KiraBobbySan
2020
The open world format in gaming is no longer as revolutionary as it once was, and it is slowly becoming a tiresome formula. It is not even so much to do with the formula itself, but in how the developers are presenting it to the players, what they are doing with the said formula. The open world concept is traditionally a great idea since it does not railroad players in any one direction and gives them ample room and opportunity for exploration and discovery. It can be quite a magical experience. The issue that we see nowadays boils down to an argument of quality over quantity. The larger the map or the more repetitive activities (acting as filler in empty spaces) does not equal good content. I feel like the most prime examples of this are the Assassin Creed games. Most of the time, the gameplay in those games is magnificent, but the maps are large purely for the sake of being so, and the activities that act as filler become repetitive and boring. It also doesn’t help if you are not really that invested in the story of the game either, like I am with the AC games. Some of the best open world games have learned to provide a sense of variety, and condensed quality content. It needs to be more about the content than the map itself. Witcher 3 is one that comes to mind in that the story and lore of the game is what fuels the player’s direction. While it is technically open world and any or all could be explored (although certain areas are level restricted, not by a lack of permission but by a warning of danger), the quests which are some of the best ever designed in a game lead the player around the map in a meaningful and purpose driven way that is not simply go to point A to begin mission.
With that said, I think Ghost of Tsushima is the best and worst of both worlds. On one hand, the quests or “tales” as this game calls them, are overall uniquely designed and meaningful, but on the other hand, the map is large and filled with so many repetitive collectible type locations that act more like distractions from what is important. During my first few hours playing the game, I was in love and ready to declare it the GOTY right then and there. However, as the game went on, the dreading sense of repetitiveness took over and the game itself lingered on for too long. Normally I wouldn’t claim a 50-60 hour game as overlong if the content justifies it, but if it seems stretched out with the purpose of prolonging the journey, then it can damage the overall experience. I think Ghost of Tsushima just barely crosses that threshold of being slightly overlong. Granted, I know in a story related manner, it is not going to be something quick and easy to overcome an entire mongol army when you are outnumbered and need to utilize guerrilla warfare tactics. At the same time, some of the side quests were repetitive with a plot that appeared in some form or manner involving a peasant enlisting your help in finding a relative and either rescuing them or avenging their killers. Those quests could be drastically diminished without harming the overall content.
The story really shined in the character related tales, even more so than the main quest line. This is where I begin to understand the criticism of the main protagonist Jin Sakai and his overall lack of charisma or defining characteristics. Jin is sort of plain and a standard trope of overcoming adversity against all odds, even sacrificing one’s own integrity. He just seems one note, and doesn’t really undergo any sort of development other than the transition in his fighting style. Speaking of which, while I know the topic of fighting style is important to the code of a samurai and the idea of honor they hold so dear, the game does railroad you into that predicament. This is less of a criticism and more of a “what could have been” moment. While the game does have two endings, the decision of which is made at the very end with no real consequence one way or the other, what if the later half of the game could have been divided into two arcs, one which follows the way of the samurai and one of the way of the ghost. That freedom of choice and consequences based on that choice would have made the game far more interesting.
I diverged off topic with my explanation of Jin, but it is highly possible that Jin feels like the weakest link in terms of characters because the rest of his supporting cast is so magnificent. The character tales especially were an interesting type of quest line, allowing the players to get to deeply know each person and the development behind their character. Lady Masako and Yuna were among my favorites, but I also like Sensei Ishikawa and the story arc involving his one time pupil Tomoe. Even though she was briefly in the game, Yuriko also left an incredible impression and honestly some of the most emotional segments in the game, which I do believe was lacking overall. Norio, the warrior monk, was also a great addition and had the persona of being an extremely likeable guy. Aside from them, the mythical tales were also some of the game’s best content. Each one derives from a piece of Japanese folklore, beginning with a hand drawn style piece of animation as each tale which is sung by the musician/ quest giver.
The main story feels fairly standard and predictable, and thus the game relies on its other functions to come out ahead, including incredibly fluid gameplay. The combat and platforming were major highlights in the game, and their level of entertainment did not die off quickly. Other notables are the game’s luscious colors and graphical designs. Every piece of environment is picturesque, and when combined with the combat, we get the stunning duels that are the game’s cinematic high points. Regarding cinema, the Kurosawa mode was a bit of a disappointment. It seemed fun at first, but I felt cheated out of the games vibrant colors and graphics. I admire its inclusion the most and its intent. If anything, it will achieve name recognition for the cinema giant amongst casual movie watchers. It is also fun to utilize during duels and cutscenes to really obtain that classic samurai flick visual. The mode just does not work the greatest during normal gameplay, as it also makes it more difficult to see. especially when trying to go stealthy during any night sequences.
Ghost of Tsushima hits many of the right notes for me, including its setting of feudal era Japan, which is my bread and butter, at least when it comes to watching classic Japanese cinema. I love the look of the game, how it encapsulates the player in this specific moment in time in Japan, Everything about it felt very authentic and meticulously applied. It provides that escapism that we all seek from any form of entertainment, and transports us to fill the shoes of a samurai and it captures that feeling. For all of its shortcomings, regarding its length, its repetitiveness, and uninspired main story/character, they felt like nothing compared to everything else the game had to offer. While it is not “the” GOTY for me, there is no denying that it is one of the best games of the year, and it deserves its praise.
https://themadnessofdionysus.wordpress.com/2020/08/14/ghost-of-tsushima-2020/
With that said, I think Ghost of Tsushima is the best and worst of both worlds. On one hand, the quests or “tales” as this game calls them, are overall uniquely designed and meaningful, but on the other hand, the map is large and filled with so many repetitive collectible type locations that act more like distractions from what is important. During my first few hours playing the game, I was in love and ready to declare it the GOTY right then and there. However, as the game went on, the dreading sense of repetitiveness took over and the game itself lingered on for too long. Normally I wouldn’t claim a 50-60 hour game as overlong if the content justifies it, but if it seems stretched out with the purpose of prolonging the journey, then it can damage the overall experience. I think Ghost of Tsushima just barely crosses that threshold of being slightly overlong. Granted, I know in a story related manner, it is not going to be something quick and easy to overcome an entire mongol army when you are outnumbered and need to utilize guerrilla warfare tactics. At the same time, some of the side quests were repetitive with a plot that appeared in some form or manner involving a peasant enlisting your help in finding a relative and either rescuing them or avenging their killers. Those quests could be drastically diminished without harming the overall content.
The story really shined in the character related tales, even more so than the main quest line. This is where I begin to understand the criticism of the main protagonist Jin Sakai and his overall lack of charisma or defining characteristics. Jin is sort of plain and a standard trope of overcoming adversity against all odds, even sacrificing one’s own integrity. He just seems one note, and doesn’t really undergo any sort of development other than the transition in his fighting style. Speaking of which, while I know the topic of fighting style is important to the code of a samurai and the idea of honor they hold so dear, the game does railroad you into that predicament. This is less of a criticism and more of a “what could have been” moment. While the game does have two endings, the decision of which is made at the very end with no real consequence one way or the other, what if the later half of the game could have been divided into two arcs, one which follows the way of the samurai and one of the way of the ghost. That freedom of choice and consequences based on that choice would have made the game far more interesting.
