the in-game, micro-decisions. You've got vaster ones to make as you continue to play the game. Which heroes feel stronger this meta? Which items? Which strategies are working?

Friends and I often talk about our "forever games", ie. the game that you will probably play for decades into the future, because you'll just never get tired of it. And that's Dota 2, for me. I began playing in 2014 and I've taken a significant amount of time off here and there (most recently, for the past 2 years, only to come back once again). If you're looking for a forever game, Dota can certainly be that for you. But there are a few significant hurdles in the way.

First off, I don't think I've ever engaged in anything with a steeper learning curve than Dota 2. There are more than a hundred heroes, of whom you must learn every single thing. All of their abilities, the items they will build, their power scale timings. And then there are hundreds of items you must learn as well. And you've got to apply all of this thinking on the fly to how it affects not only your hero, but your teammates' heroes. It's such a massive amount of knowledge to compile, and it's changing all the time. Nine out of ten players will try this out for 5-20 hours and set it down, utterly bewildered by what they're doing wrong as they get mercilessly brutalized over their first 10 games or so. So it certainly helps to play with a more experienced, exceptionally patient friend who can show you the ropes. And if you stick it out, and play a few hundred hours, you'll find that you can begin to gain an appreciation of why this game so dominates the passions of so many players around the world.

I can talk about how the sound design is fantastic, how I dislike some of the character designs, or any other of normal-video-game-things, but the real focus on reviewing Dota should talk about two things: 1) The incredible job IceFrog and Valve do at balancing a game with so many disparate parts and how having such a deep set of mechanics to learn keeps players coming back for tens of thousands of hours, and 2) the infamously cancerous community surrounding the game.

Dota 2's infamously contemptible community is easily the games worst aspect

I'm not going to blow smoke; many of the players populating Dota's servers are unkind and delusional. I've had literally hundreds of games in which I've watched a player roam into the enemy jungle, try and fight 3-4 enemy heroes, die stupidly, and then proceed to flame their teammates for not following. Or the players who, the moment you die, will jump on your mistake and adopt an air of superiority in scolding you, and trying to correct the way you play—despite being the same rank as you. Everyone playing Dota 2 seems to believe that they belong at a far higher rank than they are, and everyone else is at fault for their placement.

The core component to the toxicity surrounding this game is a stunning lack of awareness of the player's own deficiencies, and the deflection of blame towards anyone else possible. Sure, there are trolls who run down mid, and there are people who refuse to actually support. But these are relatively rare in my experience. What wears me down from playing Dota consistently is the sheer amount of toxic communication and blame-game playing. If you play this game, you've got to have a thick skin. You'll be criticized mercilessly and blamed incorrectly. And it's constant. This happens nearly every game, even if you have a decent behavior score (8000+), as I do. Even I'm not exempt from this behavior—there have been plenty of times in the past when I've engaged in bitter exchanges with teammates. It's something that just comes with the territory of playing such a difficult, highly competitive, intensely human game. Emotions run high and we say things we regret.

That said, I do believe the game's in a better place now than it has been in years past. Supports are more likely to pull, gank, and buy smokes and deward. Individual couriers have done a lot to improve player relations in-game and prevent arguments—it's hard to believe now that you'd sometimes get games in which supports would refuse to buy a courier. And, perhaps most important, Role Queue is a huge, fantastic development—you now no longer have 5 carries every single game. And to deal with such rampantly poor communication etiquette, all you've got to do is mute other players liberally. My personal rule of thumb is to mute anyone who begins suggesting items to other players (these people often have a false sense of superiority that leads to flaming teammates when things go poorly), or begins to broadcast the slightest amount of negativity. I've never regretted muting a player, but I have frequently regretted not muting them. I've even gone through dozens of games with everyone muted on both sides, just enjoying the game itself in lieu of any communication whatsoever. Learning to use the mute buttons liberally is the fastest way to truly enjoy playing Dota 2. But you'll still likely end up having days where Dota 2 is the best game you've ever played, and days where Dota 2 is the worst game you've ever played.

There's also the esports scene around Dota, which is incredible. The International is the best esports tournament in the world, and the Dota client itself has amazing features for spectating games by high-level pros, whenever you want to. I personally enjoy spectating games from Player Perspective, so I can analyze what high level players are doing differently than me when I play.

Reviewing Dota 2 is not like reviewing any other game. It's the deepest, most rewarding competitive experience I've ever had with a video game. But it's also the most infuriating and mood-ruining. Striking a healthy balance between these things is key. If you have the determination to learn the game, a thick skin, and a modicum of intelligence, you'll probably adore this game. And, best of all, you can get all these thousands of hours of enjoyment out of the game without spending a single dime. All the heroes are free so you have a complete playing experience right out of the gate, unlike other, similar games on the market.

And maybe you'll play it forever, like I will. Give it a shot. It's free, after all.

⭐⭐⭐⭐

Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018) by Warhorse Studios

I was interested in Kingdom Come: Deliverance on release but read reviews and decided it wasn't for me. It sounded buggy and unstable, which I can't stand in RPGs—broken quest flags infuriate me. And the save system sounded awful since I can't stand games that don't allow you to quicksave and instead force you to rely on checkpointing, which is almost never as good as your ability to quicksave.

So I decided to pass on it. It sounded like more frustration than it was worth.

2 years later, Epic Store offered it for free so I finally decided to check it out. I recalled the save system being tied to potions you had to buy and decided to check and see if there was a mod available that allowed you to quicksave instead. PC modders—being the amazing people they are—had indeed made one! So I installed the game, installed the save anywhere mod, and booted the game and fooled around a bit. The devs have patched most of the bugs and instability out of the game by now, the dialogue writing was of a far higher quality than I was led to believe, and I liked the premise of being a peasant in medieval times rather than a nobleman or some kind of hero. So the game had me interested from minute one.

However, I got to my first combat engagement in which a drunk made a fool of me in a fistfight. The whole thing felt like bullcrap. I had no idea what I was doing, and I rage quit and uninstalled.

But the fight stayed on my mind. I thought about it more and more and considered that I was a kid with no combat experience, fighting a practiced brawler much larger than me. It made sense he would beat me up. I realized then that the game was aiming for a level of realism much higher than that of other RPGs. I reinstalled the game and decided not to confront the drunk. Like an immersive sim, there are various emergent ways of solving these problems—I ended up doing a favor for my tavern buddies, and in return, they came with me and beat the crap out of the drunk together.

From that moment on, I was completely hooked.

This game has a hardcore group of fans that sing its praises, and after playing for nearly 30 hours I'm starting to see why. It's unapologetic in its identity: It's a hardcore RPG that aims for a level of realism not found in other RPGs these days. It reminds me a bit of Skyrim with a thick coat of realistic paint: There's no magic here, no fantastical elements, but there are survival elements in place of those—you've got to sleep, eat, and bathe yourself. Your inventory weight is going to be taken up mostly by your armor. Archery is insanely difficult, like it is in real life. And, perhaps most rewarding; combat will take literal hours of training for you, the player, to get right.

