blue reviews

[blue-reviews]

"Dying Light”

Version Reviewed: Xbox One

Time Played: 25 hours (as of now)

The Bad:

The protagonist is easily the worst character I have played in a video game in recent memory. Kane? Crane? Forgettable guy is at his best entirely bland; at his worst he’s making terrible decisions counter to the player’s interests, acting like an asshole, or generally getting in the way. The game will continuously introduce you to characters you wish you were playing as. Often, they’re two dimensional cutouts with twelve lines, but they still have more personality and plausible motivations than the presumed hero of the story.

The story itself is simply put… fucking stupid. What’s happening right now? I am not sure, but I am sure that I couldn’t possibly give less of a fuck. It’s a combination of zombie stories you’ve seen before, both in traditional media and, brazenly, other video games. It’s a very, very flimsy justification to present story missions, which honestly, aren’t particularly appealing. The lack of meaningful stakes in the plot make advancing it feel tedious.

The combat mechanics are *still*, after 25 hours, unclear to me. I can set three people on fire, two will die, and the third will be a smoldering mess and withstand a handful of electric-shock-hatches directly to the skull. Other people are immediately beheaded. There is zero discernible rhyme or reason to weapon damage or enemy level or… honestly any of the combat. I have to believe this is intentional, but people make bad choices on purpose all the time.

The graphics, at least on the One, are barely adequate. There’s a ton of draw-in for models and textures that aren’t anything to write home about. I honestly don’t care in general, but they seem to especially fail when you need to see what is happening most.

The Good:

The side missions are really, really good! They’re varied, they’re fun, they feature characters with reasonable motivations and varied personalities. I honestly think the game would be better if the plot was simply all side missions, the plot being a vague “save the city”. I wish every available side mission was marked on the map instead of needing to be discovered, but it’s impetus to interact with the environment, and “Dying Light” needs all the help it can get in that regard.

The parkour is spectacular. Normally, this is the kind of game mechanic I openly loathe and refuse to use (see: bullet-time, magic in fantasy games) but instead, it’s one of the clear highlights of the game. Games have long promised “fully interactive” environments, but “Dying Light” delivers here. You can freerun on / over / across anything you can see. My first hours with the game were spent freerunning thinking “the game won’t let me parkour….” only to do exactly what I intended to. It WORKS and I finally understand the cult around “Mirror’s Edge”.

The combat mechanics are well, whatever they are. At the same time, it’s fun and often, quite satisfying. Landing a well-placed blow and removing a limb or fracturing a brain stem feels like a genuine accomplishment, and the mechanics are fluid enough that the requisite gore doesn’t play out like a “Mortal Kombat” fatality. It always feels natural and… well, as “realistic” as a zombie game can be. The weapons themselves are legion, and all are uniquely upgradable. “Dying Light” deserves a lot of credit for going *just* far enough without crossing over into zany.

Overall:

“Dying Light” reminds me a lot of “Dead Rising”. It’s an early next-gen zombie game that exceeds our previous expectations and genuinely feels fresh. However, in retrospect, “Dead Rising” wasn’t that great of a game, it was just really, really fun at the time. I honestly believe “Dying Light” is the same: in a few years, we’ll see it mostly for its warts. However, that doesn’t make it any less fun now, and right now? It’s a really fun game.

7.5/10

[blue-reviews]

“Destiny” (Beta)

Version Reviewed: Xbox One

Time Played: 16 hours

[Disclaimer: I understand that this is the beta, and changes to the game are forthcoming. I am, however, reviewing only what they have presented thus far, as that is all we have to judge concretely.]

The bad

  The graphics are a massive let-down. “Destiny” simply doesn’t look next-gen; instead, it looks merely adequate or competent. Cut-and-paste textures are everywhere and each environment looks particularly “same-y” every 100 yards.  The art style is often bold and new, but fails in execution. “Destiny” is supposed to be *the* game of 2014, but it’s already graphically outclassed by older titles like “Wolfenstein” and the launch title “Forza 5”.

 The environments feel restrictively small; levels feel like levels and not like say, “Russia” or “Earth”. The game itself often feels linear and it can/often quickly devolve into corridor combat: the same tried & true FPS setup from “Doom” to “Bioshock”. “Destiny” encourages exploration, but there just isn’t much to explore, and even worse, there is little impetus to. The “loot chests” are few and far between, and that’s the only place you will ever find anything useful, short of defeated enemy drops.

