Korn's Arcade

South of Midnight - just south of greatness

2025-07-01T01:27:00.004+03:00

Like the romanticized American southern manners, South of Midnight greets you with its charms at first sight. The stellar music, the art direction, the stop motion-like animation feel like ice-cold lemonade on a sweltering New Orleans night. But, again, like the romanticized American southern manners, something problematic often lurks underneath the charm.

From the very first intro animation, one thing becomes clear: the game oozes atmosphere. The animation which purposefully skips frames (much like the Spider-verse films do) blends with faily good but definitelly well accented voiceovers, moody guitar blues, haunting banjos and gospel-like choirs. It all swirls together like moonlight and fog, pulling you deeper into the bayou levels, where stories with that southern, almost voodoo/hoodoo vibe unfold through simple puzzles, decent platforming and bad combat (but we'll get to that later). The soundtrack would definitely steal the show, if the rest of the game's charms didn't meet it on equal footing.

The art style is definitely the game's biggest draw, despite the story trying its best to be the standout feature. It has an almost rugged realistically cartoony edge (again, like the Spider-Verse films), complete with intentional frame skipping.

However, in trying to reconcile this art-style with today's demands of smooth 60+fps and gameplay requiring smooth and easy-to-read animations, the game doesn't do itself many favors. More often than not, it gets stuck somewhere in the middle, with the framerate fluctuating depending on what model or animation is happening on screen. This lack of commitment to a consistent approach ends up making the skips feel unintentional and annoying at times, and sadly the art style only truly shines in cutscenes, when it succeeds in giving off that eerie, puppetry vibe.

The story begins as a personal journey for Hazel, our YA main character, to find a loved one after a disaster. Not before long, she begins discovering her unique powers as a Weaver, a person able to see the strands of fate and history to uncover the past and heal its wounds. And, conveniently, to navigate platforming sessions like her life depended on it (and often it does) as well as fight manifestations of old pain called Haints and cleanse the tangle of negative emotions that spawns them.

The story quickly expands to the backstory of Hazel's family, and the stories and legends of the general area. Fair warning, these do get pretty dark. We're talking accidental death of minors, patricide, fratricide, murder, child abuse and much more besides. This is the lot of a Weaver though; to uncover and to heal, something Hazel eventually comes to terms with.

The gameplay itself loops through 2 distinct cycles: exploration and platforming, and combat.

The first is enjoyable, if not very standard, formulaic stuff. There's your jumping sections, your exploration sections, your basic puzzles, using abilities like double jumping, boosting, gliding etc to navigate levels, uncover tidbits of story and hunt down ability points. What elevates this is the aforementioned atmosphere and level design: swamps, mountaintops, caves, burrows, abandoned towns, dreams themselves, they all lend their geography towards the progression of unfolding plotlines and environmental storytelling, in a way being reminiscent of the template for the genre, Prince of Persia.

Unlike PoP though, the second gameplay cycle of the game, combat, strongly harms the overall experience.

All the combat in the game (including boss fights) occurs in closed-off arenas. And, while the enemy design of each Haint type and the bosses is unique and scary, the mechanics of combat itself feel uninspired at best, needless at worst. All the goodwill the game builds up with its many charms gets swiftly stomped out by mediocre combat that feels like it's there simply to tick a box.

There's no real rhythm or fluidity in the combat - attacks and abilities often don't seem to mesh and flow together, making it an awkward affair. Haze's inability to block attacks, limited dodging and limited abilities and arsenal, combined with the fact that most enemies will not react to your attacks beyond losing hitpoints and will execute attack patterns and animations in the middle of your combo only exacerbates this.

Boss fights, despite looking a lot more impressive, and despite being multi-staged and typically being foreworded with great buildup, unfortunately largely suffer from the same issues. They do, at least, include some additional mechanics to spice things up a bit. I have to go with my gaming gut on this, and that gut says that if they trimmed combat or, better yet, skipped non-boss combat entirely, the overall experience would be all the better for it. This is pretty much the only game I suggest playing on an easier difficulty - it will be more enjoyable by making its weaker gameplay parts go by quicker.

If I had to summarise all of the above in just a few words, it would be these: South of Midnight shines brightest when it leans into its charms and strengths, and would have been a fantastic narrative driven exploration game. It's just a shame that it tries to be something else.

Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 — The Matrix on Absinthe

2025-06-23T01:30:00.011+03:00

How do I even start?

Imagine if The Matrix was directed by Chris Nolan, with notes from Jean-Pierre Jeneaux and Tim Burton, and took place in a surrealist, melancholic version of Belle Époque France where "magic" is real, and where instead of dodging bullets in trenchcoats, you’re dodging having to deal with emotional trauma. Sound weird? It is. And it’s also one of the most narratively rich, emotionally resonant, and just beautiful games I’ve played in years. Let me make it crystal clear: Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 is, straight up, the most significant game released since Baldur's Gate 3. And it's a game I will use two words a lot to describe it in the following post: "melancholic" and "quirky".

It's pretty much impossible to describe just how complex and well-written the story is without spoiling it. The term clair-obscur itself means "light and darkness", an artistic term (perhaps better known by the Italian word "chiaroscuro") which would be a hint to some of the themes present. However, you are hereby duly warned, the next two paragraphs will spoil the first hour or so of the game. If you want to avoid all spoilers and go in entirely fresh, skip the next two paragraphs and move on to the one after the two images in a row. Last warning!

The very first part of the game begins in what remains of the once beautiful city called Lumiere, a sort-of-mirror of Paris, shortly before that years' Gommage. What is that, you ask? Well, here's where the setting begins getting drip-fed to you in a slow but steady manner - 67 years ago, the world fractured, and (for all intents and purposes) "monsters" called Nevrons appeared. Lumiere itself was torn asunder, and only half of it now survives as an island, cut off from everything else. But that is not all. In the far distance stands a monolith, with a gigantic countdown of glowing numbers, counting down from 100. We're at 34, and whenever it ticks, a gigantic, sulking woman simply known as the Paintress "paints death" by dissolving the oldest people alive into flower petals, which is what the Gommage is. The rest of the time, she sits melancholic under the countdown, always present, unmoving, always visible on the distant horizon. No one knows what will happen when the countdown ends, but it can't possibly be good. And every year, a hopeful expedition of brave Lumiere citizens embark on a mission to stop her before she counts down to the next number.

This year, our protagonist Gustave (voiced by Daredevil himself Charlie Cox but clearly based on Robert Pattinson's face), the inventor behind the Lumina converter, sails onwards with Expedition 33, but not before seeing the love of his life, Sophie, gommage before his eyes. Only, once the expedition lands on a beach on the mainland, they see an old man, a man old enough to have gommaged decades ago, who easily (and violently) kills 99% of the expedition. Gustave survives, broken, and once he realises the extent of his expedition's devastation almosts ends his own life - luckily, he meets another survivor just in time to pull him back from the brink. Together, they embark on a trip to find more survivors, and do their best to complete the mission.

The setting and setup are rich and nuanced, but that pales in comparison to the plot and revelations that unfold during your playthrough. It's, hands down, one of the best written games I have played, both in narrative beats as well as character dialogue, always with a dose of that quirky, charming Frenchness and undertones of melancholy. The voice acting plays no small part in this. We've got Andy Serkis (doing his second videogame project as far as I remember, the first being Enslaved) growling and brooding with a gravelly voice barely holding back emotions. As mentioned, we've got Charlie Cox bringing a layered, quietly heartbroken but idealistic Gustave to life. Jennifer English nails the balance between warmth, resignation and deep-buried fury of Maelle, a child born in a world that forced her to grow up before her time. And the last standout is Ben Starr giving Verso a loving, intense, passionate energy that constantly walks the line between wanting to open up and keep a distance from others.

Not that the other VAs are bad, oh no no, these are merely the standouts. The quality is stellar across the board. These aren’t phoned in performances. You can hear the cracks of doubt form in their beliefs, the weight of regret in the pauses. The delivery is subtle, human, intimate. When warranted, heart breaking, and at other times, also when warranted, hilariously quirky. This is the kind of voice acting that makes you not skip dialogue, even on repeat playthroughs. Also shout out to the separate mocap team who infused each character with little mannerisms and body language that make everyone feel, well, real.

But while we're on the subject of sound, well, the very first thing you will be exposed to when you launch the game is its music. Music that doesn’t come in hot with bombastic gusto or swelling hero themes. This is music that seeps into you. It’s dreamy, melancholic, sometimes quirky, and always beautiful. The score doesn’t just set the tone, it is the tone. It paints an auditory portrait of a beautiful, fractured and fragile world, a world than simply being in it makes you feel like an intruder inadvertedly about to step on something beautiful.

But Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 is a game, not a film. The story, score and performances are its main strengths, but what about the gameplay?

I won't lie, I have a built-in negative predisposition when I hear the term "turn-based combat", which is one of the reasons I never managed to get into Final Fantasy 7 no matter how many times I tried but loved the Remake. And this, it's an RPG in pretty much the same way Pokémon games are considered RPGs (only, you know, with a much, much more adult and complex story).

It’s indeed got that Pokémon simplicity at its core: you explore the world in pursuit of your mission, levelling up your party, gradually gaining new abilities and accessing new areas, completing (simple) quests, making friends and defeating foes, while engaging in rock-paper-scissors combat that is initially fairly easy to understand but hard to master as the skills available to your party and the enemies you face evolve in complexity. No two party members play the same way, and mastering the game's combat and being able to defeat every enemy (especially the optional, tough ones) means having to learn when and how to:

Dodge, jump over or block incoming moves by timing it juuuust right. If you fully block all steps of an incoming attack sequence, you get to unleash (usually) devastating counter-attacks, adding a high-stakes real-time reaction element to turn-based combat.
Use free aim shots to deal damage or apply specific effects, use items, or use base attacks to gain action points.
Manage your action points and/or each character's unique mechanics (Maelle's stances are an early example, but others are more complex) to execute special attacks, some of which are simple, while others require a well timed button input or more to be fully effective.
Juggle buffs, debuffs, status effects, weaknesses, resources (AP and gradient charges) during the course of an encounter to optimise your performance and counter enemy defenses.
Allocate level up attribute points across 5 different stats - Vitality, Power, Defense, Agility and Luck, and learn new attacks/moves as you level up and gain skill points.
Customize each character via many upgradeable weapons, each with different abilities and effects that tweak your playstyle, and each requiring specific stats to unlock their full power, meaning fully respeccing a character because you found a too-good-to-pass-up weapon will not be a rare occurrence. Some weapons boost specific type of attacks, some hit harder, some work better with some abilities and some may fundamentally affect a character build.
Equip magical "items" called Pictos, up to 3 per character, which function like skill-granting gear. Win 4 fights with a character that has a Picto equipped, and you gain a Lumina version of the Picto, meaning you can equip it to any (or all) characters so long as you have allocated enough Lumina points to them, allowing for complex synergies and builds, especially later on. Some Pictos feel simple, like 50% damage increase on base attacks, while others just...cheat (like the apptly named "Cheater" which allows any character that has it to play two times in a row). But how does a combination of 50% base damage increase, plus 50% more break damage on base attack, plus additional AP generation, plus one extra turn after using a base attack sound? Some synergies can break things, and you'll feel a satisfying sense of reward in discovering and using them.