The game is historically realistic about what Henry, the peasant protagonist, can do. You don't leave your parents house a total bad-ass—you have to train! When I began fighting I would nearly always get my butt kicked unless I was fighting naked, starving bandits. If I got jumped by Cumans on the road, I had to run or I'd die. Luckily for me, you get to a certain point in the story where Henry has the opportunity to train under a Master-at-Arms. Sir Bernard beat me senseless with a wooden sword for a literal hour before I began to get the hang of perfect blocks and master strikes, which require precise timing to pull off. I spent—no exaggeration—2 straight hours (real-time, not in-game) simply sparring with Sir Bernard until I could train completely naked, with real weapons, and counter every move without taking a single scratch of damage. And the the process was actually fun—not grindy! I got better and better, slowly, as I watched for his tells to try and guess when he was attacking so I could counter. It was incredibly rewarding not only to master that and rough up Sir Bernard for a change, but then to take it out into the "real world" and be able to duel actual knights—who would have slaughtered me before I practiced so much—and make complete fools of them using not stats that I had increased, but my own increase in skill with the game's combat system. The fantastic hollow metal clangs make everything ring true and feel satisfying, and the first-person animations when you pull off a master strike reflect the work you put in the become so well-practiced. It's the single most rewarding first-person melee combat system I've ever played in a game. I'll never be able to go back to Skyrim again.

Where it gets difficult is when you're fighting multiple enemies. But I don't think is a flaw—rather, it reflects the realism of how difficult it is to fight multiple enemies and come out on top. It's rare that I will come across a trio of Cumans on the road in an ambush and escape without a scratch. The enemy AI is quite good in these battles: One will pull out a bow and fire at you repeatedly, one with a shield will engage you from the front, while the third constantly tries to circle behind you. And if they have a dog, forget it—the little mongrel will constantly circle behind me more quickly than I can move. The solution in these battles is usually to sneak around the ambush, or run. But rather than frustrating, this lends realism to the game. I never leave such encounters angry because the game is staying consistent with its commitment to realism.

This commitment is also beginning to show now that I'm later in the game and wearing heavier armor. I love vast power scales in games, and this game reflects the near-invulnerability of a fully plate-armored knight in the 15th century. Your errors in combat are so much more forgiving when you're wearing a full set of heavy armor that your opponents need to continue to wail away nearly until your armor breaks before they can properly damage you. It makes all of your war loot even more valuable, while at the same time depicting realistically the intimidating power of a heavy knight. The loot in the game is surprisingly compelling, too—mostly because Henry has nearly a dozen different armor slots for all the layers of armor and padding a medieval knight would wear. I had no idea they were so thickly armored before playing this game.

This sort of painstaking realism also applies to non-combat things such as reading, which no peasant was able to do in the 15th century. You have to go on a specific quest to find someone to teach you, which takes in-game days of practice with a scribe. This is the level of realism to which this game aspires, and I love that about it.

In addition to how it handles combat and the growth of both your abilities and your character's, there are a number of things the game does as-good or better than any other RPG of the past decade or so, and some of these things have not been mentioned nearly enough in media covering the game: It has some of the best story and character writing out there, and that is supported by phenomenal voice acting—I particularly enjoy the player character Henry's performance by Tom McKay, and that of Hans Capon. It has a fresh setting that hasn't been explored in this level of detail before, and it has a strong commitment to historical accuracy that lends weight to it. It has utterly phenomenal music and art design—I spent minutes at a time just looking at the frescoes present in churches.

This game hits on so many things I love: It's fantastic historical fiction, it tells a compelling story with a strong narrative hook, it has emotionally resonant characters who feel like real people. And it has challenging, rewarding gameplay.

⭐⭐⭐⭐

Downloadable Content: From the Ashes (2018)

I'm surprised by the lukewarm reviews of this content because I loved it! It provides a nice motivational diversion from the main game. About halfway through the main campaign I found myself filthy rich simply from looting and selling all of the gear I acquire from sacking bandit and Cuman camps. This expansion gives you somewhere to invest that money. The way it ties in to the main campaign and allows you to 'recruit' NPCs you've come across via side quests is brilliant as well.

I haven't felt this kind of ownership since Monteriggioni in Assassin's Creed II. This content is absolutely wonderful and I adore it. Watching your settlement grow in real time and observing the NPCs living out their lives is such a rewarding pleasure, and it gave me more motivation to continue doing sidequests and amassing wealth. I think the folks who were dissatisfied with this were expecting something like a settlement builder which Fallout 4 features, however I'm much happier having things more rigid like this expansion, if it avoids the jank and tedium present in games like Fallout 4.

Wonderful DLC; highly recommended.

From the Ashes Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Downloadable Content: A Woman's Lot (2018)

A Woman's Lot centers on Theresa, which is great because she's very well-acted and a solid character. It also lets you get to know the people of Skalitz better, which is welcome. And, best of all, it introduces your dog companion, Mutt! Mutt is the best, he makes the main game so much more enjoyable. I'd honestly pay the cost of this DLC just for him!

However, Theresa's actual mission and, specifically, the objectives you're given, make this actual DLC campaign range anywhere from incredibly frustrating to, by far, the most boring things I've done in the entire game.

As previously indicated; I really liked Kingdom Come: Deliverance. Part of what I like so much is that honest effort went in to designing the quests and objectives. You're constantly invested in what you're doing because the story is so compelling and Henry's growth as a character feels real and earned. All of that is removed in A Woman's Lot. There's zero investment in Theresa because you know none of this carries over, and there's nearly no opportunity to develop her character through the course of the DLC. Beyond the novelty of playing the beginning events of the game from a different point-of-view, her entire portion is all but worthless. The story, too, is basically what you already know, with one or two little Easter eggs thrown in. But aside from that, it's utterly predictable.

I was interested to play as Theresa because I love her character and she provides a nice change of pace from Henry. And I hope they'll include the option to play as a female character in KCD2, but the quest design here is complete and utter garbage and just zero fun to play.

On paper, it seems good: Introduce the player to Theresa's everyday life to make the impact of Skalitz's sacking that much more severe. In practice it's simply not any fun. You're tasked with things like feeding chickens, picking stuff up from the blacksmith, and various other fetch-and-deliver quests that are about as fun as a trip to the dentist. And on paper, requiring Theresa to be stealthy and sneak past guards rather than fighting makes sense. But in practice this clashes severely with the game's controversial save system. The stealth mechanics in KCD are very realistic, which is something I appreciated in the main game; no more hiding right in front of bad guys because your stealth skill is 100, like in Skyrim. But having such realistic stealth mechanics mixed with the way this DLC makes you utterly powerless to fight or run leads to an incredibly difficult, punishing experience. Once you're spotted, you can't even run from the Cumans, so you basically just get killed. And because you're not free to save whenever you like, you're often losing 15-30 minutes of gameplay at a time and forced to start back at the beginning. I was cursing up a storm playing through these sections, which is a clear deviation from my experience in the main game, which I'm nearly always enraptured by!

The cherry on top of this turd pie was near the end, when you're tasked with collecting random things like 10 flowers, 6 bandages, and some water in the dark, as a Cuman patrols near you. The game tries to have your dog help you seek out the items, but this mechanic was broken for me, as the dog did nothing but follow me as usual. I couldn't use a torch without being spotted, so I walked around the same area, tediously, for almost an hour, looking for barely visible flowers in the pitch dark. It was easily the worst time I had playing through this entire game; an absolute nightmare, and if I didn't love KCD so much I'd have shut this down, uninstalled it, and never touched it again.

And then, to top it off! None of this crap you were forced to collect matters anyway! The task you were trying to accomplish by collecting these various worthless items fails regardless of what you do. Thanks, Warhorse!

Seriously though, Kingdom Come: Deliverance is an amazing game. And this DLC is worth getting at a discount just to have Mutt accompany Henry through the main game. But if I ever replay this game from the beginning, there is no way in hell I will ever play through A Woman's Lot again.

I would certainly like to have the option to play as a female character, but more importantly, I want it to be fun and satisfying! And this DLC just simply isn't.