I diverged off topic with my explanation of Jin, but it is highly possible that Jin feels like the weakest link in terms of characters because the rest of his supporting cast is so magnificent. The character tales especially were an interesting type of quest line, allowing the players to get to deeply know each person and the development behind their character. Lady Masako and Yuna were among my favorites, but I also like Sensei Ishikawa and the story arc involving his one time pupil Tomoe. Even though she was briefly in the game, Yuriko also left an incredible impression and honestly some of the most emotional segments in the game, which I do believe was lacking overall. Norio, the warrior monk, was also a great addition and had the persona of being an extremely likeable guy. Aside from them, the mythical tales were also some of the game’s best content. Each one derives from a piece of Japanese folklore, beginning with a hand drawn style piece of animation as each tale which is sung by the musician/ quest giver.
The main story feels fairly standard and predictable, and thus the game relies on its other functions to come out ahead, including incredibly fluid gameplay. The combat and platforming were major highlights in the game, and their level of entertainment did not die off quickly. Other notables are the game’s luscious colors and graphical designs. Every piece of environment is picturesque, and when combined with the combat, we get the stunning duels that are the game’s cinematic high points. Regarding cinema, the Kurosawa mode was a bit of a disappointment. It seemed fun at first, but I felt cheated out of the games vibrant colors and graphics. I admire its inclusion the most and its intent. If anything, it will achieve name recognition for the cinema giant amongst casual movie watchers. It is also fun to utilize during duels and cutscenes to really obtain that classic samurai flick visual. The mode just does not work the greatest during normal gameplay, as it also makes it more difficult to see. especially when trying to go stealthy during any night sequences.
Ghost of Tsushima hits many of the right notes for me, including its setting of feudal era Japan, which is my bread and butter, at least when it comes to watching classic Japanese cinema. I love the look of the game, how it encapsulates the player in this specific moment in time in Japan, Everything about it felt very authentic and meticulously applied. It provides that escapism that we all seek from any form of entertainment, and transports us to fill the shoes of a samurai and it captures that feeling. For all of its shortcomings, regarding its length, its repetitiveness, and uninspired main story/character, they felt like nothing compared to everything else the game had to offer. While it is not “the” GOTY for me, there is no denying that it is one of the best games of the year, and it deserves its praise.
https://themadnessofdionysus.wordpress.com/2020/08/14/ghost-of-tsushima-2020/
Similar to my Death Stranding review, a significant portion of this entry will be devoted to arguing against much of the backlash this game has unjustly received. In those sections, there will be heavy spoilers but a fair warning in advance will be given.
Several years since the release of the first game, and about the same amount of time passed within the game, Part II feels as though it picks up right where the first one ended. While there are some fragmented pieces that the story fills in little at a time to cover that gap, the entire basis of this second game is to address the consequences of how the first one came to a close. That particular climatic event put the wheels in motion of a fire and brimstone carriage, carrying vengeance along its path, and destruction in its wake. Revenge tales can often feel like standard fare, given how often such tropes are utilized. Yet, when done correctly, or at least in a way to where revenge is not necessarily the focal point or theme of the story, but rather a byproduct, these types of plots can be incredibly engaging. The idea of revenge is a staple in almost all of Shakespeare’s tragedies, namely Hamlet, and has since been a popular character arc to respond to. One must look deeper, past the literal act of revenge which is superficial in itself, and question all other motivations and consequences that lead up to and endure after the fact.
The Last of Us Part II continues the trend of its predecessor in pushing the moral boundaries of its player base. The game never allows the player to remain comfortable with a character for too long, and paints them all in a grayish light. In this world, good and evil are commodities of the past, and while every human group yearns to regain said humanity, survival always comes first. Characters are forced to do unspeakable acts to survive as is par the course in any apocalyptic setting. However, The Last of Us games in particular, that abandonment of morals is analyzed through the emotional torment of its characters. They sometimes struggle with the consequences of their actions, while others not so much or at a later time through the form of PTSD. The sequel, like the original, are both incredibly genuine in this aspect, and their characters are some of the most realistic ever written for a video game. These are the aspects where the game’s story excels.
Where it falters, in my opinion, is not being able to differentiate itself from its precursor. It is too similar to the first game, even with the introduction of Abby and Lev, we see another similar character duo arc to that of Joel and Ellie’s. To compare, Red Dead Redemption 2, while being a prequel rather than sequel, was able to become its own beast altogether, with minimal remembrance to the previous game until extremely later on. This complaint is minor but it does prevent me from truly recognizing it as a work separate from the first. The two are just destined to go hand in hand, and that is not always a bad thing.
As far as similarities go, the mechanics in this game are pretty much identical to the original with only a few tweaks. Perhaps, it is one of those cases of if it is not broken then don’t fix it, but what was once revolutionary in 2013, is not the case in 2020. Which again as I reiterate, is not necessarily a bad thing. The gameplay is beautiful and it lives up to its reveal footage with cutscenes seamlessly transitioning into gameplay undetected. The graphics are a marvel to behold, and the game moves so fluidly. As many others have stated before me, the attention to detail here is really unheralded among its contemporaries, and the music is somberly fitting. In the case of all of the above aforementioned aspects, the game is truly a technical masterpiece. Aside from the lack of originality in its inability to separate itself from the first entry, it being slightly bloated/overlong, and a few plot devices that could have used some work (I’ll explain more soon), the game as a whole would have been a masterpiece.
Now onto Spoilers…. so be warned, SPOILERS ahead…
While completely dismissing any negativity revolving around Ellie’s sexual orientation or Lev’s gender identity (as bigotry is not a legitimate form of criticism), the majority of upset and outright enraged fans denouncing the game is due to the early death of the first game’s main playable character Joel, and the inclusion of a new playable character Abby who is responsible for the aforementioned death. However, the reasoning behind these two complaints feels contradictory and why I feel the need to address such.
My first issue comes from the hero worshiping of Joel. Now, I admit, I like Joel too, as much as the next person, and that is mostly due to how great the character writing and voice acting skills in these games are. The sheer fact that Joel who was a dick to Ellie the majority of the first game, and became a complete villain by the end, still garners admiration from fans is a testament to the complexity and realism displayed within these characters and the world they inhabit. I admit I’m painting Joel with a more clear cut depiction by singling out his flaws, but it is true he is extremely likeable and seems sincere in how he eventually grows to care for Ellie as his surrogate daughter. Some of my favorite moments in this sequel were the flashbacks with Ellie and him, particularly in the museum which was one of the more nostalgic and emotional scenes. Now, did I want to see Joel die in this game? No, but I understand completely why he is murdered, and the justification behind doing so. The truth is Joel deserved Abby’s wrath by tenfold.