I know seeing it all laid out can seem daunting, and perhaps too complex. But the game does an excellent (can't stress this enough) job with its learning curve, introducing new mechanics and things to keep in mind gradually, and organically. And it’s so damn satisfying when it all clicks. Eventually, once you learn enemy type attack patterns and are able to avoid or counter them, and set up your characters with the right builds, luminas, weapons and pictos, suddenly the battles stop feeling like story interruptions and start feeling like a balancing act. It’s surprisingly deep. Surprisingly fun. And surprisingly addictive. It’s evokes the Civ mentality of “okay, one more turn” and then realize it's 3AM and your GPU is begging for sweet release.

Speaking of GPUs, visually this game is...art. Like, actual art. While (most of) the characters look realistic enough for today's Unreal Engine 5 standards, it's the Belle Époque visual direction for the environments, enemies and non-human characters that stands out, full of smoky vistas, abandoned battlefields, impossible architecture, crumbling grandeur, and the kind of stylized lighting that just works and will often leave you with your mouth open without even realizing it.

There’s a surrealism quality permeating the game, that gives every environment, interaction and story beat this uneasy, dream-like quality. It’s not realistic, it’s symbolic. Theatrical, expressive, poetic. And there’s something deeply French about it all. That specific artistic blend of melancholy and joie de vivre. You know the vibe. Moody men in elegant coats, smoking a cigarette in silence with a half-smile. Creepy masks frozen in expressions ranging from abject terror to droll amusement. Existential ennui, with occasional wholesomeness and/or silliness sprinkled in.

It’s not all beautiful brushstrokes, cello solos, choral laments and poetic monologues though. The game did crash on me a few times (often enough to be pointed out), usually after long sessions - and when I say “crash,” I mean freeze-frame followed by a forced restart and swearing. It also felt hefty on the hardware, making my RTX 3060 sweat more than Doom: The Dark Ages did. At no point did if feel unplayable or stutter, even at high settings with HDR and DLSS on, but it did make my GPU's fans sound like a helicopter about to take off, and is definitely something to consider if your rig’s older or prone to overheating.

To summarise, Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 isn’t just a good RPG. It's not even just a game. It’s a mood piece. It's a thesis on memory, grief, duty, and the beauty of fighting battles you know you can’t win, but doing it anyway because the alternatives are too painful to ponder.

It’s The Matrix meets The City of Lost Children on the cobbled alleyways of a fever dream of Montmartre, with a combat system that rewards a combination of brains and timing, and a world that drags you in only to tell you you're not welcome there, and that’s exactly why you’ll stay and see the story through all of its twists, turns and revelations, to one of its two absolutely emotional endings that, if you're anything like me, will leave you deeply unsettled and sad, or ugly-crying.

Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 is not just a game. It's an experience, and you owe it to yourself.

Diablo IV - There's no Sanctuary to be found here

2023-06-22T02:15:00.006+03:00

Back when I favorably "reviewed" Diablo III, I was not exactly a fan of the franchise, and even my excitement for it waned soon enough when the review "mode" was over. As you may recall, it did re-emerge, with a vengeance. Diablo III eventually managed to pull me in enough to not only buy and play the expansion and the Necromancer DLC, but to also play through various seasons, soloing 100+ level Rifts, on multiple characters, and leave it with more than one of each character per class geared to the nines and an almost by-heart knowledge of multiple builds for them. I even bought the game on console, namely Switch. To a hardcore Diablo player this will sound like child's play, but to me, that was huge.

I actually started reading up on the lore. And, more importantly, on the fascinating start of the franchise. In fact, I was so pulled in that not only did I buy (twice) the remastered version of a game I tried over a dozen unsuccessful times to get into when Diablo II Resurrected came out, but to also play a fair bit of Diablo Immortal on my phone. Hell, it even made me buy the original Diablo again on GoG and give the OG Diablo II another go before Resurrected came out. However, none of the games managed to scratch the same itch that Diablo III specifically had scratched for me.

So, after seeing the pre-release footage and articles regarding Diablo IV, I made the obvious choice to stay away for a couple of years. Give the dust time to settle, the teething issues to go away, the price to drop. Maybe wait for the inevitable expansion or DLC that will add the monk class back.

But just from reading this, you all know how long that decision lasted, right?

If you're looking for a one sentence verdict: it's good. Like, really good. If you want to know a little more, Diablo IV is, in many ways, Diablo II: Part II. However, it retains many of the changes that made Diablo III last for as long as it did with a playerbase as wide as it has.

If you want to know more...then let's break it down.

Visually, Diablo IV is a lot closer to II than III. Though both games had a healthy (or, depending on your viewpoint, unhealthy) dose of horror and gore elements, IV veers closer to II's muted, gothic aesthetic than III's more vibrant overall look, its earthy tones of brown and grey mirroring the juxtaposition of Quake to Doom. The overall art style opts for a more...realistic view than its last two predecessors did, which lends itself well to the aforementioned gothic look. Gorgeous visuals, coupled with impressive abilities, enemies exploding into bucketfulls of liquid gore and viscera, enemies of various shapes, sizes and types, imposing bosses, varying environments, customisable player models (more than just gender and gear, this time), a zoomed in, cinematic eye for cutscenes that include actual emotes rather than simply voice acting, pretty much everything that the previous games did well visually, IV not only repeats, but also builds on and surpasses. From a PC standpoint, the game while certainly more demanding hardware-wise than III, is nevertheless not outrageously so: 3440x1440 with everything turned on to the max will net you an everage of 100-140 fps on a system that would have been considered entry-mid a couple of years ago, and that's without FSR or DLSS active.

This "yes, and" approach persists across many of the game's aspects, from gameplay to story to sound to loot systems. If you've played Diablo II Resurrected, you'd be excused in feeling that game played, in retrospect, both like an experiment regarding the players' reception of IV, as well as a refresh of what is, for all intents and purposes, IV's source material.

Now, it's well documented that I was not a fan of II. Even Resurrected did not manage to excite me as much as I had hoped. And yet, IV retains enough of the combat and story flow of III to feel like a middle ground between II's more "stilted" approach to progress and III's illusion of fluidity and bombastic viscerality, balanced just enough to feel both organic and, at times, tactical. The game makes sure that you take stock of this from very early on in your adventure, using many of these familiar yet evolved elements in tandem, within the first half-hour, to show you that this is not your daddy's Diablo, making the story even more integral and impressively (and, importantly, personally) told, without however imposing it or doing it in a way that's detrimental to the gameplay.

Ah, yes. A key element that creates this feeling is the gameplay. Take, for example, the skill tree. While it retains the "tree" format seen in II, it has many of the simplified UI elements that III introduced. Skills are divided in categories which progressively unlock the more skillpoints you allocate, allowing you to pick one (or more) per category. However, this time you can further specialize them as well as allocate ranks on them to increase their effect, and passives are also present in the same tree rather than having a separate interface like III did. Builds require more in-depth thought than they did in 3 (and II, for that matter) and seem less dependent on gear sets and bonuses, while at the same time remaining plenty easy to intuit.

Additionally, further emphasizing familiarity while going deeper, many of the signature abilities return, but they do so in fresh ways, and are complemented by interesting mechanics. An example: the barbarian has some signature abilities carrying over from previous games (such as Whirlwind or Hammer of the Ancients), but this time around is carrying 4 weapons at the same time, can (and is encouraged to) assign a different weapon to each offensive ability, and there are abilities and buffs that trigger when swapping weapons enough times or on a short rotation, encouraging experimentation rather than just clicking on an enemy until they burst into gore and gold. This is a feature that could have been an item set before - now it's a core mechanic of the class. This approach persists for all of the game's launch classes: Barbarian, Necromancer, Rogue, Druid and Sorcerer.

However, IV's gameplay is not solely borrowing and evolving elements from its own lineage, but also borrowing some of the MMO elements introduced in a not that known offshoot of Diablo, specifically Marvel Heroes, a game that has been dead and buried since the end of 2017. And while this may not seem like an apt comparison at first and may, in fact, be dismissed as personal bias because I loved that game, bear with me.

Diablo IV has one large, shared world, in which you will encounter other people in hubs or questing out in the wild, and you can choose how much -if at all- you will interact with them, or -indeed- even acknowledge them. You can choose to approach it as a single player experience, or an MMO one. But at the same time, all story or progress-specific areas or dungeons are instanced, making those areas personal to you (or your party). So the game world is effectively split in twain: the shared overworld, and the personal underworld. Access to the highest levels of difficulty in the overworld is achieved via completion of a "trial" capstone dungeon.

And this, was the exact same model Marvel Heroes introduced back in 2015 (and refined when their highest overworld difficulty was introduced). Now I just know there's some other game out there probably using that same formula (maybe even that introduced it before Marvel Heroes), but it's where I saw it first at least on a large scale, so...sue me?

The approach of warped familiarity mentioned above also affects things such as the loot system (with randomized items now also extending to legendaries), the aspect system that resembles the legendary + Cube system from III, semi-randomised world events and areas, enemies, and even game modes (campaign or adventure mode), and multiple tiers of difficulty. Entirely new concepts in the formula (like mounts or the interconnected open overworld rather than being broken down into multiple smaller scale maps) are still familiar and normalised enough as overall gaming concepts, in retrospect feeling more like necessary omissions from previous entries, rather than truly new additions. In short, IV will feel familiar enough yet fresh to veterans of both II (Resurrected more so than vanilla) and III, while launching with a formula that aims to achieve the longevity of its predecessors.

However, I cannot, in all good conscience, not go to this one final disclaimer: unlike its predecessors which were one and done in terms of purchases (expansions notwithstanding as those were at least substantial additions in terms of content), Blizzard has peppered the menu interface with dedicated pages of microtransactions, which initially both scared and infuriated me to see on a 70 dollar game of a company that should be desperate to earn some good faith back from its fans after the multiple years of misconduct allegations, mass walkouts, dwindling playerbase on their main cash cow of WoW, negative media coverage, WarCraft III Reforged, Diablo Immortal backlash and the most recent Overwatch fiascos. Especially considering that Diablo III also launched with a store/auction house back in the day, something they themselves decided they had to remove a couple of years later (the official line was it was for gameplay approach and balance issues, but rumour has it they just didn't want to keep maintaining a feature the playerbase did not use as much as they had hoped and was not providing enough revenue to justify its continued upkeep). The silver lining is that - at least for now- these microtransactions pertain solely to cosmetic items with zero gameplay impact (unlike Diablo Immortal currently and Diablo III back at launch) and are thus completely optional.

