The job system is much adored and with good reason, but the story is just... it's so dumb. It's so very dumb. At some point though, that stops being a negative. In replaying, I have to give some more credit to these characters, particularly Bartz, as there's a bit more to them than I remember there being, and there's a pretty clear reason why. Much of the necessary "fleshing out" is relegated to optional, easily overlooked scenes that I probably didn't even see the first time. Gameplay is extremely flexible and replayable, which is V's saving grace. It's a fun, whimsical romp that probably won't leave much of a lasting impression on anyone who's touring their way through the franchise. It's meant to be replayed multiple times and in numerous ways, and that's a virtue lost on those who are just visiting on their way to FFVI.

Whoo man, look at the score spectrum on this one... Looks about right.

This game is super divisive, and I've found that the biggest indicator of where one's opinion is going to fall on this game is how much they liked Dragon Age Origins. Players who are expecting an actual sequel to that game that is similar in structure and scope will be very extremely disappointed by Dragon Age 2. Players who liked the strategic RPG elements of Origins and were hoping to see more of that will also be disappointed. Dragon Age 2 takes place entirely within the vicinity of one city, tells a much smaller and more personal story, and has a much more action-based combat system.

I had played Origins before Dragon Age 2, but really hadn't fallen in love with it yet. In fact I had burned myself out on it in such a way that my relationship with it had soured, and when I played it I was growing very bored of the formula that Bioware had settled into with KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect 1, etc. Dragon Age 2 was an impulse buy for me on its release, and I had not been following any coverage for the game before that. I didn't even know it was in development.

I had a fantastic experience with Dragon Age 2. I played it obsessively over the course of a weekend and I was enthralled. I had no particular love of Origin's combat, so I enjoyed the crunchy, satisfying, action-y feel of Dragon Age 2. I was completely drawn in by the story and continuously failed to predict where it was going to go next.

Now just because I happened to have a really good experience at that exact moment in my life, doesn't mean that this is an objectively well crafted game, and I find all the standard the complaints to be valid. I'd be interested to know what the reception would have been if it weren't presented as a sequel to Origins.

A great game that is reduced to a being a "good" game by a few bad decisions. The draw system is interesting and certainly has positive points, but often results in players unnecessarily grinding for magic or refusing to cast any of it, just because of the psychology that's now in play. Making several GFs only obtainable by drawing from unmarked bosses throughout the game is either cool or cruel depending on who you ask. Level scaling every enemy in an RPG is just... pretty much always a bad idea. The game's whole difficulty curve can be annihilated early on just by buying a few select items on the cheap, and while it's easy to say "well don't do that then," it still speaks to ill-considered balance. Many players including myself find themselves confused about what is and is not supposed to make their party more powerful, and that sort of confusion just doesn't speak well of the game design. Several story beats are conveyed in ways that make them feel too absurd to be taken seriously, even if upon close inspection their internal logic is relatively sound. Flaws aside, FF8 is just fucking cool, and it's worth experiencing. It's far from the best FF, but it certainly isn't the worst.

If you're me, Minecraft is a game about spending seven hours getting lost looking for diamonds and then getting bored. If you're a child and have friends, Minecraft is probably your entire life. It is a game whose random number generator and infinite modding scene can sustain a child's attention span for years, singlehandedly.

It represents an interesting anomaly, because to be frank, I truly do not believe that Minecraft's popularity is the result of any remarkable development skill. Like LEGO, Minecraft's appeal does not come from any feats of a toymaker's genius... it just strikes at all of the same critical spots on a young human's brain.

Minecraft's RNG gods are just unfeeling enough to lend authenticity to one's adventures in it. Without that hand of craft, out here in the wilds of chaos, there may exist thrills unrivaled by traditionally crafted ventures. Children love few things more than the absence of supervision, and that includes the tangible presence of a game developer. Minecraft, like Dungeons and Dragons, is more a set of flexible rules than it is anything else... and this is why its community was able to make it into the best video game experience to become commercially available in 2011.

The best playgrounds are built on accident. In elementary school, my friends and I spent our recesses on an old, wooden castle-ish thing with some swings and a tunnel made of tires. That playground is gone now, replaced with brightly colored plastic. The new playground is full of things that have clear and intended uses. The spinning cylinders are for tic-tac-toe. The funnels are for speaking through. I hate it, and I pity any child who frequents it, for a bowl is most useful when it is empty.