Here is where I have some issues behind Ellie’s motivation for revenge. During flashback sequences, it is revealed that Ellie discovers the truth of what went down at St. Mary’s Hospital at the end of the first game. Upon the revelation, her and Joel’s relationship becomes broken to the point of no return. She agrees to go back to Jackson, but exclaims how she can never forgive him for what he had done. Later on, their relationship appears to mend, albeit slightly, and she explains how she would like to “try” to forgive him. So there is some form of redemption occurring for Joel here, but it still is explicitly shown that Ellie would have rather died in that hospital for the possibility of a vaccine, than have Joel save her by massacring hundreds of Firefly members. Therefore, when the reasons behind Joel’s death are clear, you would think Ellie would be more understanding and withdraw from her revenge quest. She instead amplifies it. Even after she finds peace at the farm house with Dina and JJ, she is still consumed by her thirst for revenge. Now part of this is from clear symptoms of PTSD, which is realistically depicted within the game. However, this is the plot device that I dislike the most. Ellie should no longer have any motivation to go after Abby, since she was spared not once, but twice from Abby’s wrath, and has since learned the truth behind Abby’s own motivation for revenge. While I loved the Santa Barbara sequence, I feel a different plot direction was needed to elicit the reunion between Ellie and Abby other than Ellie going off on another revenge hunt.
With all of the above mentioned details between Ellie and Joel, I find some interesting parallels between the two. While Joel abandoned his humanity by the end of the first game, and in essence became a villain, I feel like Ellie makes a similar transformation in this game during her revenge quest. I understand that for both characters, these transformations are more designed to show their flaws and even to a certain extent provide some type of learning and growth, but it also does change, at least some players, opinions of the morality behind these characters. By the end of this game, Ellie will have realized she lost everything she wanted in a peaceful life with Dina and JJ at the farm, just to further pursue a lost cause of revenge that was never going to heal her pain. Same goes for Joel, in that he lost his good relationship with Ellie. One could also look at Abby as well, and see all of the loss she accrued as well, by enacting an otherwise justified revenge.
Speaking of Abby, I’m surprised by the amount of hate this character received with what seems to be her only flaw is not being Ellie, well that and she killed the beloved Joel. I thought it was an excellent way to structure the story, in separating and then coinciding the two perspectives of Ellie and Abby. First, we get to see Ellie enact revenge or try to anyway, against some unknown entity that caused Joel’s death. Then we get to see Abby’s perspective and why her killing of Joel was justified, thus turning the plot of the game on its head. The inclusion of Lev and his sister is another interesting aspect of the story, with the relationship between Abby and Lev forming a replacement duo of what had been Joel and Ellie of the first game. Lev’s presence serves more to bring Abby’s humanity back from its recesses, which is similar to the hardened Joel that we had seen at the beginning of the first game before his fondness grew of Ellie.
I’m not sure what kind of game the disgruntled fans were expecting, but with the way the first one ended, there was really no other way it could go without that event being addressed in some form or another. It’s not the greatest video game story ever told (a difficult task to do in this crowded zombie apocalypse genre), and it probably is more than likely an unnecessary sequel, but it is a pretty great game nonetheless and does not deserve some of the fan bashing that it has received.
https://themadnessofdionysus.wordpress.com/2020/06/30/the-last-of-us-part-ii/
Several years since the release of the first game, and about the same amount of time passed within the game, Part II feels as though it picks up right where the first one ended. While there are some fragmented pieces that the story fills in little at a time to cover that gap, the entire basis of this second game is to address the consequences of how the first one came to a close. That particular climatic event put the wheels in motion of a fire and brimstone carriage, carrying vengeance along its path, and destruction in its wake. Revenge tales can often feel like standard fare, given how often such tropes are utilized. Yet, when done correctly, or at least in a way to where revenge is not necessarily the focal point or theme of the story, but rather a byproduct, these types of plots can be incredibly engaging. The idea of revenge is a staple in almost all of Shakespeare’s tragedies, namely Hamlet, and has since been a popular character arc to respond to. One must look deeper, past the literal act of revenge which is superficial in itself, and question all other motivations and consequences that lead up to and endure after the fact.
The Last of Us Part II continues the trend of its predecessor in pushing the moral boundaries of its player base. The game never allows the player to remain comfortable with a character for too long, and paints them all in a grayish light. In this world, good and evil are commodities of the past, and while every human group yearns to regain said humanity, survival always comes first. Characters are forced to do unspeakable acts to survive as is par the course in any apocalyptic setting. However, The Last of Us games in particular, that abandonment of morals is analyzed through the emotional torment of its characters. They sometimes struggle with the consequences of their actions, while others not so much or at a later time through the form of PTSD. The sequel, like the original, are both incredibly genuine in this aspect, and their characters are some of the most realistic ever written for a video game. These are the aspects where the game’s story excels.
Where it falters, in my opinion, is not being able to differentiate itself from its precursor. It is too similar to the first game, even with the introduction of Abby and Lev, we see another similar character duo arc to that of Joel and Ellie’s. To compare, Red Dead Redemption 2, while being a prequel rather than sequel, was able to become its own beast altogether, with minimal remembrance to the previous game until extremely later on. This complaint is minor but it does prevent me from truly recognizing it as a work separate from the first. The two are just destined to go hand in hand, and that is not always a bad thing.
As far as similarities go, the mechanics in this game are pretty much identical to the original with only a few tweaks. Perhaps, it is one of those cases of if it is not broken then don’t fix it, but what was once revolutionary in 2013, is not the case in 2020. Which again as I reiterate, is not necessarily a bad thing. The gameplay is beautiful and it lives up to its reveal footage with cutscenes seamlessly transitioning into gameplay undetected. The graphics are a marvel to behold, and the game moves so fluidly. As many others have stated before me, the attention to detail here is really unheralded among its contemporaries, and the music is somberly fitting. In the case of all of the above aforementioned aspects, the game is truly a technical masterpiece. Aside from the lack of originality in its inability to separate itself from the first entry, it being slightly bloated/overlong, and a few plot devices that could have used some work (I’ll explain more soon), the game as a whole would have been a masterpiece.
Now onto Spoilers…. so be warned, SPOILERS ahead…
While completely dismissing any negativity revolving around Ellie’s sexual orientation or Lev’s gender identity (as bigotry is not a legitimate form of criticism), the majority of upset and outright enraged fans denouncing the game is due to the early death of the first game’s main playable character Joel, and the inclusion of a new playable character Abby who is responsible for the aforementioned death. However, the reasoning behind these two complaints feels contradictory and why I feel the need to address such.
My first issue comes from the hero worshiping of Joel. Now, I admit, I like Joel too, as much as the next person, and that is mostly due to how great the character writing and voice acting skills in these games are. The sheer fact that Joel who was a dick to Ellie the majority of the first game, and became a complete villain by the end, still garners admiration from fans is a testament to the complexity and realism displayed within these characters and the world they inhabit. I admit I’m painting Joel with a more clear cut depiction by singling out his flaws, but it is true he is extremely likeable and seems sincere in how he eventually grows to care for Ellie as his surrogate daughter. Some of my favorite moments in this sequel were the flashbacks with Ellie and him, particularly in the museum which was one of the more nostalgic and emotional scenes. Now, did I want to see Joel die in this game? No, but I understand completely why he is murdered, and the justification behind doing so. The truth is Joel deserved Abby’s wrath by tenfold.