Atomic Heart - Or How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Bot

2023-06-07T19:14:00.051+03:00

I'll be honest: I started playing Atomic Heart knowing absolutely nothing about it.

Yes, I had seen a couple of memes regarding the robot twins, but that was, pretty much, the extent of it. In truth, I just wanted to try out a brand new game following Jedi Survivor's teething issues to benchmark my rig's performance. And if it was good, all the better. So I loaded up GamePass, it caught my eye, and a few minutes later I was running it for the first time.

It took mere seconds for me to vividly flashback into Bioshock Infinite's Columbia. The whole -lengthy- introduction felt like a cross between BI and the original Half-Life, where a day in a (seemingly) idyllic location soon goes entirely to shit when robots go all Terminator meets I, Robot.

The premise of the game is, the Soviets came up on top after WWII, and soon established themselves as a utopia with crazy-advanced technology (especially robotics). But, things are not really as they seem beneath the surface, and the game soon begins showing clear influences from the original Bioshock's Rapture instead. Before expanding a little, though, I feel a disclaimer is in order.

I was unaware of the whole controversy around the game's finances and thematic concerns (those being that it's essentially Russian propaganda following the war in Ukraine) until after almost finishing it, but maybe because of this ignorance I was able to see it through a wholly unbiased lens. In my eyes, the story and plot is not pro-Russian propaganda and, if anything, it pokes quite a few pointed jabs and parody at the concealed rot and corruption in the Soviet system, even in a utopian fantasy. Individuality, free will and endangered human rights at the forefront of what the main character is fighting for, in spite of the system in place, in stark contrast of what is happening in the real world. To me it's no more propaganda than Red Alert's Soviets were, less humorous and tongue in cheek, perhaps, but certainly not defending the concept of a communist society in the way Soviets (and some modern Russians) meant it. As to the real-world financial implications regarding Mudfish (the Cyprus-based developer), where its funding came from and where the profits are going, I have not investigated enough to form an opinion.

Necessary disclaimer interlude aside, I will not go into too much detail regarding the development of the plot, who -and what- the main character P-3 aka Major Nachaev is, the antagonists, the precious few allies you will encounter. The game's story is not going to win any awards for originality, even though the overall world-building is interesting at times. I will not expand much on the visuals of the game, except to say that they are really very good and, most importantly, very well optimised. Being able to play a 2023 fps that looks this good, at high (60+) framerates, at the highest possible settings, at 3440x1440, with a mere RTX 3060 is no easy feat nowadays. What I will expand further on are the sound and environment design, and the gameplay.

The sound design of this game deserves a special note, which I don't usually do, simply because of how good it is for the most part, and how spectacularly bad and C-tier it becomes when it fails. The overall sound design of the game is pretty standard, but well thought out; you will soon learn to identify enemies and traps by sound alone. The music in the game, both ambient tone-setting pieces or singular tracks is...if not stellar, as close as it makes no difference. You will go from operatic arias (quite literally real opera music, such as Carmen), to Russian metal, to classical pieces like The Blue Danube or Swan Lake, to Russian techno-dubstep to Shostakovich pieces, sometimes aimed to get your adrenaline pumping, others to build atmosphere, and others simply to create memorable moments (such as surviving wave after wave of enemies until Habanera from the aforementioned Carmen ends). So far, so great!

But (and this is a big but), the voice-acting in the game is very hit and miss, and for the most part it's miss. There are not that many speaking characters for the majority of the game, and the biggest offender of them all is the main character's voiceover, with the voice artist performing a very good but entirely unfitting impersonation of male V from Cyberpunk 2077 (not his fault, as likely the culprit was the direction he was given). Other characters with lots of lines are not faring much better, with Granny Zina being the second worst and ill-fitting VO after P-3. Both their lines feel rushed, not fitting the environment and tone set by scenes and events, as if they were recorded in a vacuum with the actors not being given any context.

Scenes with both of them are especially bad

I can't stress enough how jarring and off-putting this feels, and how much it ruins any atmosphere and immersion the game manages to eke out in other ways. I also find it hilarious that almost everyone speaks perfect American English with no hint of Russian accent, while every piece of writing in the game world uses the Cyrillic font, and the only person with a thick-ish accent is...the German guy. A special shout-out needs to go to the voice of NORA and the various robot voices in general, for standing above the mediocrity (and worse) of the rest.

The above, unfortunately, runs contrary to the overall pretty good environment-building of the game, from the utopian setpieces of the beginning, to decrepit, derelict and overrun facilities, to countryside, to infrastructure both intact and destroyed, to government, bureaucratic facilities and, most impressively from a visual standpoint, hallucinations within P-3's head.

And now, to the meat and potatoes of the game, the gameplay itself. At the start of this "review", I made some Bioshock comparisons. Turns out, I should keep making them, as the game is almost entirely built on the same formula gameplay-wise as well, with some bits and bobs added and removed at will, and slight influences from games such as Far Cry (3 and above) and Deus Ex.

In the heart of the game beats a pure, old fashioned story-based linear (for the most part) shooter. Add to that formula special powers such as Shok, Telekinesis and Frostbite, automated vendors that use scavenged materials to upgrade skills, powers and weapons or craft powerups, weapons, weapon upgrades and ammo, add "safe rooms" in which you will find said vending machines and save machines/terminals. Add frantic action setpieces alternating with tense and creepy exploration and painstaking ammo and resource conservation setpieces. Furthemore, add the premise of "wondrous retro sci-fi tech" that permeates the game, robotic enemies both humanoid and not, creepy plant mutants (yes, very Last of Us, and somehow very Stranger Things as well) and the exploration of abandoned environments where, essentially, all hell got loose and there are practically no friendly survivors, and yeah...with this recipe you will have a game that is, at its best, paying hommage to Bioshock and, at its worst, copying it.

Atomic Heart does neither.

The game is trying a bit too hard to present itself as a mature one, but its overt (and, frankly, needless) oversexualisation of the female form as an object (evident in pretty much all "female" robots, rather than any breathing women within the game) and the innuendo slinging dirty talking NORA may well have been intended as commentary on male misogyny and objectification of women, but miss their mark and instead come off as a teenager's edgy masturbatory aid.

While it has many interesting ideas, several memorable moments and action, and is definitely worth a playthrough, it's hardly a game you will crave to replay or think about much afterwards. When all is said and done, for a game called Atomic Heart, it has surprisingly little of it.

Star Wars - Jedi Survivor - Why a by-the-numbers approach can be a good thing

2023-06-06T13:56:00.003+03:00

Let me start with a disclaimer.

If you put a lightsaber in my hands, physical or virtual, I'm happy. Pretty much every time a game did so, I ended up playing the crap out of it. I can't even remember how many times 15-year old me played through The Phantom Menace game, and when you take off the rose-tinted glasses, it was not a good game.

And hell, when the game actually was good, it was another story entirely.
Jedi Knight Outcast, for example, I played through so much, that it actually ended up being the first game I played online with strangers, in random duels, and probably the first time I got seriously into modding with skins, something that would continue well past the lifetime of its sequel, Jedi Knight Academy.

JKA had a special place in my heart for a long time. Not only did I play through the story multiple times, making different choices, trying different lightsaber configurations (for the first time, you could use a double bladed lightsaber or dual sabers), but I played the crap out of multiplayer, especially Powerduel - a 2v1 duel duel in which I always preferred to be the 1 vs the 2. If you're a long time reader, you know I'm not one to toot my own horn, so I will just say this: I was good.

You might believe I digress. But trust me, you'll see where I'm going with the trip down memory lane when it's done.

Other games down the line to offer the chance to wield a lightsaber did not do it quite as well or fluidly, making the weapon feel more like a stick or truncheon and not so much a superheated plasma blade cutting through everything, and the wielder's movement to be more stilted. Yes, even the much-lauded by its nostalgic fanbase Episode 3.

That was until The Force Unleashed.

A game that -at the time- was touted as canon, and did fit in with the established lore at the time, provided you made the "good" choice at the finale. It was a game that made the player use the Force to feel like a force of nature, pushing, pulling, dashing, jumping, electrocuting and slicing freely. The lightsaber itself was ...let's be honest, meh. But the game made up for it by not focusing on it. However, another thing the game did well, was provide iconic moments. From wreaking havoc on Kashyyyk as Vader, to using the Force to tear apart a freakin' Star Destroyer, to fighting your way to the Emperor through everyone (including Vader). And then, came the forced tacked-on sequel that dragged the plot way past its prime while adding very little to the gameplay, killing the mood almost entirely. There were just 5 Star Wars games released for the next 8 years, and that was 2 LEGO games, 2 Battlefront titles and one MMO. It was that bad. Let that sink in.

But then, the stars aligned, and Fallen Order happened (minor spoilers for it in the next paragraph.)

A story-driven single player game, with beautiful visuals, truly engaging story, amazing lightsaber parry-based combat (Souls-lite, to be honest), quite adequate puzzles, open-ish world exploration, and peppered with truly iconic moments from start to finish: from the train escape at the start, to exploring Dathomir, to high-jacking an AT-AT and meeting Saw Gerrera on Kashyyyk, to exploring Ilum to rebuild your saber and stumbling into the early makings of Starkiller Base, to reliving Order 66 as a young padawan, to that ending setpiece which I respect too much to spoil, despite being a 5 years old spoiler at this point.

It's a good thing then, that Survivor takes all that made Fallen Order work, and simply dials it up.

There is no reinvention of mechanics, no reinvention of the formula of the game, no mini-games added in (much...). Also, it dodges the pitfall many sequels fall into, by not resetting Cal's earned abilities. The approach of the game is "you pick up where you left off", with the same mechanics, and the gameplay remains largely the same, but more. For the most part, the new baseline is Fallen Order's endgame. New additions include more lightsaber modes/stances (more on that later), a few types of discoverable "tokens" to exchange for cosmetics or abilities at vendors, Force trials and discoverables that unlock cosmetics and a few improvements in hp and the like, new abilities both for Cal and BD, and, for a couple of planets, mounts. The needle moves, but not by much.

Where Survivor does move the needle is by taking the established story up to that point and progresssing it organically, evolving and adding characters, creating jaw-dropping setpieces and sequences, while at the same time cementing its place in the "present" of Star Wars canon (between Episodes III and IV), casting ties to both the canonical High Republic past, as well as the future that we already know about.

It's not only a puzzle piece that fits in perfectly; it's a puzzle piece that plenty of other crucial puzzle pieces connect unto, from Clone Wars, Mandalorian, the films themselves, novels et al. I will not go too much into the plot, as it deserves to be experienced unspoiled. All I will say is that yes, it's good, and more than lives up to the standards Fallen Order had established. Even if I did see some things coming, some others caught me completely off guard.