A Woman's Lot rating: ⭐

Halo: Reach (2010) by Bungie

(Note: I played the remastered version of Halo: Reach released in 2019)

343 has done a lot of work with the textures, and it shows—the environments have been spruced up a bit, but the character models especially have been retooled to near-modern standards. While it runs exceptionally on my system on paper—I'm managing 200+ fps nearly constantly (depending on how much Michael Bay is going on on my screen)—there is a persistent stutter which makes things look rather jagged. Normally this would be excusable, but it's rather bothersome in a shooter. Some of the settings are welcome in a remaster such as this; the field of view slider is particularly nice. It shows the team remastering this were listening to the demands of their potential PC customers. I'm sure adding that took some extra work on the part of the devs, and it's much appreciated. TotalBiscuit would have been so happy to see it.

Additionally, mouse and keyboard controls are fantastic. I'm somebody who played all of the original Halo: Reach when it released in 2010 and it plays exactly as I remember it—which is odd because I played it with a controller back then, and I'm playing with a mouse and keyboard now. That goes to show the hard work the development team has put into making mouse and keyboard controls feel so good they come naturally in a game that was never originally meant to have them. There is mouth smoothing and acceleration available, but thankfully they are set to 'off' by default. Another little thing I appreciated as a PC gamer.

In addition to the odd framerate stutter, another complaint regarding the port would be that the sound is relatively poor. Guns are far too quiet and their sound design lacks pop, which makes them feel like little more than plastic toys, and there is no dynamic range here whatsoever which hampers the realistic feel of gunfire and explosions most shooters feature these days. Additionally, the mix in general sounds a bit muddy to my ear—the bass of the music often blares too loudly and drowns out the dialogue that is occurring. It shows how far shooters have come, as I recall Halo: Reach being completely competent in the sound department back in 2010. Sadly, it shows Reach's age, whereas the updated textures make you feel like you're playing a modern game.

As far as stability is concerned, the port has been wonderful. I haven't experienced a single bug thus far.

Maybe you're new to Halo? Perhaps you're a younger gamer, or you've been a old-school PC gamer who never picked up Halo: Combat Evolved or Halo 2 back when they released on PC in the early 2000s. If that's the case, the Halo series represents a sprawling, thrilling adventure that's ambitious and action-packed, and it's a completely competent shooter even in the modern day. My opinion is that you owe it to yourself to check it out, and if you like Halo: Reach, then you'll probably dig the rest of the series, too.

Time to manage expectations, though. Don't expect a fully modern shooter with Halo: Reach! Even with the fresh coat of paint, Halo still feels like Halo—and this is not necessarily a good thing to some people as it's a very particular taste.

Movement and jumping has always felt a bit floaty in Halo games. The campaign difficulty might be a bit higher than folks might be used to, and stronger enemies such as the elites can feel a bit bullet spongey. It will take some time to get used to not being able to aim down iron sights for every weapon, and for sprint to not be readily available.

If you're looking for a great campaign, you will find it here. Halo: Reach features a poignant, phenomenally written and designed campaign with absolutely perfect pacing. It will leave you reeling from its emotional impact despite its minimalist storytelling. One of the highlights of Reach's campaign is that you're finally not the only Spartan around. As Noble Six, you have five other team members around you at all times. Certain members accompany you on certain missions, and sometimes the whole team gets together. It's tough to avoid growing attached to your squadmates as you play through the campaign. Whereas in other games they might remain faceless, helmeted supersoldiers, in Reach they are given a coloring of humanity and they feel like real people as a result. Carter is a stoic leader, always attempting to put his feelings to the side, which makes it all the more noticeable when they bleed through. Kat is a grouchy, technical genius—her disability does little to hamper her. Jun's quiet competence suits him as the sniper of the group. Jorge is gregarious and seems consciously at odds with his nature as a killing machine, and perhaps the most dangerous of the bunch. Emile is a clear A-type personality, and his actions later in the story are perhaps the most memorable bit of Halo: Reach. And Catherine Halsey, the intelligence spook, is perhaps the best of the bunch—her cold calculus renders her little more than a psychopath, but we see the humanity poke through a bit here and there. I particularly loved her scenes with Jorge. Throw these characters into a catastrophic, desperate battle to defend their homeland in a losing war, and you have the makings of a gripping, shattering story of sacrifice and perseverance. This is the best campaign of the series in my opinion, and one of the best single player shooter campaigns ever crafted.

To top it off, all of this game has a soundtrack of nearly unheard of quality despite the lower than usual mix from the muddy sound of the port. The Halo series has great music in general, but Reach's score in particular is so poignant and moody and it suits the campaign narrative perfectly. You'll be humming some of these songs in the shower after a night of playing. Others will bring a tear to your eye for years to come, whenever you hear them.

⭐⭐⭐⭐

STAR WARS Jedi: Fallen Order (2019) by Respawn Entertainment

Fallen Order looks gorgeous and its respect for the Star Wars license is apparent. It does a fairly good job at taking inspiration from recent, popular game series such as Dark Souls, Uncharted, and the Tomb Raider revivals. If you like those games, or you're hardcore Star Wars fan, go ahead and pick this up—You'll probably quite like it! For me, however, it didn't do enough to elevate itself above its genre or its license, and although I love Star Wars and was eager to jump into the world, that love failed to carry me to enjoying this title. I frequently found myself struggling to have fun with it for a number of reasons.

Although Fallen Order looks great graphically and runs fairly well in general, I experienced regular, annoying framerate hitches—most often during transitions into different areas. Normally this is a minor annoyance, but there are several instances in which this hitching and other frame drops occur when you're attempting to platform, or even in the middle of sub-boss fights. It's extremely frustrating to miss the timing for a jump or a parry because the game is dumping frames from 70+ down to 20ish. One instance was the ice slides on Zeffo, at which framerate takes a dump at certain points when you're attempting not to slide off the edge, or make the jump from one slide to another, or when wallrunning and attempting to jump to a hanging vine from which to swing. The framerate hitching here is severe enough to hamper your timing and cause you to miss a jump, which is very frustrating. There's another instance during one sub-boss on Kashyyyk, which I had to battle while experiencing awful framerate drops seemingly every time I entered the room, which led me to such frustration during attempted dodges and parries that I quit playing the game completely for a few days... And scared the crap out of my dog with a loud string of vitriolic curses damning the game's existence.

I generally find Respawn's level design to be incredible; it was the main attraction for me in Titanfall 2. Although the design is nicely cyclical in Fallen Order and cleverly uses shortcuts a la Dark Souls, the actual layout of each individual area within the levels themselves seem far more gamey and much less ambitious than the lived-in, unique, inspired spaces found in Titanfall 2. Fallen Order is made up of mostly small corridors and a sometimes rectangular, box-like rooms for larger encounters. A lot of the stuff in this game looks beautiful graphically on Unreal Engine 4, but I did not enjoy roaming through these environments because despite this graphical beauty, they all ended up seeming very dry content-wise. I appreciate the attempt to liven up the atmosphere by scattering bits of lore and storytelling items throughout the level, but this was done in such an inorganic way that they seemed contrived and out-of-place and made everything feel gamey more than they made the environment seem lived-in and realistic.

Another issue I had with the game is its reliance on backtracking. If you have liked Metroidvania style backtracking, then you'll probably enjoy this about Fallen Order as well. I personally dislike using unlocked abilities to backtrack through levels, as this loop serves more to frustrate me with repetitive environments and engagements rather than impart a sense of a growing power level. I don't want to grind through 90% of an area I've already cleared to unlock something, get to 10% of a new corridor, and get a box that has a different lightsaber knob. To me, that is boring and unfulfilling. For you, maybe it will be different—perhaps you'll enjoy the added challenge. I can't say.