Here is where I have some issues behind Ellie’s motivation for revenge. During flashback sequences, it is revealed that Ellie discovers the truth of what went down at St. Mary’s Hospital at the end of the first game. Upon the revelation, her and Joel’s relationship becomes broken to the point of no return. She agrees to go back to Jackson, but exclaims how she can never forgive him for what he had done. Later on, their relationship appears to mend, albeit slightly, and she explains how she would like to “try” to forgive him. So there is some form of redemption occurring for Joel here, but it still is explicitly shown that Ellie would have rather died in that hospital for the possibility of a vaccine, than have Joel save her by massacring hundreds of Firefly members. Therefore, when the reasons behind Joel’s death are clear, you would think Ellie would be more understanding and withdraw from her revenge quest. She instead amplifies it. Even after she finds peace at the farm house with Dina and JJ, she is still consumed by her thirst for revenge. Now part of this is from clear symptoms of PTSD, which is realistically depicted within the game. However, this is the plot device that I dislike the most. Ellie should no longer have any motivation to go after Abby, since she was spared not once, but twice from Abby’s wrath, and has since learned the truth behind Abby’s own motivation for revenge. While I loved the Santa Barbara sequence, I feel a different plot direction was needed to elicit the reunion between Ellie and Abby other than Ellie going off on another revenge hunt.
With all of the above mentioned details between Ellie and Joel, I find some interesting parallels between the two. While Joel abandoned his humanity by the end of the first game, and in essence became a villain, I feel like Ellie makes a similar transformation in this game during her revenge quest. I understand that for both characters, these transformations are more designed to show their flaws and even to a certain extent provide some type of learning and growth, but it also does change, at least some players, opinions of the morality behind these characters. By the end of this game, Ellie will have realized she lost everything she wanted in a peaceful life with Dina and JJ at the farm, just to further pursue a lost cause of revenge that was never going to heal her pain. Same goes for Joel, in that he lost his good relationship with Ellie. One could also look at Abby as well, and see all of the loss she accrued as well, by enacting an otherwise justified revenge.
Speaking of Abby, I’m surprised by the amount of hate this character received with what seems to be her only flaw is not being Ellie, well that and she killed the beloved Joel. I thought it was an excellent way to structure the story, in separating and then coinciding the two perspectives of Ellie and Abby. First, we get to see Ellie enact revenge or try to anyway, against some unknown entity that caused Joel’s death. Then we get to see Abby’s perspective and why her killing of Joel was justified, thus turning the plot of the game on its head. The inclusion of Lev and his sister is another interesting aspect of the story, with the relationship between Abby and Lev forming a replacement duo of what had been Joel and Ellie of the first game. Lev’s presence serves more to bring Abby’s humanity back from its recesses, which is similar to the hardened Joel that we had seen at the beginning of the first game before his fondness grew of Ellie.
I’m not sure what kind of game the disgruntled fans were expecting, but with the way the first one ended, there was really no other way it could go without that event being addressed in some form or another. It’s not the greatest video game story ever told (a difficult task to do in this crowded zombie apocalypse genre), and it probably is more than likely an unnecessary sequel, but it is a pretty great game nonetheless and does not deserve some of the fan bashing that it has received.
https://themadnessofdionysus.wordpress.com/2020/06/30/the-last-of-us-part-ii/
This review is based on the console port that was released in May of 2019, but the 3-4 year span listed in the title is to represent the game’s original release date as it came out in episodic form. It was crowdfunded on Kickstarter, similar to The Game Kitchen’s recent release ‘Blasphemous’. In fact, that is how this game came to my attention. I was incredibly eager to play ‘Blasphemous’ even prior to its release, and when the time finally came, the game did not disappoint. It was a stunning metroid-vania with tremendous action, detailed set pieces, insane mythos and art, with lore of a perverted sacrilegious horror. I fell in love with it, and it was during that time that I discovered the developers The Game Kitchen had a previous game under their belt, and it was to come to consoles soon. Hence, my journey to ‘The Last Door’, a point and click horror mystery with heavy influences on literary terrors such as Edgar Allan Poe and H.P. Lovecraft.
I know, on the surface, the game probably does not look like much. It is a pixelated story driven game with very little in way of gameplay. Its point and click mechanics basically serve two functions, to point and click where you want your playable character to walk to, and to point and click on what object of interest is available to examine/inspect. While none of these features bothered me, I must admit that I at least yearned for something with a bit more detail in the graphics/ art design other than just pixels. These thoughts mainly arose in comparison to how simple yet marvelous the design in ‘Blasphemous’ was, and it could have been easily replicated here. In fact, while we are on this subject and given that my reaction towards this game was mostly positive, I also thought how wonderful it could be if this game got a face lift in a remake or remaster. These are just wishful hypothetical ramblings. On to the more juicier stuff.
Since this game is essentially designed in a television series format, and I’m talking more than just how it is divided by episodes (there is even a well crafted opening title sequence before each episode), I kept comparing it to the film/television medium. Story-wise, the game fits right in that environment and could be easily adapted into a series-miniseries for television (Probably too much for one film). Given that comparison, and how even some of the best series out there can have lackluster seasons (Game of Thrones season finale?), I got to say that the first season here is far superior to the second. I was actually ready to include this game among my top favorites while playing the first season, but the second one became far too tedious and the story sunk in quality by getting too overtly complicated in a Lovecraftian dimensional timeline with cults. The first season had the perfect balance, it had great intrigue and even some shocking and surprise filled moments that truly caught me off guard. This was particularly the case with the shocking yet cliff hanger style way most of the episodes ended. It just begged for the player to keep continuing and unraveling what comes next in the mystery.
On a few other notes, the music in this game was fantastic, and really enhanced the moody atmosphere the game created. Also, I had briefly mentioned the gameplay by only describing the point and click mechanics in a broad manner. However, on that topic, I want to add how well thought out and intricate some of the puzzles featured in the game were. None were too overtly difficult as well (maybe a couple were pretty complex). It is not too long of a playthrough either. It took me roughly 12-15 hours or so, but that was including a partial 2nd playthrough in order for me to write my first ever trophy guide for any game. There was not a complete guide that I could find on the internet that compiled both seasons, so I decided to fill in that gap. Overall though, this was a stellar game that I highly recommend. Obviously, as I said before, it’s not the type of game you get for gameplay, and more similar in the vein of a story based walking simulator (although this time you point/click to walk). So, if you are in the mood for a little indie game that delivers the suspense and intrigue, then this is for you.
https://themadnessofdionysus.wordpress.com/2020/04/12/the-last-door-2013-16/
I know, on the surface, the game probably does not look like much. It is a pixelated story driven game with very little in way of gameplay. Its point and click mechanics basically serve two functions, to point and click where you want your playable character to walk to, and to point and click on what object of interest is available to examine/inspect. While none of these features bothered me, I must admit that I at least yearned for something with a bit more detail in the graphics/ art design other than just pixels. These thoughts mainly arose in comparison to how simple yet marvelous the design in ‘Blasphemous’ was, and it could have been easily replicated here. In fact, while we are on this subject and given that my reaction towards this game was mostly positive, I also thought how wonderful it could be if this game got a face lift in a remake or remaster. These are just wishful hypothetical ramblings. On to the more juicier stuff.