Jumping back into the gameplay additions, most of them are self-explanatory: bigger and more complex areas require traversal aid (hence new moves and mounts), fresh puzzle ideas require fresh abilities etc.

Let's focus a little more on the combat itself. Survivor retains the Souls-lite approach, with successful combat being a balance of offense and defense, parries and dodging, with the occasional ability thrown in. Especially in higher difficulties, engagements often feel like threading a needle with another needle, where missing hurts.

You retain the single saber and dual-bladed saber stances from Fallen Order, and the dual saber special attack from before now becomes a dedicated dual saber stance that focuses on offense. The two new stances are a crossguard stance that fills in the "slow two-handed behemoth of a weapon" weapon slot, and an interesting blaster stance that is a versatile mix of rapier-like saber melee and blaster ranged attacks. This brings the total to 5 possible stances, of which 2 can be active at any point, freely changeable at any rest point.

You will quickly settle down to your own preferred playstyle, but may find that some engagements or bosses are better suited to one type instead of another (perhaps maybe even one you are not well accustomed to). Single is balanced, dual-bladed has reach and is good for defense and crowd control but lacks an offensive punch, dual sabers are fast and offer the best offense but lack in defense, crossguard is devastating in both but really slow and creates large openings on your defense when attacking, while the blaster is a jack of all trades type, and the only one to offer ranged offensive abilities besides deflecting blaster shots or throwing your saber.

I can't, in all good conscience, not also say a few words on the launch of the game and specifically its poor PC performance at launch (though longtime readers will know technical aspects is not something I like to focus on).

To my eyes, Fallen Order at maximum settings and Survivor and its maximum settings, at the same resolution and the same hardware don't look too different visually. Certainly not enough to justify the spike of hardware requirements and, most importantly, the very spotty performance of Survivor in its first few days. Console players were having a blast, but PC players with demonstrably superior hardware were not, simply because of bad code optimization.

While I did not have performance issues bad enough to cause me not to want to play, when I did it hurt my experience and the immersion (particularly in cutscenes). I was able to play at epic (the penultimate option) settings with raytracing on comfortably enough with a Ryzen 3800x and an RTX 3060 (not Ti), hovering around 40-50 fps. A couple of patches later, the same rig offers a demonstrably smoother experience, hovering at around 60-70 fps with the same parameters.

So while I did not personally have game-breaking performance issues at launch, I couldn't guarantee you wouldn't either if you were on PC.

But now? I can guarantee that you are much less likely to. And the game is worth it.

60 DAYS OF GAMING: DECADE ANNIVERSARY - DAY 32: My favourite gameplay gimmick

2022-05-20T20:58:00.004+03:00

Then: Bullet time

Now: Bullet time has sort of fallen out of favour in the last ten years, and fallen out of the collective zeigeist of gaming. Perhaps it was overdone, or done badly one too many times, or we just got bored of it and craved something new. It still very much exists, even in high-profile games such as RDR2, but it's no longer a selling point or a show-stopper.

Truth be told nothing has collectivelly emerged to replace it, though several games have put forth worthy contenders.

As a personal preference, I will go with what I like to call Superhot's bullet time 2.0, in which the flow of time itself ebbs and flows relative to your movement, making the experience a first-person Snydercam bullet chess. Couple that with a bold art-style and a 4th wall-breaking high concept, and you truly have something special on your hands.

It's hard to explain unless you try it yourself, and you can do so by playing the game's prototype here.

60 DAYS OF GAMING: DECADE ANNIVERSARY - DAY 31: My favourite weapon

2022-05-16T14:03:00.002+03:00

Then: The lightsaber

Now: still very much the lightsaber

I did not go into much detail last time. I thought a lightsaber did not need much explanation or justification.

But in truth, it's its sheer elegance, its symbolism, it's perfect marriage of old-school fantasy melee and sci-fi technology and power, that demands focus and acrobatic skill and reflexes to not only wield properly but to do so effectively in close quarters in a world where laser weapons are commonplace.

Not every time we've gotten to wield a lightsaber in games it had done its mythos justice, obviously. Some games treated it as a melee stick that deflected blaster bolts (occasionally). Some really did their best to treat it as part of the character, customising its hilt and blade or even stats. Even when incorporated in a basic way, however, it managed to effortlessly be the cooler weapon in any game it was in.

Except for Jedi: Fallen Order. No other game has come as close to not only putting a Jedi's weapon front and center, but doing it justice as well.

60 DAYS OF GAMING: DECADE ANNIVERSARY - WHAT HAPPENED?

2022-05-08T20:51:00.000+03:00

Holy crap, I'm sooooooo behind on this.

Let's get cracking.

We were left on Day 30 - My favourite game of all time: Baldur's Gate Saga

This may be pure nostalgia at this point: despite my best intentions, I have not yet managed to get myself to fully replay this saga with a ranger, something I've been fully aiming to do since...um...2007 or so.

But that playthrough of Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 back in the early 2000es that allowed me to import my character from the first game into the second and seamlessly continue the epic tale of the * ugh* paladin I was playing (I was 16, ok?) will probably forever stand in my heart as the seminal story-telling in gaming, and probably what has shaped me for many years of my young adult life, and has definitely informed how I interact with people, romance, overwhelming odds, taught me how to accept or mourn the things I cannot control and how to fight for what I can.

Purely for its sheer importance (which it gained by being incredibly well-crafted), I think it will forever be my favourite game of all time.

Adult video games...of the other sort

2022-05-08T15:59:00.001+03:00

Back in early 2019, Subverse became one of the top, most fast funded projects on Kickstarter, and blasted through its goals. Subverse went on to garner more than 2 million dollars of consumer-to-developer cash.

This meant a lot of things, of course.

It signalled to many studios and creators that no, turns out you don't necessarily need the pockets of a big publisher to make the game you want to make in the scale and scope you want to make it. If your proof of concept and quality of work are up to par, gamers will maybe - just maybe- be able to help you take it off the ground yourself, without a publisher breathing down your neck to meet deadlines and alter things to their wishes.

It signalled that gamers had finally started realising en masse that publishers are the issue in most cases of botched, buggy releases, rushed content, microtransactions galore, and overall bad quality. The place of these colossi in the face of a future of digital storefronts and no-middlemen possibilities, suddenly did not seem so immutable.

Subverse, 2019/ongoing

It also signalled that there was an eager and sizable market for games that not only included sex, but revolved around it. Smut money is still money, after all. Just ask the porn industry.

Subverse is not the first video game with sex in it, of course. Subverse isn't even the first game where the focus is on sex. Faaaaar from it.

Based on the above, Subverse was the last -and strongest- smut signal in a market that, in the western world, was considered niche.

Gals Panic, 1990

(Japan was...well...Japan. This genre had been going strong over there for quite some time, and had long been exploring not only explicitly sexual content in videogame form, but niche fetishes as well)

Real Kanojo, 2009

Koikatsu!, 2019

But before we go any further, let's do one my favorite things - a deep dive into video game history.

Ever since someone saw 80085 on a calculator, squinted and chuckled, we have been attempting to simulate sex and sexual content in an interactive digital format - sometimes with a "serious" approach, and sometimes with tongue in cheek.

What game was first is most likely lost to history at this point. Of course, the limitations of technology of the time did not allow for much in the way of innovation - mostly what came in the late 70es and early 80es was a softporn variation or own take on:

a) a (what would eventually become known as a) visual novel with digitised pictures of models

b) an arcade game with digitised adult-themed pictures to gradually reveal

c) strip "something" (usually poker in the western world, mahjong in Japan)

The sheer volume of these identical clones of similar concepts (often with little to identify and timestamp them) makes any sort of accurate backtracking a very difficult task. The general concensus is that the first main release in this theme was Softporn - a text adventure that was basically an interactive erotic novel.

There were some exceptions to the above, of course, but not much worth talking about (there are some hilariously simple and rudimentary -albeit explicit- "sex simulators" of the era) save for some that live in infamy due to their tone-deafness (even for that era), such as Custer's Revenge - in which the player assumes the role of General Custer (ostensibly after the events of the Little Bighorn), serial raping native american women while doging arrows. Yes, it's exactly as bad as it sounds.

There is also a myriad of strip poker games as early as CGA graphics up until now, the earliest examples of which were
at the time tittilating, nowadays tame when compared to an average pop music video.

"Strip poker", 1985. Please note that games with the exact same name are uncountable - even its contemporary ones.

There's no use beating around the bush (and I swear using that expression was not an intentional joke): the theme and tone has remained largely the same to this day. Most adult-themed games coming out today belong in the same broad categories, with the change that the exceptions to this are more abundant and vary in quality.

Leisure suit Larry In the Land of the Lounge Lizards, 1987

Now, I'd love to be able to tell you this is a subject I only recently dived into in order to write this, but it would not be truthful. This started decades ago, when a floppy disk with Leisure Suit Larry In The Land Of The Lounge Lizards fell into my hands (complete with age-determining questions on american pop culture and history which 10-year old me brute-forced, memorising correct answers each time).

Leisure Suit Larry: Love for Sail!, 1996

At the time I enjoyed the Larry games (one of my earliest forays into adventure games), culminating in the peak of the series with Larry 7: Love for Sail and never truly recovering after attempting to go 3D with Larry: Magna Cum Laude .

Lula: The Sexy Empire, 1998

It continued with Lula: The Sexy Empire, skipped the sequel and became a problem with Lula 3D.

Lula 3D, 2005

There were others I tried from time to time, mostly out of curiosity, but never really delved back into the subject after Lula 3D.

Yeah, it was that bad.

Until Subverse, that is. Its mere existence made me want to explore what exactly was going on with this. The concept of a crowdfunded project of this size intruiged me, and the kickstarter entry point was low enough that I went ahead in a "sure, why the heck not" moment.

This kicked me down a rabbit hole of trying several examples of what this niche sub-genre had to offer. From the polished ones to the cash grabs, from the multi-person team AA projects with smooth graphics and animation, to the 1-person indie puzzle games with hentai pictures.

And now finally I emerge with my findings.

It's bad, people. It's really bad.

Most of these suffer greatly both in terms of gameplay as well as polish, and the crushing majority of these has no story or actual meat-and-potatoes gameplay to speak of. I fully expected to delve into this and come out with a quality assessment, telling you which ones of these deserve your time, but the truth is the majority of these games are little more than niche masturbatory aids with some gameplay elements tacked on.

There are so many puzzle games with nude pictures or models slapped on them that it really does not even make sense to get into it: peruse and purchase at own discretion (and risk). The exact same thing applies to various "dating simulator"/visual novel "games".