Fallen Order relies on combat as its main challenge, and while it is decent, I couldn't help feeling like swinging the lightsaber felt too light and airy, in addition to having a very small range. It also constantly clips through the environment as you move through the game, and it seems to do no actual physical damage to humans (by this I mean the dismemberment you would expect from a lightsaber, such as with combat finishers in Witcher 3) but still somehow kills them, which feels fake—like your lightsaber is make-believe—and gives a distinct, immersion-breaking feeling of weakness. Some of the most satisfying combat in video games, such as in Dark Souls, features weapons that all seem to have a realistic weight to them, and act physically like a real weapon would. The lightsaber in Fallen Order feels like a make-believe object—a toy, or a stick—and imparts no sense of power or danger that it should. Swinging the zweihander in Dark Souls, or parrying in Sekiro, for example, are some of the most satisfying weapon interactions of any game I have ever played. I wanted the lightsaber in Fallen Order to feel somewhere near this good, too, but it's just lacking. The animations are enjoyable enough, but the weightlessness and the lack of any effect on the environment are unsatisfying enough to noticeably damage the experience. The force powers, however, were excellent—I wished I could use them earlier in the game, and more frequently once I had unlocked them.

I bought the game because I wanted a good Star Wars story, and perhaps most damning was that I had little to no emotional investment in the game past the first level. Past this introduction—which I found gorgeous, polished, compelling, and inspired—I felt like I was simply shuttled from video game level to video game level and with the plot driven forward only by a MacGuffin I didn't care about. Additionally, the loot and collectible items scattered through the environments did little to help motivate me, either, as they're pretty uninteresting: you will sometimes spend 10 minutes solving a puzzle, only for it to unlock a minor difference on the rubber grip on your lightsaber hilt that you'll never even notice outside the work bench interface. I've done an entire platforming challenge on Kashyyyk only for Cal to scan a Force Echo and say "this place was sacred to them". Due to this I felt no drive to explore side paths and find additional loot because their contents were almost always underwhelming, nor was I urged to do so by additional plot or character development.

Since neither the story nor the collectibles motivated me, the vast majority of the game felt like grinding forward through samey corridors, similar encounters with similar enemies, and ultimately to unfulfilling tedium. There were a few boss fights I legitimately enjoyed (Second Sister ended up being my favorite character), but the plot left me unsatisfied. It features some very contrived turns that made little sense. Haxion Brood base felt completely out of left field, for example. The constantly forces you into making contrived mistakes even when you know they're coming, robbing you of any agency to affect the story. It often turns you towards going back to worlds to which you have already been and grinding through areas you have already cleared, since there is no fast travel system. The game tries its best to utilize shortcuts to funnel you through quickly, but there's only so much the level designers can do here. If these were interesting, inspired areas that provided a genuine, lived-in feel of immersion, then not having a fast travel system would be no issue. But they're not; they're boring corridors with little to catch your interest, creating a feeling of tedium when you're forced to go through them repeatedly.

If you like action games, Soulsbourne games, or Star Wars, then Fallen Order might be right up your alley. You may even love it, as many people seem to. But if you're looking for narrative punch or realistic, inspired world and satisfying lightsaber combat, you will likely want to look elsewhere, as it's very light on that—at least so far. For me, though, it's been a disappointment.

⭐⭐

Disco Elysium (2019) by ZA/UM

Disco Elysium is a very well-written game. If you like reading, classic cRPGs, or point-and-click adventure games, chances are you're going to love this game. But if you're a fan of the RPG-lite games that have released in recent decades such as the Mass Effect trilogy or even JRPGs, this actually might be a little too slow and too RPG for you. I don't mean to look down anyone who likes those things—hell, I am someone who likes those things! I personally never got much into cRPGs or point-and-click adventure games, but I did love JRPGs growing up in the '90s, and the Mass Effect trilogy are my favorite games of all-time. Disco Elysium took a lengthy adjustment period for me before I began to love it as a result of these tastes—but I do love it.

The most striking difference between this and most RPGs on the market today is that there's no combat engine in this game. You walk around, talk to people, and examine stuff, and that's basically it. Every conflict in the game is governed by skill checks. So you're not running around gunning people down or even stealthing your way through levels. However, I enjoyed this about the game—It allows it to effectively build tension in this manner and makes it so that, when something violent does happen, it affects us more closely to how actual violence does in the real world. It's more shocking.

Most of the game lulls you into a sense of the mundane—A vast majority of what is happening is centered on relatively low-key conversations with NPCs, in addition to the protagonist's own inner dialogue between different aspects of his personality. This probably sounds pretty boring—and it might be to some folks. It certainly could have made the game incredibly dry, but for me, though, it was absolutely riveting. I suspect this has partly to do with my own interests (I'm a lover of classic literature, which is often permeated by these sorts of lengthy derailments into philosophy), but it's also rendered a strength of the game simply by the astounding quality of the writing. None of these inner dialogues that occur inside your player character's head seem like padding. They're all entertaining on some level—either because of the substance of the conversation, or due to the absurd, bleak humor of the game.

This game is hilarious. I haven't laughed this much at a game in my entire life. Even the way simple things are handled—such as choosing to have your character say 'Hello?' into an echoing chimney, only to have him lose his cool unexpectedly and unleash an echoing monstrosity of a scream that reverberates throughout the entire building. Or choosing to tell the hotel manager that you're not paying for the room by slyly slipping away from the desk, only to have your player character sprint away, trip, and fall into a lady in a wheelchair because you don't have a very high dexterity skill—leading you to become a clumsy oaf.

And that's the beauty of this RPG: It allows you to fail—frequently, and often in humorous ways—that allow you to continue the game with only minor penalties. It constantly surprises you in ways such as this whenever you fail a skill check, and it does so in a way that feels deserved. It leaves you thinking, "Why did I attempt to be sly here? I have only 2 points in my Motorics skills. Of course I was going to screw that up". Successes often result in you feeling like Sherlock Holmes, or a sly con man, or just a bad-ass. Failures will make you look silly, sure, but they also lead to unbelievably hilarious moments. And once you get a hang for how the skill systems work, you can reasonably predict not only what sort of outcomes will be had by succeeding or failing a check, but also when you should try for a risky roll, and when you shouldn't, because the stakes are too high and screwing up in a situation will result in some serious misery for everyone involved.

The more I played, the more I was entertained not by the central mystery of the game, but by my player character's inner dialogue. I should probably make clear how this actually works: When your skills get high enough—things such as your physical prowess, your logic, your empathy, or your ability to 'feel' the city around you, etc—these skills vocalize themselves to you (the human playing the game) in order to help you make decisions in-game. For example, you might be interviewing a witness, and your ability to Empathize with them will chime in in unspoken text to tell you; "Hey bud, this guy is lying", and it will also narrate why your player character knows this—the person's eyelid might flutter, or they may pronounce a word in an odd way. Or, your gut instinct (the skill called 'Inland Empire') will call your attention to the way a door feels—it's "too blue", or something—prompting you to inspect it.

This is an astoundingly accurate depiction of how our subconscious mind works. We're constantly making these calculations that, had they occurred in our active thoughts, would take multiple sentences to vocalize. But in our subconscious they're quickly calculated and filed away in the background without you ever noticing.

For example—Have you ever felt when driving that you can tell somebody ahead on your right is about to switch lanes, even before their signal is on, or before they've indicated in any way that they're going to do so?

Why?

"Well... Because they're just moving their car in a way like they want to change lanes? I don't know, it just felt like they were about to switch lanes."

And then, guess what? You're right. They switch lanes.