Since this game is essentially designed in a television series format, and I’m talking more than just how it is divided by episodes (there is even a well crafted opening title sequence before each episode), I kept comparing it to the film/television medium. Story-wise, the game fits right in that environment and could be easily adapted into a series-miniseries for television (Probably too much for one film). Given that comparison, and how even some of the best series out there can have lackluster seasons (Game of Thrones season finale?), I got to say that the first season here is far superior to the second. I was actually ready to include this game among my top favorites while playing the first season, but the second one became far too tedious and the story sunk in quality by getting too overtly complicated in a Lovecraftian dimensional timeline with cults. The first season had the perfect balance, it had great intrigue and even some shocking and surprise filled moments that truly caught me off guard. This was particularly the case with the shocking yet cliff hanger style way most of the episodes ended. It just begged for the player to keep continuing and unraveling what comes next in the mystery.
On a few other notes, the music in this game was fantastic, and really enhanced the moody atmosphere the game created. Also, I had briefly mentioned the gameplay by only describing the point and click mechanics in a broad manner. However, on that topic, I want to add how well thought out and intricate some of the puzzles featured in the game were. None were too overtly difficult as well (maybe a couple were pretty complex). It is not too long of a playthrough either. It took me roughly 12-15 hours or so, but that was including a partial 2nd playthrough in order for me to write my first ever trophy guide for any game. There was not a complete guide that I could find on the internet that compiled both seasons, so I decided to fill in that gap. Overall though, this was a stellar game that I highly recommend. Obviously, as I said before, it’s not the type of game you get for gameplay, and more similar in the vein of a story based walking simulator (although this time you point/click to walk). So, if you are in the mood for a little indie game that delivers the suspense and intrigue, then this is for you.
https://themadnessofdionysus.wordpress.com/2020/04/12/the-last-door-2013-16/
2019
A.K.A “I bought a Switch for this?”
That joke of a tagline is at least partially true, as there are other games I want to check out on the Nintendo Switch system, but one of the major factors was indeed for the sake of Pokémon’s first ever port to console.
I’ll use an asterisk there, as I played the game on the Switch Lite that I own, thus the entire game was played via handheld and honestly not much different than playing any of the past titles on the DS.
What a disappointment. There was so much build up, not for Sword and Shield specifically, but for Pokémon to get its first major release on a home console system. There had been talks of such an eventual transition happening for years, and such talks had always speculated what new possibilities it would open up for the franchise once it had evolved past its handheld history. All that build up was for naught, as the result we received with Sword & Shield was a rushed display with very few new mechanics and essentially not much different or innovative than its handheld predecessors. It basically felt like it didn’t even “need” to be a Switch game and could have easily existed on the Nintendo 3DS as an exclusive handheld game like all of the past titles. There was not anything truly new and special to differentiate between old and new to warrant the change in device. The graphics were not that much better than Sun & Moon, not that the Switch is known for its graphical prowess in comparison to its competitor counterparts (PS4 & Xbox One). The length of the game was not any longer than usual, although it would have been awesome to have a sprawling epic in a Pokémon story based game. So why now, with this particular title duo does Pokémon want to make the jump? Why not wait a little longer until they have a more polished and innovative title worthy of the switch (no pun intended)?
Sword & Shield definitely feels like a rushed product that Game Freak put together quickly after the release of the “Let’s Go” titles on the Switch (which served as a primer). I didn’t expect Pokémon to change up its tired but true formula with its gameplay mechanics and story structure but they went beyond and barely made any pivotal changes compared to the handheld titles. I feel like I am repeating myself, but to elaborate with more examples, I didn’t expect them to change anything in regards to battling, catching, collecting, item utilization, etc., nor to change the same Gym structure they announced they were returning to after its absence in Sun & Moon. However, what I did expect was for all of the aforementioned details plus more to be more fleshed out and detailed for expanded capabilities the game developers now possess. As far as I can tell, the only notable changes are the Max-Raid battles, the wild area, and camping for some reason but even that is similar to the “Pokémon Refresh” feature in past titles. I’m not even going to include Dynamax/ Gigantimax given how they are basically a version of mega evolutions. Everything else is identical to the handheld titles while perhaps being with even less features and details.
For instance, character customization in this game was extremely limited and poor. One could customize their character with far greater options in Sun & Moon. Trading is worse off now as well, with the absence of the GTS (Global Trade Station). What we have now is extremely hit or miss to whatever random person (if you have no friends) may accept your trade invite and be offered to give up, as we cannot see what pokemons they may have unless they choose to display it. Surprise Trade is the same exact thing as Wonder Trade so nothing new there except a name change. However, the most glaring omission of all, that everyone on both sides of the debate have been hearing about forever now, even prior to the game’s release, is no National Dex, hence no way to transport pokemon from previous generations forward. You can tell right away which side of the controversy I am on. This has been a staple in Pokémon titles since its existence. Hell, they even gave us the capability using the Pokémon Bank to transfer “mon’s” from the digital versions of Pokémon Red, Blue, & Yellow, to current gen. Why eliminate that now, when Game Freak is taking the next steps to making the franchise in its biggest form to date?
This generation could have been so much better, and I do hope one day we will see a proper Pokémon title that is deserving of console status. Even the world building in the game was so damn limited and restricted. Aside from the wild area, there wasn’t much room for exploration, and the map itself seemed incredibly small as I worked my way through it. There would be a city in the game like Spikemuth for example, that the developers would intricately design and make it extremely appealing as far as visuals are concerned; but then, actual gameplay and movement would be restricted to one small straight way with virtually no room for exploration or interaction. It was such a waste, and frankly a lazier option to go with in making the game, instead of doing something like a true open world format, or even partial open world (like the Wild Area but all over). Another thing that could have been drastically better is the story. I know Pokémon has never relied heavily on its story, using a basic formula which is literally:
Begin Pokémon Journey -> Face your rival multiple times -> create some type of conflict with new “Team” baddies -> finish gyms/trials -> become Pokémon Champion -> Conflict resolution -> Capture box Legendary -> hopefully some end game content…
I’m not saying they need to scrap the entire formula but at this point, there is no excuse to be this lazy when it comes to the plot of your video game. It’s as if they are just letting the franchise sell itself, while doing the bare minimum. The story in Sword & Shield was down right atrocious. Sun & Moon actually had a fairly decent story and did not deviate too much from the formula, and then you have Black & White (in my opinion the best of them all) that proved Pokémon could even tell a story with complex characters, and morality tales. Black & White also turned the story on the player in a meta sort of way. as if we were the villain, because we wanted to capture and “enslave” pokemon. It’s story blurred so many lines, and even though there was a “true” villain revealed in the end, so many other characters (including player character) fell into this grey area where no one is all good or bad. I mean why couldn’t they bring back some of that innovativeness to this new title, instead of virtually going the entire plot with no conflict only for one to be suddenly thrust upon us at the end with no logic or build up involved whatsoever. The writing in Sword & Shield was just terrible, even the characters were generic, with Piers, the Spikemuth gym leader, being the most interesting, but even he was just reminiscent of a nicer Team Skull member from the previous gen.