There are those who stand above the rabble, of course. But usually, even the best of them are not something to write home about in terms of an actual game. And I say this after buying (with my own money) and trying several of these, and researching the upcoming releases.

There are great games out there that feature sex - sometimes heavily so, like, say, the Witcher series, or even more independent releases like Agony Unrated or Lust For Darkness.

Lust for Darkness, 2018

But games whose selling point is sex are usually trite, or rushed, or boring, or copy a mainstream formula up to apoint with copious amounts of digital nudity slapped on top of them to the point they become veritably tiring as everything in them revolves around getting 3D characters to bump uglies (such as, say, Bonetown or Bonecraft or Whorecraft), to the point they are little more than a porn parody of the game they borrow elements from. The most famous example of this is probably Bonetown, a GTA clone that has been around for a long time.

Bonetown, initially released in 2008, saw a re-release in 2018

Then there are those that are flat out porn simulators, like Succubus Cafe, or niche itch-scratchers like the upcoming Carnal Instinct, and those that feature highly detailed models and features that showcase them for this exact reason, but fail to just own what they are by attempting to be an action game or whatever (such as She Will Punish Them)

Succubus Cafe, 2021

Carnal Instinct, TBR

She Will Punish Them, 2021/ongoing

Finally, you have your entirely unapologetic videogame porn: games that flat out aim to serve as porn and absolutely nothing else (like 3D Sex Villa) and sometimes even aim to do so online with human playmates controlling other avatars instead of bots doing this (such as Red Light Centre)

Subverse stands alone in this regard, as the only one polished enough to be able to tangibly offer something more than just jerk-off material. But even so, don't expect more than some Mass Effect galaxy map-style exploration, a grid turn-based combat minigame and an arcade top-view spaceship shooter mini game. It's all connected through a very Starcraft 2-like exploration of your own ship, and a rudimentary "dating" mechanic, peppered with high quality animations of...erm..stuff. The story in itself is...eh...ok? I guess? What marginally saves Subverse is its tongue-in-cheek approach and humour, varying from actually funny, to teen comedy of the early 2000s.

There are some that already surpass it (or will when they're actually out, notably Wild Life) in the actually "adult" sections: more control over what happens on screen, better graphics, more realistic models, better animations etc.

But for most of the games in this sub-genre, you are better off skipping the excuse, and just watching porn instead.

Let's talk about Xbox

2022-01-19T23:55:00.012+02:00

In the late months of the year 2001, the Xbox entered the gaming scene.

At the time the world scoffed - the market was already positively saturated by the three big companies that had dominated the console gaming scene (and indeed, gaming in general) for years.

In case of Sony, the Playstation which had just launched the almighty PS2 a year earlier.

In case of the two older behemoths, Nintendo had just launched the Gamecube less than two months before and had a slew of exclusive franchises in their arsenal, while Sega was still riding out the slow death of the Dreamcast and was getting ready to officially withdraw from the console wars.

But, it turns out, *reads from tattered ancient prophecy scroll* there must always be 3, to balance one another.

First, it was Atari, Nintendo and Sega.

Then, it was Nintendo, Sega and Sony.

But who would join that trio now that Sega was gone? Surely it wouldn't be Microsoft? They didn't have the pedigree for it.

Let's not mince words, despite the PC having the superior theoretical hardware (especially once 3D acceleration cards in the form of 3DFX's Voodoo and (then newcomer) Nvidia's Riva TNT made their debut), gaming on PC had been an afterthought for all but the most platform-devoted game developers.

Sure, there had always been amazing games exclusive to PC even at those bleak years, but consoles always took priority for publishers and developers.

Not to mention that to game on a PC you needed plenty of space (CRT monitors were still the dominant type at the time) as well as a beefy Windows PC with several peripherals like a decent graphics card, a 3D Acceleration card, a sound card, a chunky keyboard, a crappy trackball mouse (optical mice were just starting to become a thing), speakers and whatever other peripherals you wanted per game: headphones, crappy gamepads, joysticks; not to mention games would sometimes limit what you could play them on (such as Shiny's MDK requiring a new Pentium CPU despite being perfectly playable (via some file tweaking) on a 486 CPU).

But I digress; PC gaming at the time just wasn't being marketed the way it is today, and had no hope of truly being magic number 3. And PC gaming at the time (and very nearly true today) meant Windows, and Windows meant Microsoft.

So Microsoft realised that there was money in gaming; and since PC gaming was too complicated and cumbersome to capitalise on at the time, there was only one way forward: enter the console battleground.

We all have heard the stories of how the original Xbox was a prototype built out of a Dell as a proof of concept and that the name Xbox (derived from DirectX Box) was a placeholder the development did not quite like (but test audiences loved); this is not what this article is, or how the mere idea of an OS and productivity software gitant that had only recently published a few games (excluding the Flight Simulator of old) and only had a few peripherals under their hardware belt would create a gaming console to compete with the Playstation's powerhouse was met with scepticism and ridicule - both outside and within Microsoft.

If that is what you are after, Xbox celebrated its 20th anniversary in the tail end of 2021, and launched a series of documentaries on youtube that chronicle the trajectory of the brand in these two decades.

In short, the Xbox brand managed to stay aflot thanks to superior hardware (and superior versions of games already on other platforms), online play, overall versatility and games such as Crimson Skies, Fable, Morrowind (this was before Elder scrolls became mega popular), Knights of the Old Republic and the minor, indie hit of...Halo.

And when its successor, the Xbox 360 came out, the landscape had changed.

The PS2 had been the best selling console of all time (155 million units moved by the end of its cycle compared to the paltry 24 million of the Xbox), and had established very popular exclusive franchises of its own, some that last to this day. Sega was a distant dot of a shadow in the past. Nintendo was still on the Gamecube (and would soon release the Wii, going in a more casual direction they have yet to shake off to this day).

The PC was...getting there, but wasn't quite there yet. It was still the superior platform, but still wasn't as easily associated with gaming as a console was, nor was it marketed as one quite as heavily as it eventually would be.

But the Xbox had successfully carved its way in. This...was now the third contestant.

And then...

*thunderclap*

Both the Nintendo Wii and the Playstation 3 were about a year away from launch.
This gave the 360 a year's worth of head start to launch with impressive hardware, impressive features, a controller so good it's only been essentially finetuned to this day, and start building an amazing library, both with its successful franchises of the previous iteration as well as new and iconic ones such as Gears of War, and Forza to go head to head with Playstation's Gran Turismo.

It did not help Sony that Playstation 3 got in its own way one too many times either (which was a whopping 699 dollars on launch), and Nintendo was content to carve its own niche.

The 360 was left to stomp around for one whole year, and as a result the 360 became much, much bigger than its predecessor. Even with its flaws, even with defective batches, even with the red ring of death, even with all the bells and bluray whistles the Playstation 3 eventually launched with, the 360 vs PS3 fight was a close one; too close for comfort for Sony which had grown complacent after dominating for two generations.

By the end, the Playstation won in units moved: 87 million compared to the 360's 84 million, but the 360 had also managed to do something other than moving units: stealing players' hearts away from camp Sony: a significant chunk of them. If the two companies continued down the same path, the market would be anyone's game.

This turned out to be too great an insult for Sony, which vowed to return more powerful than before...

In a twisted reversal of history repeating itself, Sony didn't need to do anything too groundbreaking. With Xbox One Microsoft bit the hand that had nurtured them, managed to annoy gamers, had only a handful of exclusive titles which were eventually ported over on Windows (to this day, the only major Xbox One game not on Windows is Halo 5: Guardians) and suffered a catastrophic loss versus Sony's wildly popular Playstation 4.

It was a bizzare turn, behind which I suspect more than a little of idiotic executive meddling was present: Here was a brand that had been extremely gamer-centric for more than a decade, showing its audience disdain and doing nothing to get on their buyers' good graces.

The result? Xbox One being a non-choice for most of its lifetime, with 41 million units sold so far (remember, it's still being sold today), while Playstation 4 gleefully has sold 115 units to date (and going strong).

Microsoft banked towards PC for a while: PC gaming had finally fully flourished as a flashy ecosystem companies could start milking dry with peripherals, services, subscriptions, RGB and overpriced chairs. So Microsoft Studios (and studios owned by them) slowly started acquiring more studios and IPs, and releasing things on a platform where gaming was synonymous with their other big product: Windows (despite Linux gaming making strides, it's still leagues behind, and Mac gaming is a really good joke).

And yet, having played around with both consoles, and despite handing over the crown to the PS4 due to its far superior library, I have to give to the Xbox than everything about it, from build quality, to heft and controller exudes a sense of...premium-ness.

The hardware was up to snuff. The problem was the attitude, and the lack of games to buy the hardware for.

Enter Xbox Series X and Gamepass.

Now 2020, even with the pandemic in full swing, was a very different beast compared to 2001, 2005 and even 2013.

The PC is by now not only the most advanced platform by far, but also widely recognised as such. Microsoft seems to have anticipated this earlier than Sony (which has only recently started bringing some of their prized IPs to PC).

While both consoles have launched for more than a year now, it's still far too early in the cycle to tell how it's going. Double the people that have purchased a new Xbox seem to have bought a PS5 at this time: but lack of widespread availability and lack of extensive unique libraries for both consoles make any credible extrapolation of data as to which system is actually ahead tenuous at best, when you factor in the PC and Gamepass.

And here's the thing: we have to factor in the PC and Gamepass this time.

Microsoft have understood that they don't need to compete with themselves. Or, more accurately, they have understood how much money gamers are willing to throw down to keep up with our hobby.

So Microsoft's new focus has been to make sure gamers have more and more reasons to give Microsoft money: either by buying a new Xbox and maybe a Gamepass subscription for the more casual no-fuff-no-fuss gamers, or shelling out for a Gamepass subscription on their Windows-running PC for the ones with more money to spend and/or the more tech savvy.

And the reason is simple: Rather than creating new IPs to compete with Playstation, Xbox has decided to buy their way in, which is something that Microsoft can afford to do a hell of a lot more than Sony can.

Microsoft had Halo. They had Forza. They had Gears. They had a bunch of other IPs they could revive.

So they also went out there and have gone on a spending spree and are acquiring studios or making deals that make a huge splash every so often.

A few months ago, that meant Bethesda for 7 billion and some change, which included Bethesda Games, Arkane Studios, id Software, Machinehead Games and others. Elder Scrolls, Doom, Wolfenstein, Fallout and a bunch of other IPs and definitely future titles will eventually stop being available outside of the Xbox ecosystem of Xbox and PC.