 PVP (The Crucible) is horrifically broken. Balance is non-existent, the maps are tiny, vehicles are ridiculously overpowered. It feels like “Call of Duty” multiplayer, contested in jello: the “Halo” movement and control scheme do not mesh with the “COD”/fish in a barrel maps… the best strategy often seems to be camping. The rounds are indeterminably long and at its best, the multiplayer is funstrating.

 There’s no map screen, and the waypoint system of guiding the player to target is vague at best. It’s too easy to get lost (in a small map) because everything looks (is) the same. Exploration is more a chore than a joy and as I’ve said above, unrewarding because there’s nothing really to find. A map would have cleared a lot of the confusion, and made the “eh” environments at least work in the game. A glaring omission.

Peter Dinklidge is not Cortana.

The good

 The character classes feel and play legitimately differently. The level of character customization is excellent, and it certainly feels as if each successive level is another opportunity to differentiate your character from the masses. From what we’ve seen, it’s quite possible that two warlocks of the same level could be drastically different. For as much time as one will put into their player, that level of individuality is welcome.

 The shooting mechanics are perfect. The damage model shines especially: most enemies do not feel like “bullet sponges” (as “Halo” sometimes does). The enemy AI is better than the usual fare, I frequently found myself getting flanked by lesser enemies as I focused on stronger ones. There’s also none of the bullshit “super sniper” accuracy that’s usually the shortcut to making enemies more difficult. Combat is fluid and fast, and the highlight of the game. (as it should be).

 The map objectives are quite flexible: they can be accomplished alone or in fireteams, and the various weapons and powers allow one to apply their preferred method of gameplay to the issue at hand, and each method is as valid/as successful as any other. The objectives feel as “open” as the levels themselves feel “closed”.

 Peter Dinklidge is absolutely terrible as the voice of the Ghost…  so bad that I almost wonder if it’s intentional.  “Destiny” is a game that takes itself quite seriously, and the abysmal voice acting injects a bit of *cough cough* “Borderlands” levity to the proceedings. I am nearly inconsolable every time the Ghost alerts me to a “space wizard”… and given that “Destiny” is a game with space wizards, maybe that’s the best way to present them.

Overall

 As it stands now, “Destiny” feels like that polo shirt you wear to work every week: it’s kind of plain and never your favorite, but it does the job well and it’s both familiar and comfortable. Unfortunately, Bungie has been billing the game as Joseph’s Technicolor Dreamcoat. It is not.

incomplete/10

[blue-reviews]

“Wolfenstein: The New Order”

Version Reviewed: Xbox One

Time Played: 32 hours

   Bethesda Softworks’ resurrection of the “Wolfenstein” brand aimed to be the Mitchell & Ness jersey for your next-gen system: an authentic throwback rendered in the finest materials (next-gen graphics & sound).

  The bad

 The sound is mixed SO poorly, I’m astonished it passed any sort of quality control check. While individually the sound design is excellent, too frequently the dialogue gets lost in the sound effects. Both are played at the same volume: so while you’re receiving critical information via radio transmissions, it’s entirely drowned out by gunfire/explosions/the lamentations of slowly-dying-in-agony Nazis. It leads to a lot of confusion and scouring of the pause menu to catch what you missed. Unfortunately, the notes often do not provide an adequate substitute.

 “New Order” is by design, difficult. Often “smash your controller into tiny pieces and then throw said pieces into the ocean, then pour gas into the ocean and set it on fire” difficult. At several points I found myself googling to make sure I was (at least attempting) to do what was required to advance.

 The poor sound, high difficulty, and lack of a traditional HUD/mini-map leads to a lot of “what am I supposed to do now?” While difficulty is appreciated, vague goals belie a lack of polish and break the good momentum that’s key to enjoying any shooter.

 You’re going to die. A lot. The checkpoint system seemed flaky at best, often respawning the character at an illogical point, or at one that only increases the already high difficulty. Upon every death, I’d hold my breath hopeful I wouldn’t have to start half an hour from where I’d left off. My prayers were often left unanswered.

  The good

 Graphically, “Wolfensten: The New Order” is *stunning*. Truly deserving of the next-gen moniker, each enemy and effect is rendered in both jaw-dropping quality and in a consistent and beautiful art design. The environments, especially, shine here. Each level is unique and truly “feels” like a different location; even tropes of FPSes (sewers, corridors) feel new and entirely of the world Bethesda created. Two location in particular rank among my favorite that I have ever seen/played/”visited”.