As far as pokemon designs go, every generation has its hits and misses, and the same applies here as well. I’ll give it to them, there were some pretty cool pokemon designs in Sword & Shield, most notably Corviknight, Centiskorch (my personal favorite), Grimmsnarl, Toxtricity, and more. While on the other side of the spectrum, you have “mon’s” ranging from an apple pie dragon (Appletun), or a penguin with a ice cube for a head (Eiscue) that were less than inspired. One more mention regarding pokemon design, the starters this generation were among the worst if not the very worst looking ones. This was the first gen that I didn’t even have at least one of the starters that I was keen on. I wound up going with the monkey Grookey/Rillaboom, simply because he was the only one that “looked” like an actual Pokémon even though I really disliked his drum. Cinderace looked like a cross between Sonic the Hedehog and Blaziken, while Inteleon (the worst of all) looked like some awkward, flamboyant humanoid that was way too weird, and did not remind me at all of the Spy look they were going for.
To wrap this up in a TLDR recap; The Good: some cool new pokemon and honestly it’s a new pokemon game, the franchise really does sell itself at this point and it will always be at least mildly entertaining. The Bad: Everything else, literally everything; and I’ll even throw in The Ugly: Inteleon.
https://themadnessofdionysus.wordpress.com/2020/01/07/pokemon-sword-shield-2019/
That joke of a tagline is at least partially true, as there are other games I want to check out on the Nintendo Switch system, but one of the major factors was indeed for the sake of Pokémon’s first ever port to console.
I’ll use an asterisk there, as I played the game on the Switch Lite that I own, thus the entire game was played via handheld and honestly not much different than playing any of the past titles on the DS.
What a disappointment. There was so much build up, not for Sword and Shield specifically, but for Pokémon to get its first major release on a home console system. There had been talks of such an eventual transition happening for years, and such talks had always speculated what new possibilities it would open up for the franchise once it had evolved past its handheld history. All that build up was for naught, as the result we received with Sword & Shield was a rushed display with very few new mechanics and essentially not much different or innovative than its handheld predecessors. It basically felt like it didn’t even “need” to be a Switch game and could have easily existed on the Nintendo 3DS as an exclusive handheld game like all of the past titles. There was not anything truly new and special to differentiate between old and new to warrant the change in device. The graphics were not that much better than Sun & Moon, not that the Switch is known for its graphical prowess in comparison to its competitor counterparts (PS4 & Xbox One). The length of the game was not any longer than usual, although it would have been awesome to have a sprawling epic in a Pokémon story based game. So why now, with this particular title duo does Pokémon want to make the jump? Why not wait a little longer until they have a more polished and innovative title worthy of the switch (no pun intended)?
Sword & Shield definitely feels like a rushed product that Game Freak put together quickly after the release of the “Let’s Go” titles on the Switch (which served as a primer). I didn’t expect Pokémon to change up its tired but true formula with its gameplay mechanics and story structure but they went beyond and barely made any pivotal changes compared to the handheld titles. I feel like I am repeating myself, but to elaborate with more examples, I didn’t expect them to change anything in regards to battling, catching, collecting, item utilization, etc., nor to change the same Gym structure they announced they were returning to after its absence in Sun & Moon. However, what I did expect was for all of the aforementioned details plus more to be more fleshed out and detailed for expanded capabilities the game developers now possess. As far as I can tell, the only notable changes are the Max-Raid battles, the wild area, and camping for some reason but even that is similar to the “Pokémon Refresh” feature in past titles. I’m not even going to include Dynamax/ Gigantimax given how they are basically a version of mega evolutions. Everything else is identical to the handheld titles while perhaps being with even less features and details.
For instance, character customization in this game was extremely limited and poor. One could customize their character with far greater options in Sun & Moon. Trading is worse off now as well, with the absence of the GTS (Global Trade Station). What we have now is extremely hit or miss to whatever random person (if you have no friends) may accept your trade invite and be offered to give up, as we cannot see what pokemons they may have unless they choose to display it. Surprise Trade is the same exact thing as Wonder Trade so nothing new there except a name change. However, the most glaring omission of all, that everyone on both sides of the debate have been hearing about forever now, even prior to the game’s release, is no National Dex, hence no way to transport pokemon from previous generations forward. You can tell right away which side of the controversy I am on. This has been a staple in Pokémon titles since its existence. Hell, they even gave us the capability using the Pokémon Bank to transfer “mon’s” from the digital versions of Pokémon Red, Blue, & Yellow, to current gen. Why eliminate that now, when Game Freak is taking the next steps to making the franchise in its biggest form to date?
This generation could have been so much better, and I do hope one day we will see a proper Pokémon title that is deserving of console status. Even the world building in the game was so damn limited and restricted. Aside from the wild area, there wasn’t much room for exploration, and the map itself seemed incredibly small as I worked my way through it. There would be a city in the game like Spikemuth for example, that the developers would intricately design and make it extremely appealing as far as visuals are concerned; but then, actual gameplay and movement would be restricted to one small straight way with virtually no room for exploration or interaction. It was such a waste, and frankly a lazier option to go with in making the game, instead of doing something like a true open world format, or even partial open world (like the Wild Area but all over). Another thing that could have been drastically better is the story. I know Pokémon has never relied heavily on its story, using a basic formula which is literally:
Begin Pokémon Journey -> Face your rival multiple times -> create some type of conflict with new “Team” baddies -> finish gyms/trials -> become Pokémon Champion -> Conflict resolution -> Capture box Legendary -> hopefully some end game content…
I’m not saying they need to scrap the entire formula but at this point, there is no excuse to be this lazy when it comes to the plot of your video game. It’s as if they are just letting the franchise sell itself, while doing the bare minimum. The story in Sword & Shield was down right atrocious. Sun & Moon actually had a fairly decent story and did not deviate too much from the formula, and then you have Black & White (in my opinion the best of them all) that proved Pokémon could even tell a story with complex characters, and morality tales. Black & White also turned the story on the player in a meta sort of way. as if we were the villain, because we wanted to capture and “enslave” pokemon. It’s story blurred so many lines, and even though there was a “true” villain revealed in the end, so many other characters (including player character) fell into this grey area where no one is all good or bad. I mean why couldn’t they bring back some of that innovativeness to this new title, instead of virtually going the entire plot with no conflict only for one to be suddenly thrust upon us at the end with no logic or build up involved whatsoever. The writing in Sword & Shield was just terrible, even the characters were generic, with Piers, the Spikemuth gym leader, being the most interesting, but even he was just reminiscent of a nicer Team Skull member from the previous gen.
As far as pokemon designs go, every generation has its hits and misses, and the same applies here as well. I’ll give it to them, there were some pretty cool pokemon designs in Sword & Shield, most notably Corviknight, Centiskorch (my personal favorite), Grimmsnarl, Toxtricity, and more. While on the other side of the spectrum, you have “mon’s” ranging from an apple pie dragon (Appletun), or a penguin with a ice cube for a head (Eiscue) that were less than inspired. One more mention regarding pokemon design, the starters this generation were among the worst if not the very worst looking ones. This was the first gen that I didn’t even have at least one of the starters that I was keen on. I wound up going with the monkey Grookey/Rillaboom, simply because he was the only one that “looked” like an actual Pokémon even though I really disliked his drum. Cinderace looked like a cross between Sonic the Hedehog and Blaziken, while Inteleon (the worst of all) looked like some awkward, flamboyant humanoid that was way too weird, and did not remind me at all of the Spy look they were going for.