Yesterday, this meant purchasing Activision Blizzard for a whopping 68 billion. Which included Blizzard, Sledgehammer, Beenox, Treyarch, Raven, Toys for Bob. This means World of Warcraft, Call of Duty, Starcraft, Diablo, Overwatch, and - perhaps more annoyingly for Sony since they popularised these characters which had debuted and been a staple of their lineups- Spyro, and Crash games will eventually only be on the Xbox ecosystem (I can't imagine how much Sony is reeling from losing future Call of Duty titles)

Tomorrow, it can be Rockstar, or Ubisoft, or almost anyone. Heck, after the scale of Activision Blizzard's acquisition, I only consider a few studios beyond acquisition uncertainty, and for reasons of principle, not because of money.

This could potentially "steal" the next GTA or the next RDR or the next Assassin's Creed from their rival platform. Or FIFA. Or Battlefield. Or pretty much any successful franchise currently outside of Microsoft's control that isn't already owned by Sony.

But Microsoft is not some great unifier of gaming, despite trying to brand themselves as such. I've been around too long to buy it so easily.

What they're doing is not making sure they win. It's making sure their opponent loses by slowly taking away pieces from the shared board for their own. And I find that equally exciting for the future of gaming, and equally frightening.

Night of the Living Game Launchers

2022-01-12T21:30:00.004+02:00

In the ancient days of...about 9 years ago, in the PC Gaming world, in the mystical year of 2013, three opponents were fighting it out for dominance.

Steam, Valve's Ancient One (by about a decade at that point).

Origin, EA's Inigo Montoya out for revenge for the death of its daddy, the infutiatingly bad EA Downloader.

Uplay, Ubisoft's uninvited ginger-haired stepchild guest with B.O. that wouldn't leave us well enough alone.

Origin was attempting to hold its own against the awesome might of Steam, while Uplay was flailing its sword around in the wrong direction.

There were others, of course, even then. But they were minor carrion-feeders at the time.

In 2022, 18 years after Steam's unveiling and the introduction into a brave new reality of needing a separate application to buy and play games, things have changed a lot.

Back then, the concept of a gaming launcher/storefront was something that alienated quite a few people at the time - remember, us old-timers were used to buying hard-copies.

(Us *really* old-timers know this was more than a DVD case with a 2-page promo/manual printout and a disc - it was a cardboard box, with a beefy manual, a jewel case with the disc and often tons of freebies like maps, coins, figures, booklets etc)

But what is it that has changed, exactly, in those 9 years?
Let's break it down.

For the sake of simplicity, in here we'll explore all the launchers and/or major services and/or major storefronts available to PC gamers in January 2022. We will not be covering gamekey resellers such as GreenManGaming which have had their actions' and goods' legality questioned recently, nor will we be covering game-specific launchers.

So, here goes.

Name:	Steam
Icon:
What it is:	Valve’s pioneer is still dominating the scene in 2022 like a megalodon orbited by various sized remoras.
What can you do with it?	Browse a vast store, purchase games and software, download them on any computer you log your account in and play them. Includes forums, friend lists, a marketplace, a workshop and many more social features.
Do you need it?	Yes. Yes you do.
Is it forced on you?	Not technically, but it’s basically the same way Coca Cola is not forced on you when you want a cola drink. Sure, you can drink Pepsi or a smaller brand, but it’s not as good.
Pros:	Huge catalogue of games and software Extensive linux support Automatic updates Cloud saving Frequent sales Easy to use and generally bug-free Pushing of new tech and compatibilities with SteamOS, linux support, Steam Controller, Steam boxes, Big Picture, VR et al.
Cons:	Nothing good comes off monopoly - Valve charges publishers a steep cut to to all games purchased on their storefront Some publishers deliberately avoid it or launch their games as timed exclusives on other platforms
Personal opinion:	You can’t spell “steaming hot gaming session” without “steam”
Rating:	9/10

Name:	Origin / EA Desktop
Icon:
What it is:	Origin has been a small-scale, EA-specific Steam for years. It’s currently sharing that function with EA Desktop (currently in Beta) and will be discontinued by the end of 2022, to be replaced entirely by EA Desktop. Its initial goal was to avoid the aforementioned steep cut of Valve from sales of their games. At the time it had first launched, this was not wide-spread knowledge, and this being EA, people just piled on it with wild abandon.
What can you do with it?	Browse EA games catalogue (not comprehensive and omits many, many older games) as well as some 3rd party games, purchase them, download them on any computer you log your account in and play them. Limited social features.
Do you need it?	Honestly? No. All the games on their catalogue can also be purchased on other platforms.
Is it forced on you?	Yes, certain games such as Battlefield, FIFA or Need For Speed need it, even if purchased or acquired on another platform, and will install it on your system.
Pros:	Good prices No fuss refund policy Blazing-fast download speeds EA Play, a subscription-based plan that gives access to different tiers of the catalogue for one low flat monthly fee.
Cons:	Clunky, unintuitive UI in both iterations Limited catalogue EA desktop has showcased some pretty buggy behaviour for me so far, but am keeping an open mind since it’s in Beta.
Personal opinion:	I used to like and defend Origin as I found the hate against it unwarranted. In 2022, I can’t see its -or its replacement’s- point.
Rating:	3/10

Name:	Ubisoft Connect (formerly Uplay)
Icon:
What it is:	Rebranded as Ubisoft Connect fairly recently, Uplay has in fact carved its own niche in the scene. While still essentially needless, it does have some nice perks and advantages that mask this at first sight.
What can you do with it?	Browse a Ubisoft-specific catalogue (like EA’s one, this also omits many older titles), purchase them, download them from your account and play them.
Do you need it?	Not really. But because of the cloud sync and the rewards, you need it in the same way you need a kickstand for your phone - it’s not the 1st thing that comes to mind, but on the occasions you want it, it’s nice that it’s there.
Is it forced on you?	Yes. If you want to play Assassin’s Creed, Far Cry, Watchdogs, For Honor, Rainbow Six or a bunch of others, you can’t avoid it.
Pros:	Each game purchase comes with a set of challenges and a set of rewards for the game. Challenges award coins, while rewards cost coins. These are usually cosmetics or in-game items. Giveaways every now and then. Includes cloud saving across devices and across platforms - if you are (for whatever reason) owning and playing the same game on PC and PS or Xbox, provided you are logged into Ubisoft Connect on all instances, your saves, DLCs and settings carry over. You can redeem a bunch of coins for a one-time 20% discount on your cart - regardless of size or contents. This means that, provided you play the games and accumulate coins to use this way, buying from Connect directly is almost always the cheapest way to acquire Ubisoft games - especially new releases that have not gone on discount elsewhere yet.
Cons:	Apart from the specific pros above, there is no point to it. Very limited social features
Personal opinion:	Can’t really avoid it these days, but it’s not as bad as it used to be.
Rating:	6/10

Name:	GoG Galaxy
Icon:
What it is:	A launcher created by CD Projekt Red as a centralised app for the storefront of gog.com, doubling as a drm measure for Witcher 3.
What can you do with it?	Browse and purchase from the store of gog.com, download and install games, keep them automatically updated, and micromanage your library
Do you need it?	Eh. An argument can be made for both a positive and a negative answer. It’s convenient, and a boon especially for OCD collectors with large libraries as an alternative to spreadsheets, but it’s not essential - for now.
Is it forced on you?	No - most everything can also be downloaded from the website as a DRM-free version that can be used as-is, and what can’t be (such as CD Projekt Red’s own Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk 2077) is also available on other platforms (such as Steam)
Pros:	Large store catalogue via webview of gog.com Incredibly comprehensive selection of older and/or classic games, curated and updated to work on modern systems Highly customisable library with integration to almost all other platforms Ability to manually add games (across any platform) as owned - making this a definitive way to view your entire games collection, down to Gameboy cartridges Cloud saving and syncing Games purchased on it usually come with a slew of goodies such as artbooks, concept art, soundtracks etc Frequent sales
Cons:	Limited social features Limited catalogue in terms of recent AAA titles
Personal opinion:	Galaxy is a modern tablet with several history books loaded into it - for some people (myself included) it’s essential, but others may not desire what it has to offer.
Rating:	9/10

Name:	Battle.net
Icon:
What it is:	Blizzard’s (and now Activision’s as well), service/storefront/ launcher for their specific catalogue. This includes some of the most lucrative franchises ever to appear in gaming, such as Warcraft, Starcraft, Diablo, Overwatch, Hearthstone and Call of Duty (from a point onwards - older CoDs can still be found on Steam, for example). Battle.net predates everything else by a looong time (being used so far back as Warcraft 2 in 1995), but today’s Battle.net resembles the Battle.net of old in name only.
What can you do with it?	Purchase, download and play a specific catalogue of games and DLCs with cloud sync, automatic updates and social features.
Do you need it?	For these specific games? Yes. If you don’t play WoW, Overwatch, Starcraft, Call of Duty, Hearthstone, Diablo et al? No.
Is it forced on you?	Yes, for these specific games.
Pros:	Intuitive and utilitarian UI Fast downloads Cloud sync
Cons:	Limited store catalogue No direct launching grid or option via macro/shortcut.
Personal opinion:	It’s a case of “you ain’t got a choice”. Thankfully it’s not a bad piece of software.
Rating:	7/10

Name:	Bethesda Launcher
Icon:
What it is:	Somewhat akin to Battle.net, with the difference of having the Bethesda catalogue instead.
What can you do with it?	Buy and launch Bethesda games.
Do you need it?	No, but you need an account in it.
Is it forced on you?	Yes, for some specific titles like Fallout 76 (but not, say, for the most recent Doom Eternal)
Pros:	None
Cons:	It has no real purpose
Personal opinion:	Why would you install this?
Rating:	1/10

Name:	Rockstar Games Launcher
Icon:
What it is:	Exactly as above, but for Rockstar games.
What can you do with it?	Buy and launch Rockstar games.
Do you need it?	No - all games are also available on other platforms, but you do need an account on it.
Is it forced on you?	Not that I remember.
Pros:	Um…unobtrusive
Cons:	No real point to it.
Personal opinion:	Again: why would you install this?
Rating:	2/10

Name:	Epic Games Launcher
Icon:
What it is:	A response to Steam’s purchase fee for publishers - it doesn’t have many original or exclusive titles, but focuses on hitting Steam where it hurts: right in the monopoly, using competitive pricing and timed exclusives
What can you do with it?	Barebones browsing of a large catalogue (with many AAA titles), purchase, download and play them
Do you need it?	Not really - unless you want to play a timed exclusive asap (past examples include Borderlands 3 and Metro Exodus, with more sure to come in the future)
Is it forced on you?	No - it’s entirely optional.
Pros:	Competitive pricing Regular generous giveaways and discounts Lightweight
Cons:	Missing all the features, bells and whistles we’ve grown accustomed to Some teething buggy behaviour every now and then (for example games launched from it refuse to detect my Xbox One controller that works normally elsewhere) No social features to write home about
Personal opinion:	While initially I was not a fan, it’s slowly winning me over as I see it for what it is: a pressure point for Steam to not rest on its laurels and improve, rather than aiming to be its replacement.
Rating:	8/10