Disco Elysium is a game full of stuff like this, and the writers are skillful enough to depict it in a way that feels real. To borrow a horribly overused phrase in video game reviews—It makes you feel like a detective. But not just a detective—It makes you feel however you choose to play your character: An alcoholic drug addict craving a fix. A pretentious, artsy-fartsy tool. A meathead weightlifter. A super-cool disco-obsessed fop. Whoever you decide you are, the game is consistently narrating your character's inner thoughts that way, and this all feeds back to you to create an incredibly engulfing experience in which you're attempting to roleplay as somebody and the game is rewarding you for doing so by adapting to your inputs and feeding you lengthy, beautiful narration depicting who you are choosing to be. It bleeds through everything in the game from how you look, to what you're doing, to how you apply your strengths to a challenge, and how you fail challenges that are outside your realm of expertise. And it does this in a superb, artful, hilarious way. All of this creates an attachment to your player character that I've never felt before, in any other game—roleplaying or otherwise.

The game is definitely not without its faults, though. The voice acting is particularly awful in some areas, with the actors delivering monotone, unconvincing lines into microphones without pop filters. I found myself picturing some characters' voices wholly different to how the actors portrayed them, and this made for a jarring experience whenever their lines were voiced. I would prefer to play the game with the voice lines completely turned off, and just allow their voices to play in my own head. It's also very, very wordy, so if you hate reading, you'll probably hate it. Be aware.

You owe it to yourself to give this game a shot if you like RPGs. If you have loved wordy cRPGs in the past, you'll probably love this game. If you have liked RPGs, give yourself a cushion of time to get adjusted to what Disco Elysium does differently. You may be rewarded with a unique experience that's not quite like any other—like I have.

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Fallout 4 (2015) by Bethesda Game Studios

These kinds of bugs...

I picked this up again to kill some time while waiting for Obsidian's upcoming The Outer Worlds, but set it back down and uninstalled it once again after only a couple of hours.

Unfortunately Fallout 4 falls far from the quality of its predecessors. It features some notable graphical improvements and a voiced protagonist, but provides an extremely buggy experience (see, uh... all images in this post), with a clearly aged and no longer acceptable engine. The shooting feels too loose, movement feels too imprecise, and there are notable frame drops indoors which I could find no way to alleviate.

...are unfortunately ubiquitous...

In addition to this, the factions are much less interesting than those found in New Vegas, and the writing overall is weaker. The main plot is contrived and tries too hard to be clever and twisty. The dialogue is poor and unbelievable, and the player's ability to maintain agency through dialogue is severely damaged by a lack of meaningful roleplaying. The quest design is also very straightforward; solvable in only one way (which usually involves shooting), and almost never presenting the player with any significant moral problems that are anything more than window-dressing. Nearly every side quest or main quest I picked up was instantly forgettable, and most of my enjoyment from this game came from wandering the world, looting areas for new gear and materials with which to mod my current gear, leveling up, and enjoying Inon Zur's wonderful soundtrack. I had to go out of my way to actually enjoy the game, as it kept pushing me towards it's bad quests and, what is perhaps most game-breaking for me personally: The game constantly pushing you towards the monotonous, inane, and janky settlement management. Surely there are some people that enjoy this kind of thing, but when I play a Fallout game I want to explore, roleplay, level up, and gather loot to become more powerful in order to affect the world more strongly. I don't want to be called on to help idiots defend their settlements regularly, I don't want to build walls and houses. I want to be free to explore at my whim without having these silly obligations nagging at me and breaking my flow within the game's core loop of exploring, looting, and leveling up. It seems Bethesda learned nothing from all of the complaints about Grand Theft Auto IV's constant demands from friends to go bowling.

...in Bethesda's latest broken mess of a video game.

This is an experience that puts all of the emphasis on looking pretty and listing its features in a neat sheet of bullet points that probably looked great in a boardroom, and none of it on the core experience Bethesda has provided which players had come to love in games such as Skyrim and Fallout 3. It has no narrative punch and it lacks whimsical, gritty heart that Fallout 3 successfully emulated and Fallouts 1, 2, and New Vegas exhibit so well. Fallout 4 wastes a potentially intriguing premise and setting on skin-deep bells and whistles that offer no real payoff or enjoyment, and it gives the player no strong themes to dig into and think about. If you want to kill some time and have a high degree of patience for bugs and poor optimization, then you may want to take a shot on Fallout 4. But if you're looking for a good roleplaying experience with a compelling open world, you should play New Vegas instead.

⭐

Fallout: New Vegas (2010) by Obsidian Entertainment

New Vegas is such a genuine, realistic, deep world that it becomes so hard to tear yourself away from it.

"What!? Dude, there are giant scorpions and ghouls who have adapted to radiation and live for hundreds of year! There are freaking aliens! What the hell are you talking about!?"

I know, I know. That sounds like a ridiculous thing to say—that a game with such a far-fetched premise could feel like it deserves to be taken so seriously. But this is a world that is based mostly in logic, despite it's more campy weirdness. Let me explain that.

Each character, settlement, and area are based logically. In Fallout 3, people have built a bunch of walls around an unexploded nuclear weapon—it's called Megaton, and it's the first settlement you see after leaving Vault 101. Have you ever asked WHY the hell they did that? It makes no sense. It's literally a bomb! The water around it is irradiated. If this were real life, why the hell would anybody build a town there? There's no logical reason for them to do so—Bethesda simply did it because it was a neat idea and it makes for a nifty looking town. Even the town's name doesn't make any sense. Why would you be proud enough of settling around this bomb to call your town 'Megaton' after these bombs have destroyed your entire world? The logic behind the settlement completely falls apart if you think about it for more than 2 minutes.

Fallout: New Vegas's comic relief often hits the mark.

Usually, you're so into the game that you don't consider things like this, but they can begin to weight on your subconscious and your ability to suspend disbelief. You stop caring so much about the setting. You begin to have a bit less fun. You care about the story and characters less and start treating it more like a game. You begin to feel less of an emotional connection to the game. Eventually, you set it down for good, no longer interested. This was my experience with Fallout 3.

In New Vegas, however, each settlement and character is grounded with very realistic motivations. Novac is a settlement based in an old motel, which people began to settle organically because it's down the road from Repconn Headquarters—an old robotics manufacturer that, although equipped with dangerous security systems, features tons of old technology to salvage and trade. The name of the town itself is short for 'No Vacancy'—taken from the half-broken sign out from in front of the derelict motel in which these people have settled. Every bit of this place has a reason for existing, and the fact that it does makes it feel like a REAL place to you. You take it seriously, its inhabitants feel more like real humans. You start to forget that you're playing a game and you become more immersed.

New Vegas's well-rounded cast keeps things interesting

The entire game features this kind of lovingly crafted fiction. The characters are no different. They have real, poignant histories. They are funny, and irritating. Reliable and flawed. The factions are equally legitimate—I particularly loved how the NCR had their bases situated in realistically-feeling locations along the river. The quests and side quests are so deep they give you a myriad of ways to deal with problems, and they're universally well-balanced and solvable by all roles. Stealthy? Sneak through, quietly killing your foes on your way to your objective. Not combat-oriented? You can hack computers, lockpick doors, or smooth-talk your way without fighting. Or, if you're a madman, go in swinging a giant hammer, or blowing everyone away with a giant minigun. Be good or evil, or something in between. Chaotic good? Go for it. Lawful evil? Equally viable. The game will mold itself to you, and its storytelling does not suffer, no matter what role you choose for your character. No matter what story you think up, the game will go along with you. It is fantastic at that.