To wrap this up in a TLDR recap; The Good: some cool new pokemon and honestly it’s a new pokemon game, the franchise really does sell itself at this point and it will always be at least mildly entertaining. The Bad: Everything else, literally everything; and I’ll even throw in The Ugly: Inteleon.
https://themadnessofdionysus.wordpress.com/2020/01/07/pokemon-sword-shield-2019/
2019
Death Stranding is without a doubt my personal “Game of the Year” and one of the best new releases of recent time, right there next to Red Dead Redemption 2. It was destined to be a divisive game amongst players simply because Hideo Kojima wanted to go somewhere no video game went before. The game is unique without a doubt, but I would actually push back on some of that talk in that with Death Stranding, Kojima essentially created a new genre or genre-less type of game. I say, at its core, Death Stranding is still very much akin to other massive open world single player games. I don’t make that comparison in any attempt towards negativity, but rather to explain to any hesitant potential players out there to give the game a try.
—-RANT WARNING: Addressing the undeserved hate some of the gaming community is lodging in Death Stranding’s direction in the following paragraphs. Skip until it’s over, if you prefer to just read about why the game is so wonderful rather than witnessing me defend it to death.—–
To elaborate further on that topic and address some of the unwarranted criticisms that they game has received, I will break down some of the game’s mechanics without going into any spoiler territory. As in most open world RPG type games, there are quests, side quests, etc., and the goal of the majority of the time boils down to some sort of retrieve and deliver item, just decorated differently depending on the game’s lore. Think of quests in Skyrim, to retrieve some relic in a massive dungeon crawl with enemies to eventually return the relic to the quest giver. The above example is simply a vague one I made up but it still expands on the fact that the entire idea of retrieval and deliver tasks exist in almost the majority if not all of these types of video games, (open world, single player, RPG). What Death Stranding did was take that type of mission task and made it the game’s core component and did not dress up the fact. In that regard, some have criticized the main character Sam played by Norman Reedus as being a glorified mailman. While that criticism breaks down the profession to its simplest terms, they are not taking into consideration the context of the in game world. Porters (the in game profession name) are actually very revered and legendary, because of the danger and risk they undertake and the importance of their job in delivering supplies to the different settlements. They are essentially the life force that keeps these separated communities going. So Sam, is so much more than your average mailman.
Another criticism I have to address, is people calling this a “walking simulator”, which is 100% false. I get that their intent might be to imply there isn’t much to do in the game besides walk, but that is also not true, nor does it fit what is widely defined as a walking simulator. The term “walking simulator” is fairly new and as of my knowledge has not been officially used by any game developers in describing their games, however that hasn’t stopped it from taking on a life of its own and laying claim to a new genre of gaming. What makes a game a walking simulator is when the only gameplay function available in a game is to walk and explore (interacting with various objects), that’s it. Mostly they are story driven, hence why the gameplay is so minimal. When you think of walking simulators, think of games like “What Remains of Edith Finch”, “Everybody’s Gone to the Rapture”, “Gone Home”, “Firewatch”, etc. Death Stranding is not among them. In fact, once the player reaches episode 3 in the game (which isn’t too long of a wait, depending on how much “standard orders” {side quests} you do), you really don’t have to walk again. The world of Death Stranding really opens up at the point, and bikes, trucks, and zip lines become available, making traveling much easier, but still with enough obstacles to make deciding on how to make the journey a thought provoking challenge. What I mean by challenge, is the different types of terrain you will encounter as well as enemies. While the game is not a shooter, another aspect that differentiates it from the walking simulator genre, is your ability to engage said enemies. There is a whole arsenal of weapons available in the game, and you can take on enemies head on or in stealth which is a Kojima specialty.
—-There is a lot more to this game than meets the eye of these naysayers. But that will be the end of my rant against some of the criticisms of the game for the time being.—–END OF RANT
Back to a more positive note, Death Stranding comes equipped with an impeccable graphic design, with luscious landscapes, photorealistic captures of the actors, and just all around gorgeous visuals. Sound design is also noteworthy, not only for the non diegetic variety (like a sound track that introduced me to a band featured prominently in the game, Low Roar), but also in game sound from BB’s lovely baby laughs, and uplifting voices of automation trying their best to encourage you in a world of humanity separated (“Keep on, Keeping on”). The game also has great humor and a lot of little Easter eggs to it as well. For instance, there is so many fourth wall breaks between the player and Norman Reedus in his private room that can be activated by things you interact with or where you are pointing the in game camera. As far as game mechanics and the game’s HUD, it seems similarly designed to Kojima’s parting game with Konami, MGSV Phantom Pain. The performance and control of the gameplay is even similar to Phantom Pain in terms of combat, movement, etc. One last note, this is a cinephile’s game, from one appreciating art form to another. The crossover of mediums is quite apparent, not only given the fact that Kojima himself is a film buff who is known for his long cinematic cut scenes, but of who he chose to be apart of this game. There are two prolific film directors that play really hefty and significant roles in the game in Guillermo Del Toro and Nicolas Winding Refn. Then you have the formidable Mads Mikkelsen alongside Norman Reedus, and the great Léa Seydoux of “Blue is the Warmest Color” fame. It’s pure star power galore, and they all do such excellent jobs at breathing life into these characters.
Stepping away from the fundamentals of the game’s design among other things and wrapping up this review, I want to talk about the story of Death Stranding as best that I can without divulging any spoiler information. Death Stranding is full of various themes. At front and center, it is simply about reconnecting humanity in a disconnected world. Both metaphorically and physically since given the events of Death Stranding (the apocalyptic disaster that the game is named after), humanity is scattered across the country in small communities without communication or connection. There is definitely something to be said of Kojima’s use of reconnecting to our fellow man in contrast to today’s political climate as well. A catch phrase of “Make America Whole Again” is even used, which is a direct connotation to Trump’s own slogan as well as his politics of dividing people including building walls rather than in the game, the goal is to build bridges instead.
Which, if I am to get sidetracked for a moment, I should interject here at this point how great the online aspect of the game is, with building that same sense of community and connection among players. So while Death Stranding is not a MMO to where you can visibly see other players in action, you instead “connect” between worlds and see the structures and items they leave behind. It really fulfills the game’s theme of hope and being in this together, especially as so many in the game’s community have already commented on how vital it has been in utilizing other online player’s vehicles, gear, structures, etc., to get out of a bind. As if it was there meant for us all along, a good deed in the right place at the right time. The same goes for the structures that you lay down, as you get the sense of helping out others. The game makes you feel like a pioneer in this sense, venturing out into uncharted lands, carving the way for the next person to follow.