Name:	Humble Bundle
Icon:
What it is:	A charity-driven online store that sells mostly bundles (as well as singular games). These bundles are mostly games, but at times have been bundles of books, audiobooks, digital comics, software, android apps etc. A variable (by you) percentage of each purchase goes to a rotating roster of charities.
What can you do with it?	Browse the store and/or bundles, make purchases, then redeem those purchases (via code keys) to different platforms such as Steam, Origin, Ubisoft Connect, GoG etc. There is also a subscription service that nets you a bundle (usually 10-12) of games each month. This subscription used to be a stellar value, but the past couple of years its quality has steadily declined to include many stinkers.
Do you need it?	The website/service, no, it’s entirely optional. The just-announced launcher looks like it might be needed for its continued use once it’s out, though, but that remains to be seen.
Is it forced on you?	See above.
Pros:	Easy and cheap way to build (read=bloat) up your library really fast and discover games you might not have tried otherwise. Low prices (especially for subscribers) Frequent sales Some bundles are insanely good You can give games included in purchased bundles that you already own away as gifts
Cons:	Bundles have been steadily declining in effective value (though we were just promised improvements on the whole system)
Personal opinion:	I still have feelings for Humble Bundle, but can’t say I am in love with it anymore.
Rating:	6/10

Name:	Game Pass
Icon:
What it is:	A storefront/mask that Windows Store wears, but most importantly a subscription service that works a little like Netflix - there are hundreds of games available at any given time, with ample warnings of which ones are coming soon and which ones are going away soon.
What can you do with it?	Browse a very large catalogue, choose, download and play as many games as you want at no additional cost. This catalogue includes Day 1 releases of studios owned by Microsoft (for example, Bethesda games, Halo, Forza etc). The PC version of Game Pass also includes EA Play (see above). You can also make purchases (if you want, via Windows Store integration)
Do you need it?	Not technically. But I think you do.
Is it forced on you?	No, it’s an optional service.
Pros:	Low subscription cost with insane value for money Ultimate “try-or-even-play-before-you-buy” method with minimal hassle A very wide variety of genres and titles Relatively easy UI Fast downloads Added bonus: if you also own an Xbox One or above, your PC subscription also applies to it for console exclusives.
Cons:	Some games sneak in additional software (meaning EA Desktop) Infrequent bugs (like downloads getting stuck)
Personal opinion:	Hands down, I think this is the most serious competitor to Steam at this time.
Rating:	9/10

Name:	Playstation Now
Icon:
What it is:	A subscription service of stream-playing a curated library of Playstation 2, 3 and 4 games on PC.
What can you do with it?	Stream gameplay of a Playstation library to your PC - in essence, the game runs elsewhere, but you’re playing it.
Do you need it?	Not really - it’s probably easier to hunt down a PS2/3/4 and the games you want to play in the used market.
Is it forced on you?	No - entirely optional
Pros:	An aging Playstation library in your PC at a low-ish monthly cost.
Cons:	I don’t feel streaming games is quite there yet for most of the world.
Personal opinion:	I have not been able to personally test this, as I have never lived in a country where it’s available.
Rating:	N/A

Name:	Indie Gala
Icon:
What it is:	Very much like Humble Bundle, with three key differences. A focus on indie games, a dedicated hentai/adult section, and community giveaways. A launcher for purchased content was recently launched with their 10 year anniversary.
What can you do with it?	Browse the store and/or bundles, make purchases, then redeem those purchases (via code keys) on Steam or download DRM-free files. There are also community “auctions” and giveaways - almost never something actually worth owning though.
Do you need it?	Honestly? No - the quality of its exclusive indie content leaves a lot to be desired, and with Steam edging into its hentai/sexual content niche it’s less relevant than ever
Is it forced on you?	No. It’s entirely optional.
Pros:	Frequent sales and promos Low prices Niche indie demographic Niche hentai game haven
Cons:	Buggy behaviour on Chrome sometimes If you’re a casual or AAA gamer, it’s more or less pointless for you.
Personal opinion:	I have made purchases on it, but regret 90% of them.
Rating:	2/10

Name:	Microsoft Store
Icon:
What it is:	A built-in store in Windows 8 and above for the super casual gamer that also includes Microsoft-sentric AAA titles
What can you do with it?	Browse said store, make purchases and keep them automatically updated.
Do you need it?	No - but good luck trying to get rid of it.
Is it forced on you?	If you are gaming on Linux or Mac, no. But if you want to game on Windows where most PC games live, it is.
Pros:	Large library of games (mostly casual, but also some AAA ones) and apps that are verified to work. It’s…um…there, I guess?
Cons:	Clunky UI Confusing pricing Every game on it also exists elsewhere
Personal opinion:	There is absolutely no reason to use it.
Rating:	1/10

60 DAYS OF GAMING: DECADE ANNIVERSARY - DAY 29: A game I thought I wouldn't like but ended up loving

2021-06-28T22:23:00.001+03:00

Then: Tomb Raider Legend

Now: Diablo III

I did not see this coming.

Usually I go into a game knowing more or less what I will find, due to both having played a ton of crap, a surprisingly accurate intuition and deductive skills.

But Diablo 3 caught me by surprise when it came out back in 2012. I was going to play it just enough to validate my gut feeling I had for it, borne out of my experiences -or lack therof- of its previous two installments. Instead, I loved it, and gave it a very positive review.

Still, at the time I figured I'd play the campaign a few times in varying difficulties to try out different classes and playstyle and that would be it. It would be amazing for others, but only good in a small dose for me.

It's testament to its polish and quality, then, as well as Blizzard's refusal to drop it despite working on one sequel and one offshoot, that I still find myself actively playing and sinking hours upon hours into it in 2021.

60 DAYS OF GAMING: DECADE ANNIVERSARY - DAY 28: Favourite game developer

2021-06-28T22:11:00.005+03:00

Then: Bioware

Now: Tons of them.

In all this time, I broadened my horizons by playing games by studios that are mostly focused on consoles, such as Naughty Dog, Insomniac and Sucker Punch. Some have done things I didn't particularly like since then, like Blizzard and Bioware. Some studios that I considered simply ok have churned out absolutely amazing things, like Respawn.

To put it bluntly: There is simply no way I can honestly say I have a favourite at this point in time.

60 DAYS OF GAMING: DECADE ANNIVERSARY - DAY 27: Most Epic Scene

2021-06-26T09:30:00.015+03:00

Then: Alistair's speech from Dragon Age Origins

Now: Yeah, I'm gonna have to give it to Bioware again for DA:O's near contemporary, Mass Effect 2 and the assault at the Collector Base.

Full disclosure, I had not fully played the original Mass Effect at the time of the original post. If I had, I might have been tempted to have chosen defending against the assault on the Citadel by Sovereign, Saren and the Geth.

However, it's its sequel's finale that wins over this time, easily. A suicide mission at the Collector Base by Shepard and the rest of the SR-2 Normandy's crew, this will as be as epic - or tragic - as you have set it up to be.

Through a fortuitous combination of serendipity and OCD, my ending was mostly the first, with a small dab of the latter (RIP Legion). And it still manages to be one of the most epic and touching moments I have ever seen put to media outside books.

I fully expect to cry when I finally do a perfect ending on Legendary Edition, but that specific ending will always be my canon.

Windows 11 - This changes...well, something. Definitely not everything.

2021-06-25T18:11:00.004+03:00

We interrupt this blog's trip down memory lane with exciting news: Windows 11 is releasing later in 2021.

I won't be doing a (p)review or cover of the new OS. I'm not going to be expanding new features and changes, for better or for worse, or doing an under the hood explanation of what I do understand. For one, I'm not qualified to do so. If this is what you're after, I wholeheartedly suggest Linus or Marques.

What I will be doing is doing a quick rundown, how to check your PC (and fix any incompatibility issues) and a quick look.

So.

The most important thing you need to know: Microsoft have been on a roll lately, and it's unlikely that Windows 11 will be dropping the ball the way Windows 8, Vista or Windows Me did.

At a first glance, Windows 11 look like the bastard child of MacOS and Windows, with a healthy dose of Ubuntu UI features in there.

Let's get this one thing straight: it looks pretty gorgeous.

Let's get another thing straight: Windows users are not fans of change.

It's unclear as of now if Windows 11 will natively allow the start button to be moved to the left for a more traditional Windows look, but you can bet your ass this will be done, by third party software at the very least.

Other than the desktop environment, Windows will behave more or less as Windows 10 did. However, this iteration promises lessons learned from the development of Xbox Series X in optimising the way your OS takes advantage of the hardware to boast improved performance and more of a squeeze from what you already have.

What this means in theory: your current PC will run games better with Windows 11 than it did with Windows 10 (or Wine in Linux). Like, much better.

Speaking of your current PC, some good news.

Windows 11 will be a free upgrade to all Win 10 users so long as the PC is compatible. In essence, and in keeping with Microsoft's approach of Windows as a service, you can technically also use your Windows 7 or Windows 8 key to upgrade to 10 and from that to 11 without having to buy anything as well.

However, the PC being compatible is the tricky part.

The specs itself are not the issue, and are in fact perfectly reasonable.

Before we break these down, you can download the official tool that checks your rig and lets you know if your PC is eligible for a free upgrade directly from Microsoft here

Did you spot the fly in the ointment? Yes? Good for you.

For whoever didn't, it's TPM.

TPM (Trusted Partner Module) is, in layman's terms, a security protocol that most home PCs (and definitely most gaming rigs) don't have on by default.

This generally translates to a separate chip added to your PC, or already existing as part of another chipset in your existing hardware.

Luckily, all of Intel and AMD CPUs from the last 5 years or so should theoretically include this, and all it needs is some BIOS rummaging to enable this if it's not already enabled (IPTT option for Intel CPUs, fTPM for AMD).

Mentioning this here because apparently TPM is the most common reason your PC may fail the official Microsoft check tool mentioned above, and the tool is infuriatingly vague in letting you know why your PC falls short, instead suggesting you simply get a new computer.

So don't despair; your rig is probably going to be ok. Don't consider chucking it and getting a new one just yet.

However, once you make sure your PC actually meets the quota, you'll be greeted with this image:

And let's get one final thing straight: PC gamers are fans both of increased performance as well as free.

60 DAYS OF GAMING: DECADE ANNIVERSARY - DAY 26: Game with the best voice acting

2021-06-25T09:30:00.008+03:00

Then: Dragon Age - Origins

Now: The overall VA quality in the industry is raised waaaaay too high to make a choice I won't regret by the time I've made it.

Purely for Mark Hamill, Kevin Conroy and their chemistry, I will choose the Arkham series (click this link at your own spoilerific peril)

See? I already regret it.