This is one of the most brilliantly crafted and written experiences in the history of gaming. It's buggy as hell, so you'll want a fan-made patch full of bug-fixes. And its graphics have aged very poorly. The character are pretty poorly animated and the textures are muddy, so you may want graphical mods, too. But aside from that? If you like RPGs, this is absolutely not to be missed. Buy the Ultimate edition at full price without a second thought.

⭐⭐⭐⭐

Dark Souls (2011) by FromSoftware

Though I always had interest, I always avoided Dark Souls on PC because Prepare To Die Edition had a poor reputation for stability and graphics options. Dsfix was a thing but I figured it would eventually be patched or remastered and decided to wait instead of deal with the hassle. I didn't really care enough to read any further.

I finally bought Remastered recently, and despite its reputation the game is really not all that difficult compared to what I expected. I think players are just used to the forgiveness and handholding that modern games provide and this game has none of that. It's designed like older games, where you are expected to have a modicum of intelligence and figure things out for yourself, sometimes via trial and error, and sometimes remaining stuck for a significant portion of time, which forces you to try new things or explore different avenues of advancement. The difficulty thing seems to just be a lazy meme, or perhaps a marketing tool adopted by publishers. Saying Dark Souls is difficult is very shallow. There's more to it than that.

Dark Souls does a lot of big things really well. Like many great games, its level design is phenomenal; gorgeous, inventive, and logically sound. Its combat balancing is excellent and insures a satisfying experience in which everything moves with a weight, creating a satisfying impact whenever physics collide, weapons scrape against shields, or characters fall to the ground. The art, inspired by grimdark manga series such as Berserk, is fantastic and the graphics look great in the remaster.

But what's most impressive to me are that there are so many small design choices that are very minor in the grand scheme of things, but really brilliant from a philosophical game design perspective, and executed upon perfectly by the team at FromSoftware.

For example, the way communication via messages and bloodstains mirrors pre-internet gaming, when you were reliant on the advice and experience of the other kids on the block to get through games. Or how the game ties dying into its fiction, and punishes the player with reasonable loss to remove the constant reincarnation superpower that so many other action games feature: "Oh, you died? Just reload the last save, as many times as you want, with losing nothing but a minute here and there. No big deal." Dark Souls solves this problem of balancing failure with a reasonable loss of progress and currency, without being overly harsh like the retro games it calls back to and doing something like sending the player back to the beginning of a stage, or the game, and frustratingly costing hours of progress. Dark Souls strikes a perfect balance: Dying without reaching your bloodstain costs just enough to add tension and make you struggle to avoid dying, but not so much that dying becomes an experience frustrating enough to put the game down for good. This balance must have been monumentally hard to manage, but the game absolutely nails it and leaves you in a flow state while playing of gathering souls, levelling up, getting to a point where you're comfortable with trial-and-error, dying, and then finally making it to the next bonfire and feeling triumphant before beginning the process again. Its core gameplay loop is absolutely wonderful, whether you're analyzing the game from a design standpoint like I am, or whether you're just a casual player looking for a fun time.

Another small aspect done extraordinarily well is how death involving the loss of certain resources pushes the player to use them, rather than hoarding them all game long without ever touching them like players do in RPGs. I always finish every Fallout game with a practically infinite amount of stimpaks, for example. In Mass Effect 2 on Insanity, I'd be banging my head against the wall and dying repeatedly but still refusing to spend any medigel in case I needed it for some impassable moment in the future. In Dark Souls, if you didn't lose humanity when dying, I'd have tons of it saved and probably would never use it. This also trickles down to regularly using consumables such as bombs or arrows in a desperate, last ditch effort to make it back to your last death spot.

Everything is very tight in this manner, all these systems tie into one another, and the execution and balancing of the planning room philosophies is perfect. The little things like this add up to create the feel that so many people half-jokingly claimed has ruined lesser games for them. I played the latest Assassin's Creed game before this, and while the scale of that game is mindblowing and it's gorgeous, so much of it just felt bland and repetitive in comparison to Dark Souls, a game that came out 7 years and a generation earlier. I'd prefer a smaller, tighter experience like Dark Souls any day of the week.

At the risk of donning my beret and sounding too pretentious, Dark Souls at its best strikes me as an allegory for life in general. Continuing to push onward, failing repeatedly, relying on the help of others who have come before, and eventually succeeding in one monumental push only to begin the struggle anew at the next bonfire. Dark Souls is proof video games are art, but in order to realize this, you need to be intimately familiar with video games. So unfortunately the Roger Eberts of the world will continue, in their ignorance, to disregard it.

I won't call it a perfect game, though, because it's not. There are several instances where the game takes its trial-and-error a little bit too far by kicking the player in the groin for no real reason. These "gotcha" moments occur when the game kills the player out of nowhere, and provides no hint beforehand that something like this is about to occur; a prime example being the infamous bridge moment early in the game. Trial-and-error is fine in most cases, since it puts the onus on the player to experiment and learn, but in these cases the learning is so one-dimensional that these deaths seem more like unwarranted punishment rather than opportunities to learn. They take the fun out of the trial-and-error present throughout the game and render it more frustrating than enjoyable.

That said, I'm still very impressed with Dark Souls. I'm pretty old among the modern day "gamer" demographic, but I've loved games for a long time (nearing 40 years now) and try often to think about them critically when I'm playing them and I believe Dark Souls is one of the most well-designed games I've ever played. You can tell the people who made it have thought long and hard about the medium and regardless of potential profit or popularity set out to design a game that improves upon the general faults so many games exhibit today. It lives up to its reputation, in my opinion, and it's a game that everyone who enjoys video games should give a shot, regardless of their personal tastes.

Dark Souls is an all-time great game. It's a genre defining experience and a medium-pushing landmark. You should give it a try, even if you hate dark fantasy, RPGs, or difficult games. Put in 8 hours, press forward, and if you don't like it after that, then maybe it's not for you. But you owe it to yourself and to this game to give it a shot anyway. If it doesn't look like something you'd be interested in, wait for a deep sale and pick it up then.

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Stardew Valley (2016) by ConcernedApe

Stardew Valley is a towering achievement not in so much that it's a really fun game (spoiler: it is), but that it was made by just one person. And not only it that it was made by one person, but that every single aspect of the game was so expertly crafted.

The game looks and sounds beautiful, and from what I understand Eric Barone crafted both the art and the music himself. By itself, that's impressive. Then you consider that he programmed the entire game, balanced everything, wrote the characters and dialogue, and filled out this world head-to-toe with fun, satisfying, and interesting activities. If you have any interest in games as a medium beyond just playing and enjoying them, Barone's story is mindboggling.

There are numerous small examples of Barone's craft that make themselves known beyond what normal games of this type display. For example, the way people will allow you to pass them with a small shake if you press into them enough, or the sound effects that play when navigating the menus. These might seem trivial, but they're indicative of the quality of experience here. There is so much polish and character to every aspect of this game, and all of it adds up to make Stardew Valley a masterful experience.

Another example of this depth of quality are the character interactions. I'm a sucker for good character writing. In Stardew, each character that populates the town is expertly written, with deep character backstories that surprised me. Even the characters I initially disliked proved to have more going on underneath the surface. I went into Stardew expecting a pretty straightforward indie farm management experience and I got so much more.

Each pursuit is gratifying as well. I initially hated fishing, but soon grew to enjoy it once I gained basic acumen. Mine-diving and battling monsters provided a satisfying progression as well. And, of course, farming and building your home and land up from being overgrown to being a palace is not only incredibly satisfying but works exceptionally for what you'd expect. I put down Fallout 4 because its settlement system was so awful, Stardew Valley's--although it admittedly has much less going on--Is an absolute dream by comparison. And tying this altogether is the Community Center system, which requires you to plug in specific types of "loot" for various rewards. It's what finally got me addicted to Stardew, staying up way too late trying to catch that elusive catfish, or reading the wiki while at work so I could find out how to get specific Artisan goods.