 The story itself is merely “OK”; it does a capable job of moving the plot. However, it does an exceptional job of world-building.  “Show, don’t tell” is a mark of quality story-telling. And “New Order” manages, via details small and large, build a rich, detailed alternate history that requires little suspension of disbelief. It’s a world that only gets deeper and smarter upon more examination. Bethesda does more with newspaper clippings and offhand comments than many developers do with every game-making tool at their disposal.

 The difficulty is intentional, and makes for a feeling of genuine accomplishment that’s missing from many modern shooters. It’s clearly a source of pride, as Bethesda took time to mock me when I took to twitter to voice my frustration. I have to respect it.

 The combat mechanics are absolutely perfect. Much was made that the game can be played as a steath-based shooter or set to “full-Rambo”.  This is absolutely true; the levels, enemies, and weapons are so well designed and balanced, there are genuinely multiple, effective means to attack each level.  These mechanics give the player a level of agency that increases immersion and replay value.

Overall

 “Wolfenstein: The New Order” is a deep, rich experience that’s true to the game’s old-school shooter roots but still feels fresh, new, and next-gen. While its adherence to games of the past can make for frustrations the modern shooter fan may be unfamiliar with, it’s ultimately a rewarding experience and a must for any FPS fan.

9.5/10

[blue-reviews]

“Watch_Dogs”

Version Reviewed: Xbox One

Time Played: 50 hours

   Ubisoft’s hotly-anticipated open world game “Watch_Dogs” was finally released on 5/27/2014, after two years of marketing speak taken straight from Pedro’s campaign for class president: “all your dreams will come true”. Did they deliver?

  The bad

  The graphical fidelity never lived up to the first E3 trailers. While it’s not “terrible”, it looks more like the middle ground between the two gaming generations than anything truly next-gen. Bad for bragging rights, but it rarely effects gameplay.  While “pop-in” is rare, when it happens, it’s obvious and awful.

 The driving physics are reminiscent of the warthog from the first “Halo”. Unfortunately, that’s the primary means of conveyance in an open world game, and many missions require skilled driving.  Precision, like shooting from cars, is not an option in “Watch_Dogs”. Ubisoft should have spent the five month delay fixing the driving controls and nothing else. it’s that broken.

  Police chases, a staple of the genre, are infuriating. Chase cars are stapled to your back bumper, and the only effective means of dealing with said pursuers is to navigate to a hackable road object and use it against them. Some other options (like pitching IEDs out of the sunroof) are desperately needed.

  The map is crammed full of crap, and finding specific side missions are an exercise in frustration. A true filter by mission type is a must for future iterations.

 The plot *really* falls apart towards the end.

The good

 Hacking, the core feature of the game, is near-flawless. There’s a solid progression of skills, the hacks are fun, can be used in numerous ways, and never feel rote or “old”. I especially like the hacking puzzles featured in the Privacy Invasion missions. Logical, fun, and challenging.

 The stealth aspects are (generally) optional, and actually work in an intuitive manner. While I generally loathe stealth games, the mechanics are sound and the level designs are ideally suited to the suite of skills one acquires throughout the game. It’s actually my preferred plan of attack in most missions.

 Chicago feels “full”. While the map isn’t as large as even some last-gen open world games, every square inch of it is full of people, items to hack, architecture to take advantage of, and more. It’s the first game to accurately convey the feel of big city streets.

 The level of detail in NPCs is a genuine triumph of technology. I have seen some “repeat” factoids, but Ubisoft manages to humanize what’s often cannon/car fodder in similar games. I’ve found myself actively avoiding pedestrians and feeling bad about stealing from people’s bank accounts. I’m not an empathetic person by nature: to make me feel anything for the non-existent is beyond impressive.

 The side missions are fun, perhaps even more fun than the main campaign. There’s a massive variety; each makes good use of the game mechanics and are different enough from the campaign and each other to stand on their own. I’m hopeful these will be a focus of at least one DLC pack.

Overall

 “Watch_Dogs” doesn’t keep all of its promises. Neither did your parents, and you still love them.

 The Ubisoft version of Chicago is deep and varied enough to keep fans of all genres entertained, and there’s enough game to justify the $60 full price. For all of its very real issues, it’s a well-built game that delivers the fun consistently. 

8.5/10