60 DAYS OF GAMING: DECADE ANNIVERSARY - DAY 25: A game I plan on playing

2021-06-24T09:30:00.004+03:00

Then: Skyrim

Now: If I have to pick only one from the list, it's Cyberpunk 2077.

Why? Because apparently I'm a masochist.

Allow me to elaborate. Quoting from that Skyrim post from way back:

"Morrowind excited me, only to disappoint me. Oblivion excited me, only to rape me while shouting "Stop right there you criminal scum!" when I complained it was being too rough. Skyrim has me excited yet again. Let's just hope it's not going to do something even worse to me when it comes out"

Well, Skyrim did.

It made me love so many of its aspects, but my memories of the lore, the exploration, the Dovahkiin powers and the dragons, the side quests and the combat are marred and overshadowed by the crappy NPCs, the bugs, the great story for the most part poorly told. It was a Bethesda game through and through. I played it to the end and more, but have not brought myself to try it again.

Despite this, I did not give much thought before purchasing and playing a huuuge chunck of Fallout 4 before abandoning it for more or less the same reasons, plus the fact it was soo much action-oriented that it did not feel as an RPG anymore, and my inner Fallout and Fallout 2 fan was starting to make schreeching noises.

Luckily, I stayed away from Fallout 76 altogether.

However, I watched with more than a modicum of schadenfreude as the gaming world at large turned on Bethesda and published hypocrits who always spoke favorably of the company and established it through sheer power of exposure to its status, now found the opportunity to join my corner and speak out for the awful patterns in their game design as a whole.

Knowing myself, I will most likely buy and try the new Fallout and the new Elder Scrolls when they inevitably come out (though now that Bethesda answers to Microsoft and Microsoft needs these games to be huge selling points for their current and future platforms, once can hope there will be some quality control before launch).

But wait. I know what you're thinking.

"Doesn't this idiot know Cyberpunk is not a Bethesda game? It's a CDPR fiasco, not a beloved Bethesda gem he can't appreciate. What's with all the Bethesda filler?"

It's all simply because I fully expect to play Cyberpunk 2077 and come out the other side feeling exactly as I feel for Skyrim, but will do it regardless.

60 DAYS OF GAMING: DECADE ANNIVERSARY - DAY 24: Favourite classic game

2021-06-24T02:12:00.001+03:00

Then: Arkanoid

Now: Bejeweled

The only real reason I'm switching it up is that what counts as a "classic" has shifted in my perception.

There are about 8 million Bejeweled clones, sequels, and offshoots, some more successful than others (Candy Crush is a Bejeweled clone, for example), some adding tweaks and twists to the formula with varying degrees of success. Its simple but wildly popular and inviting formula (which in itself is a more complex Connect 4) qualifies it as a classic. Not to mention the original came out like -Christ I'm old- 20 years ago.

The point is, I often find myself playing one on my phone when waiting or *ahem* using the bathroom. So there it goes.

60 DAYS OF GAMING: DECADE ANNIVERSARY - DAY 23: Game I think had the best graphics or art style

2021-06-22T09:30:00.001+03:00

Then: Prince of Persia (2009)

Now: Ori and the Will of the Wisps.

I'm not going to go for pure, raw graphical fidelity this time either, as it will likely become obsolete as soon as I publish this. Hence, art-style.

Hence, Ori and the Will of the Wisps (and the previous title, Ori and the Blind Forest) win this one fairly easily by being gorgeous, evocative and, while not exactly unique (we've seen games with similar art styles before in the indie scene as well as bigger titles such as the latest Rayman games), it nevertheless uses them smartly.

60 DAYS OF GAMING: DECADE ANNIVERSARY - DAY 22: A game sequel which disappointed me

2021-06-21T10:00:00.003+03:00

Then: Knights of the Old Republic 2

Now: Command and Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight.

There were runner ups, of course. Curiously, many of them RTS games (such as Dawn of War III and Age of Empires III), but also games such as Mirror's Ege Catalyst, all Need for Speed games after 2005's Most Wanted (to various degrees, and it still baffles me the name got reused for 2012's mediocre outing), the Amazing Spider-Man 2 (the 2014 one), Halo 5, Silent Hill Downpour and a bunch of others.

But nothing comes even close to the utter and heartbreaking disappointment that is the bastard mess of C&C4. A mess so bad, that it (combined with the span of time between the previous game and this) managed to kill one of the strongest, most fan-devoted franchises in the history of gaming. It makes you wonder if the people that designed, developed and approved it actually cared what made C&C special, or cared. Or, judging by some of the most baffling choices, if they even knew. For shame.

60 DAYS OF GAMING: DECADE ANNIVERSARY - DAY 21: Game with the best story

2021-06-20T01:24:00.001+03:00

Then: Baldur's Gate 1 + 2

Now: Still Baldur's Gate 1 +2

I will admit, the choice was tougher this time.

Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 (and 2's expansion, Throne of Bhaal) told a single, amazing story that got deeper and more complex the more you delved into it and the more you interacted with its characters.

It was epic, world changing stuff, but at the same time deeply personal, at times funny and quirky, at times dark.

However, it is not the only game to do so as well since then. The Mass Effect series did the same. The first 2 Dragon Age games, ditto. Witcher 3. Red Dead Redemption 2. Hell, even Odyssey (Assassin't Creed, not Mario), and I am 100% sure there are games in my backlog I have yet to playor play much that also do the same.

But Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 did it first for me. And you never forget your first.

(And you also never want to risk tarnishing the memory of your first with someone who bears the same name but has very little to do with it otherwise, especially story-wise. Looking at you, Baldur's Gate 3)

60 DAYS OF GAMING: DECADE ANNIVERSARY - DAY 20: Favourite Genre

2021-06-19T09:08:00.003+03:00

Then: RPGs

Now: Still RPGs, but I'm more honest and upfront about my (significant) love for other genres as well.

If you ask me to describe my tastes in music, film or videogames, I am in that rare-ish but awkward position of being able to say I like "any kind so long as it's good".

I am the kind of person who will happily obsess and rewatch the entire MCU timeline, while at the same time watch and enjoy a horror film (be that a top-tier or a B or C list one), I love European and Asian cinema, will chomp down on popcorn while watching the next mindless Fast & Furious installment or a Judd Apatow film.

(But not Adam Sandler. There's a limit).

I'm the same way with games. I love RTS games, and Age of Empires, Command and Conquer, StarCraft, Total Annhiliation and Dawn of War will forever be in my heart. Same for Shooters. Same for Adventure games. Same for management games, Simulation games, racing games, puzzle games, action games, hack and slashes and even smaller more experimental titles like The Stanley Parable.

However, when you get down to it, I have to choose only 1 genre.

For the reasons mentioned last time, I still choose RPGs.

And true, "pure" RPGs are not that common as they used to be, and are nowadays usually the fist element in a compound mixture (action RPGS, shooter RPGs, online RPGs etc), but the genre still remains and is represented in its pure form in series such as Pillars of Eternity or the sequel to my favourite game of all time, Baldur's Gate 3 (that I am somehow not that excited about)

60 DAYS OF GAMING: DECADE ANNIVERSARY - DAY 19: A Game setting I wish I lived in

2021-06-18T00:43:00.000+03:00

Then: The Golden Age of Comics-esque world of Freedom Force.

Now: The idyllic, beautiful (yet dangerously lethal) Tsushima Island, from Ghost of Tsushima.

Ideally at a time of peace, and definitely way before the Mongol invasion.

Unless I had the same katana skills as Jin Sakai. In that case, just drop me off anytime. I'll manage.

60 DAYS OF GAMING: DECADE ANNIVERSARY - DAY 18: FAVOURITE PROTAGONIST

2021-06-17T00:45:00.005+03:00

Then: Half-Life's Gordon Freeman, by virtue of intentionally being a blank slate.

Now: Nathan Drake, from Uncharted.

While Gordon Freeman remains a very valid choice (and consider him one of the runner ups this time along with PS4 Spider-Man's Peter Parker, Joel and Ellie), Nathan takes the cake.

This is not hype for the upcoming Uncharted prequel film starring Tom Holland (which I think will not be very good based on my thoughts on the curse of films based on games).

(Though I do urge you to watch to short Uncharted fan film starring the perfectly cast Nathan Fillion)

This is entirely to do with the depiction of the character over the course of the first 4 games of the franchise.

A wise-cracking, well-read, highly intelligent (in some regards), highly capable, lucky scoundrel artifact hunter, Nathan is a lot more than a male Lara Croft (even though the gameplay of Uncharted and Tomb Raiders pre-reboot is largely interchangeable), and a lot more mischievous and morally ambiguous than Indiana Jones.

For the first 3 games, he's a great main character, but it's during the 4th, where the already good supporting cast becomes excellent with the introduction of his previously never mentioned older brother and the introduction of antagonists both major and minor, and his true childhood and past and future coming to life that he really shines and in hindsight becomes even better for the previous 3 as well.

He's a charming scoundrel with a heart of gold, sharp wit and genuine levels of emotional (im)maturity. What's not to love?

60 DAYS OF GAMING: DECADE ANNIVERSARY - DAY 17: Favourite Antagonist

2021-06-16T00:11:00.005+03:00

Then: Sarevok, from Baldur's Gate

Now: Deimos, from Assassin's Creed Odyssey (yes, again. I loved that game. Sue me). Spoilers follow both for this game as well as several others (but nothing from the last 5 years).

Game developers have, on the whole, increased their game on antagonists, creating interesting characters as a foil to you much more often. Vaas, Handsome Jack, Father Comstock, Andrew Ryan, Cortana (as a promise of a villain rather than the execution of it in Halo 5), Khotun Khan, Brooke Augustine, Balder, the Second Sister, Abbie, Tinkerer and Doc Ock from the PS4 Spider-Man games and hell, most of the Red Dead 2 cast.

However, this one goes to Deimos for the exact same reasons it had gone to Sarevok last time.

And I quote from that old post:

"Sarevok is, depending on how you play the game, either your polar opposite or someone exactly or almost exactly like you. What makes this special is that you carry the same burden [...] No matter what you do though, you could be Sarevok."

This is almost entirely true for Deimos.

But for a click, the roles would be reversed. Two siblings: one chosen to be the protagonist, the other to become the antagonist. And yes, technically canon says that Kassandra is the main character and Alexios is to be Deimos, but that is canon based on the novelisation, not on everyone's playthrough (and not on mine, for that matter).

Like Sarevok and your character both carry the taint of Bhaal's seed within you, so both Deimos (whoever that is) and your character (whoever that is) carry the Isu-human hybrid blood of Leonidas' bloodline in them. It's what they do with that that sets them apart.

Their stories would be the same had both escaped mount Taygetos with their life or had both been raised and brainwashed by the Cult of Kosmos. But for a flick of fate, their paths diverged entirely, but the question plagues both the main character and, if you have any empathy, yourself: could this have been me?