If what you've seen of Stardew Valley has interested you in even the least, you should probably just give it a shot. I thought I knew what it was, but it proved far deeper and more polished than I ever expected a game made by one person could be. And if you liked its spiritual ancestor Harvest Moon, then you owe it to yourself to play this game. It's a phenomenal example of the power of a singular vision when creating art, and another example of the flourishing indie scene that's developed in gaming over the past decade or so.

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Fallout (1997) by Interplay

I just recently wrapped up playing Assassin's Creed Odyssey. In general, I liked it a lot, but couldn't help being greatly disappointed by its story and writing at nearly every turn. An otherwise great game is consistently marred by wooden dialogue, shallow characters, contrived plotting, and--perhaps most importantly--the illusion of choice.

After completing Odyssey I found myself wanting a quality writing experience to cleanse myself of some of the pitfalls of the game. I've already played and replayed the Mass Effect series and the Witcher series ad nauseam, so I decided to jump into a genre of game I have only marginal experience in: The classic cRPG.

I already own (but had yet to play) both Baldur's Gates and each of the first three Fallouts (1, 2, and Tactics), so I decided to start at the earliest release of the bunch: Fallout.

I fully prepared myself for a dated experience, as many of the game's fans caution that it has aged extremely poorly. And that is certainly true. The interface is obtuse and nearly unusable if you don't have the patience to constantly grapple with it. The graphics are obviously as dated as one would expect from a game from 1997. Friendly AI and the combat system, which resembles more a tactical RPG than what I expected from a classic cRPG, are all a far cry from modern gaming. That isn't to say that combat isn't fun at times, but it is quite shallow. I was surprised to see that the recent Shadowrun revival games seemed to draw strong influence from Fallout, though those games are quite a bit deeper than this one is.

Despite these negatives and the wear of age, Fallout is also unexpectedly modern--And even better than a lot of modern games--in other ways. The character building (which you'll be familiar with if you've played Fallout 3 or New Vegas) is superb, featuring deep perks and skills that allow you to affect the world in great ways. It reminded how solid the character building in the more recent Fallout 3 and New Vegas were, and how disappointed I was with the stripped-down system in Fallout 4. The roleplaying is also excellent, providing for different dialogue options that you aren't even aware of until you play the game with a different character build. Following this are the meaningful choices you're given throughout the game, something that even modern game writers are still struggling with implementing. I was shocked to see how refined and modern the roleplaying aspects of this game were, considering how badly its other aspects had aged, and after playing Fallout I was convinced that its fans are not just clouded by nostalgia, or living in the past, but completely correct that some of these cRPGs are truly the high-water mark of roleplaying video games. Fallout has left me excited for what's to come. I'll be playing its sequel, Fallout 2, in addition to Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate II, and Planescape: Torment. I'll try and write reviews for each game.

In conclusion, the original Fallout makes it clear just how far video games have come as a medium. They're a far more polished experience, way more user-friendly, with most having easier-to-use combat that requires less imagination to become immersed, with flashier visuals, and far better user interfaces. However playing through this game has also highlighted how much games have not changed from the late '90s, and how much work they have to go to reach the writing quality of television or feature film. There are many games released only in the past five years whose writing doesn't even come close to the quality of Fallout's in terms of dialogue and/or plotting--Even other RPGs are seldom this credible in these aspects--a great example being BioWare's most recent Mass Effect Andromeda, which, although made by a company with a history of classic, great RPGs such as Baldur's Gate, suffered from the same poor characterization, contrived plotting, poor character building, and awful dialogue that I lambasted Assassin's Creed Odyssey--a game made by an action/open world studio--for having.

RPGs seldom feature this kind of quality writing and worldbuilding, so I'd recommend this to anyone reading if you have a strong interest in roleplaying games. It's a worthwhile roleplaying experience, with solid plotting and great character building. However if you have trouble playing dated games and have found in the past that you can't get into them, then this game will certainly not be your bread-and-butter, as its UI is obtuse, its combat AI is abysmal, and its visuals are greatly dated.

⭐⭐⭐

Final Fantasy VIII (1999) by Square

I'm a huge fan of the Final Fantasies of the SNES and PS1 era. I've put hundreds of hours into the western games of this era and I consider myself a qualified opinion on the quality of each.

I've replayed all of these in the past few years, and though dated, they all still represent a high-quality experience that's worth exploring even now, decades after the original releases. All of them, that is, except Final Fantasy VIII. The things that make these games so great; the quality of their writing and exploration of serious themes, the beautifully rendered (though aged) backgrounds, the excellent soundtracks, and the quality JRPG gameplay, are all noticeably lesser in Final Fantasy VIII than in its brethren.

An accurate depiction of what it's like to try and make sense of
Final Fantasy VIII's convoluted, lugubrious plot

VIII is plagued by a tedious, grind-heavy draw system that grates on the nerves from minute one and cannot be avoided in order to progress through the game. The junction system could have been, but its reliance on this tedious draw system to be effective kills whatever potential it has. From the second you're given control of your characters, you are expected to spend several hours out of the initial town, continuously drawing spells from enemies with which to junction to your stats. It's a mind-bogglingly bad design decision, and it's going to immediately kill the drive of most folks who are dipping into this game for historical purposes.

Another negative is puzzlingly awful plot writing. There are several instances of enormous plot-holes that smack of being rushed. Seifer attacks President Deling at the Broadcast Station in Timber, and is whisked away by the sorceress. Deling, presumably, escapes. Our heroes were also there, and were culpable, but are somehow allowed to walk straight out the front door. But why? And where are all of Deling's guards? It's established that he was very well-protected in Timber before this, so how can we just walk in and out of the broadcast area without being stopped, or anything? There are no fights in this section, no guards at all. And even more puzzling, almost all of this happens off-screen. There is also a moment later that I won't reveal because it's a massive spoiler, but basically: There's a large reveal, which is nearly impossible for none of the characters to have known about. This is explained away to us as the characters believing they all have shared memory loss. I'm not joking -- It's actually that bad.

There are many instances in the story that make no sense whatsoever. It feels like there are huge portions of the game's story that were ripped out, or unfinished. My uneducated assumption is that the team had little time to finish these segments and were rushed to complete the game to capitalize on the massive success that was Final Fantasy VII, but that's just my guess. Either way, these Final Fantasies live and die on their writing, and this is an aspect in which Final Fantasy VIII fails miserably.

Triple Triad, the card game present, is at first intriguing, but also plagued by the same sort of tedious, logistical nonsense that the junction and draw systems suffer from. Certain regions in the game have completely idiotic rulesets, and these are only changeable through a massive pain-in-the-ass of traveling to different regions and succumbing to whatever the RNG gods tell you.

The Steam port is also pretty awful. Controller support is a must with these games, as several minigames rely on on-screen button displays showing the original PlayStation symbols. This is something completely lost in translation with this Steam version, which stupidly uses S, X, C, and V in place of the controller's face buttons. These is extremely clunky, and it makes the train mission when you first arrive in Timber (when you have to input codes of numbers aligning to these face buttons) almost impossible. It's completely broken on Steam if you're using a controller -- Literally. The display is actually incorrect on the screen. I had to break out a pen and paper and write which buttons went with which, and after failing several times, switched to the keyboard to accomplish the mission instead. It's an absolute mess.

I've put several hundred hours into all of Square's recent rereleases from this era on Steam. I've got nearly 100 in Chrono Trigger, more than 100 in Final Fantasies VI, VII, and IX. And I've got nearly 150 in Final Fantasy X. If Square ever releases Steam ports for Final Fantasy Tactics and Xenogears, I'll probably put 100 into those, too.

It's noticeable, then, that Final Fantasy VIII has seen only 30 hours of play from me. And that's over two playthroughs. I replay the other games once every few years and still love them to this day; 20+ years after playing them for the first time. However, I haven't replayed Final Fantasy VIII since probably 1999 or 2000, and I've tried to replay it twice in the past few years since the Steam port released. I can never get much further than Galbadia Garden. Last time, it was the relentless amount of drawing I was subjecting myself to. "Why am I doing this? It isn't fun," I said to myself before putting the game down. That was a few years ago. This time it was traveling back and forth between Timber and Dollet and attempting to change the Random rule out of Triple Triad in Dollet. This was taking me hours, before I finally just put the game down once again and figured it was time to whip up this negative review.

The Final Fantasies released in the '90s and the early '00s are nearly universally phenomenal games. But every series has its duds, and for this series, it is unquestionably Final Fantasy VIII that falls far short by comparison to its brethren.

Oh, but Uematsu's soundtrack is good. Really good. It's by far the best part of the game. So, you know, just go check that out on YouTube or something. And skip this. Because Final Fantasy IX is probably the best game in the entire series. Do yourself a favor and just play that instead.

⭐⭐

Playtime: 34 hours

Assassin's Creed Odyssey (2018) by Ubisoft

Judging whether or not you’ll want to play this game is most easily done by comparing it to its direct predecessor, Assassin’s Creed Origins, with which Odyssey shares a lot of its DNA.

I played nearly 100 hours of Origins but was surprised it received nearly universal praise. Origins is more polished than a typical AC game due to its extra year of development time, and the setting of Ancient Egypt is wonderful, but I found there to be severe flaws in the foundation of what that game does regarding stealth, combat, and story. Typically with an Assassin’s Creed game I expect a great core experience that often lacks polish in terms of stability due to the grueling yearly release schedule from Ubisoft that doesn’t allow adequate QA time to fix such things. With Origins, it was the opposite—The core experience was lesser than Syndicate’s, but the game was very polished. It ran okay and looked gorgeous.

The universal praise Origins received was only skin-deep, full of people raving about its wonderful setting and graphics while neglecting the deeper issues the game had at its core. Odyssey, then, reminds me a lot of what Syndicate was to Unity; an improvement of the core mechanics and the smoothing out of the previous game's rough edges.

If you liked Origins and want more of something similar, then you’ll probably love Odyssey. It’s just Origins with added light roleplaying, MUCH better combat, more practical skill trees, and some key new features to provide enough new territory that it doesn’t simply feel like Origins in a new setting.

The most hyped aspect of the game is its expanded RPG elements. Since Unity, which introduced customizable gear, there have been growing light RPG elements to the Assassin’s Creed series, including the introduction of skill trees in Syndicate. Continuing this trend, Odyssey has become a full-blown action RPG rather than just an open world game with some RPG elements. It’s clear the team was playing a lot of Witcher 3 during development as, superficially, roleplaying and story are more developed. However, a lot of this comes to naught, because most of the side quests are still boring, filler fetch quests, and a lot of the "decisions" you have to make are little more than window-dressing: the illusion of choice rather than actual choice. I reloaded saves only to realize that the same thing happens in most instances no matter which choice you make. While it's nice to have the option to select dialogue this time around, story and roleplaying still clearly need more work put into them to deliver on the promise of better story and writing.

Combat in Origins was one of my chief complaints. The animations felt stilted and artificial, and the combat itself was difficult to judge due to the unrealistic speed at which animations played. The game felt like it was aping Dark Souls without understanding what makes its combat great. Combat in Odyssey, however, has several more layers of polish. Animations seem more natural, dodging takes place over a judgeable distance, easy countering is back. Adding depth are Adrenaline Skills, which basically act the way the single Overpower skill did in Origins. There are a number of different Adrenaline skills to unlock within the skill tree, with each providing a different facet than the other.

The skill tree is greatly improved from Origins, which had few useful skills and a lot of what felt like unexciting padding that didn’t change gameplay greatly. Many of the abilities that were locked to gear in Origins have been instead relocated to the skill tree (different bow styles from Origins are now tied to skill unlocks), which gives you far greater freedom in customizing the way your character looks via gear. It’s a very good decision as the skill tree from Origins felt like something that was tacked-on because somebody on the team decided “we should have skill trees in this game”. The skill tree in Odyssey feels more natural and has a huge impact on gameplay.

A lot of the new abilities feel inspired by WB’s Shadow of Mordor series. Chiefly among this inspiration, though, is a fantastic port of what was obviously inspired by Shadow of Mordor’s Nemesis system. Odyssey takes place during the Peloponnesian War in 431 BC, and this war has a number of the different city states of Greece going at one-another; chiefly Athens and Sparta. Odyssey’s modified version of the Nemesis system depicts what feels like a living, breathing war going on around you. Athens and Sparta change territory through the story and your actions, with each city’s forces being easily identifiable, and each occupying different fortresses as they move. They have leaders, cities you can disrupt, money and materiel you can steal and destroy. There are various war leaders and mercenaries that function as the actual Nemeses from the Shadow games, and somehow the team has made this system feel more natural in an Assassin’s Creed game than the Lord of the Rings games which inspired it. It’s the main draw of Odyssey, and it’s a huge one. It all works smoothly, indicative of significant polish, and the game is worth playing just to experience it even if you were burnt out on Origins.

There are a number of more minor new features which fixed complaints I had about Origins. Number one of which is a dedicated (though limited to the open world) Quicksave feature for the first time in the Assassin’s Creed series. As a hardcore stealth fan I despise any game that features stealth without quicksaving and makes me rely on checkpoints. It’s too easy to experience a bug (especially in AC games) and have your entire stealth run of a fort become ruined. This alleviates it, and it’s a fantastic quality-of-life addition. There are also now non-lethal takedowns and enemy recruiting, deepening stealth gameplay.

History blurbs are also back! This eliminates one of my chief personal complaints about Origins: Ripping out these history blurbs and putting them in a separate gameplay mode from the main game. As a fan of historical fiction I want to learn about these settings as I play, and Origins taking that away really damaged the experience for me. They are now back as a map feature, allowing you to hover over map markers for a brief paragraph of background.

I do have some complaints, though. The balance of the game is off, requiring a bit too much grinding if you’re not clearing every map marker like I am. The leveling system is also far too rigid, turning enemies one level higher than you into health sponges. This should be addressed in a future balance patch. It didn’t affect me much because I’m always overleveled, but I could see how someone focused only on the main story would become frustrated.

The game also removed shields from combat, which is puzzling in a game about Greek combat—A style of combat based almost wholly on the use of a heavy bronze shield. I loved the shields in Origins and am puzzled and disappointed to see them go.

The game also runs questionably—my 1080 couldn’t hold 60 fps on ultra settings at 1080p. It needs a performance patch.

In the end, much of Odyssey looks the same as Origins: The user interface is nearly identical. You have a pet bird to scout with. The running and climbing animations are the same. The buildings look similar. The graphics are of the same quality.

But these similarities--like the critical praise for Origins--are only surface-deep.

Odyssey fixes Origins’ faults and adds solid new features. If you liked Origins or you’re a fan of the series then you’ll love Odyssey. It's the culmination of what the past 3-4 Assassin’s Creed games have been introducing, and it’s become one of my favorites in the series.

⭐⭐⭐⭐