Back to the story, and definitely on an ending note here, the themes in the game go far beyond just reconnecting society. There is also a great deal of metaphysical material as well, exploring life and death, as well as the meaning of each. There is not really anything theological about the game and instead a lot of the supernatural elements are explained via pseudo science, which served its purpose but I’ll admit it was my least favorite aspect in the story. However, the talk of “beaches” (sort of like everyone’s personal landscape in the afterlife, like your own private heaven) and BB’s “Bridge Babies” (existing between life and death) really becomes fascinating with the lore that Kojima builds around it. With each passing episode, the story becomes more intense, and the player more invested. It is definitely a story with a well built arc narrative, and rising to a brilliant climax. The ending literally left me in tears, and I know that is just some obligatory response to display how emotional attached I became with the game but it was true. The characters all had well written progression and fully fleshed out to the max, even little BB kind of became the star of the show for me. The game was an experience unlike any other and is certainly cemented itself a spot on my list of favorites.
https://themadnessofdionysus.wordpress.com/2019/12/17/death-stranding-2019/
—-RANT WARNING: Addressing the undeserved hate some of the gaming community is lodging in Death Stranding’s direction in the following paragraphs. Skip until it’s over, if you prefer to just read about why the game is so wonderful rather than witnessing me defend it to death.—–
To elaborate further on that topic and address some of the unwarranted criticisms that they game has received, I will break down some of the game’s mechanics without going into any spoiler territory. As in most open world RPG type games, there are quests, side quests, etc., and the goal of the majority of the time boils down to some sort of retrieve and deliver item, just decorated differently depending on the game’s lore. Think of quests in Skyrim, to retrieve some relic in a massive dungeon crawl with enemies to eventually return the relic to the quest giver. The above example is simply a vague one I made up but it still expands on the fact that the entire idea of retrieval and deliver tasks exist in almost the majority if not all of these types of video games, (open world, single player, RPG). What Death Stranding did was take that type of mission task and made it the game’s core component and did not dress up the fact. In that regard, some have criticized the main character Sam played by Norman Reedus as being a glorified mailman. While that criticism breaks down the profession to its simplest terms, they are not taking into consideration the context of the in game world. Porters (the in game profession name) are actually very revered and legendary, because of the danger and risk they undertake and the importance of their job in delivering supplies to the different settlements. They are essentially the life force that keeps these separated communities going. So Sam, is so much more than your average mailman.
Another criticism I have to address, is people calling this a “walking simulator”, which is 100% false. I get that their intent might be to imply there isn’t much to do in the game besides walk, but that is also not true, nor does it fit what is widely defined as a walking simulator. The term “walking simulator” is fairly new and as of my knowledge has not been officially used by any game developers in describing their games, however that hasn’t stopped it from taking on a life of its own and laying claim to a new genre of gaming. What makes a game a walking simulator is when the only gameplay function available in a game is to walk and explore (interacting with various objects), that’s it. Mostly they are story driven, hence why the gameplay is so minimal. When you think of walking simulators, think of games like “What Remains of Edith Finch”, “Everybody’s Gone to the Rapture”, “Gone Home”, “Firewatch”, etc. Death Stranding is not among them. In fact, once the player reaches episode 3 in the game (which isn’t too long of a wait, depending on how much “standard orders” {side quests} you do), you really don’t have to walk again. The world of Death Stranding really opens up at the point, and bikes, trucks, and zip lines become available, making traveling much easier, but still with enough obstacles to make deciding on how to make the journey a thought provoking challenge. What I mean by challenge, is the different types of terrain you will encounter as well as enemies. While the game is not a shooter, another aspect that differentiates it from the walking simulator genre, is your ability to engage said enemies. There is a whole arsenal of weapons available in the game, and you can take on enemies head on or in stealth which is a Kojima specialty.
—-There is a lot more to this game than meets the eye of these naysayers. But that will be the end of my rant against some of the criticisms of the game for the time being.—–END OF RANT
Back to a more positive note, Death Stranding comes equipped with an impeccable graphic design, with luscious landscapes, photorealistic captures of the actors, and just all around gorgeous visuals. Sound design is also noteworthy, not only for the non diegetic variety (like a sound track that introduced me to a band featured prominently in the game, Low Roar), but also in game sound from BB’s lovely baby laughs, and uplifting voices of automation trying their best to encourage you in a world of humanity separated (“Keep on, Keeping on”). The game also has great humor and a lot of little Easter eggs to it as well. For instance, there is so many fourth wall breaks between the player and Norman Reedus in his private room that can be activated by things you interact with or where you are pointing the in game camera. As far as game mechanics and the game’s HUD, it seems similarly designed to Kojima’s parting game with Konami, MGSV Phantom Pain. The performance and control of the gameplay is even similar to Phantom Pain in terms of combat, movement, etc. One last note, this is a cinephile’s game, from one appreciating art form to another. The crossover of mediums is quite apparent, not only given the fact that Kojima himself is a film buff who is known for his long cinematic cut scenes, but of who he chose to be apart of this game. There are two prolific film directors that play really hefty and significant roles in the game in Guillermo Del Toro and Nicolas Winding Refn. Then you have the formidable Mads Mikkelsen alongside Norman Reedus, and the great Léa Seydoux of “Blue is the Warmest Color” fame. It’s pure star power galore, and they all do such excellent jobs at breathing life into these characters.
Stepping away from the fundamentals of the game’s design among other things and wrapping up this review, I want to talk about the story of Death Stranding as best that I can without divulging any spoiler information. Death Stranding is full of various themes. At front and center, it is simply about reconnecting humanity in a disconnected world. Both metaphorically and physically since given the events of Death Stranding (the apocalyptic disaster that the game is named after), humanity is scattered across the country in small communities without communication or connection. There is definitely something to be said of Kojima’s use of reconnecting to our fellow man in contrast to today’s political climate as well. A catch phrase of “Make America Whole Again” is even used, which is a direct connotation to Trump’s own slogan as well as his politics of dividing people including building walls rather than in the game, the goal is to build bridges instead.
Which, if I am to get sidetracked for a moment, I should interject here at this point how great the online aspect of the game is, with building that same sense of community and connection among players. So while Death Stranding is not a MMO to where you can visibly see other players in action, you instead “connect” between worlds and see the structures and items they leave behind. It really fulfills the game’s theme of hope and being in this together, especially as so many in the game’s community have already commented on how vital it has been in utilizing other online player’s vehicles, gear, structures, etc., to get out of a bind. As if it was there meant for us all along, a good deed in the right place at the right time. The same goes for the structures that you lay down, as you get the sense of helping out others. The game makes you feel like a pioneer in this sense, venturing out into uncharted lands, carving the way for the next person to follow.
Back to the story, and definitely on an ending note here, the themes in the game go far beyond just reconnecting society. There is also a great deal of metaphysical material as well, exploring life and death, as well as the meaning of each. There is not really anything theological about the game and instead a lot of the supernatural elements are explained via pseudo science, which served its purpose but I’ll admit it was my least favorite aspect in the story. However, the talk of “beaches” (sort of like everyone’s personal landscape in the afterlife, like your own private heaven) and BB’s “Bridge Babies” (existing between life and death) really becomes fascinating with the lore that Kojima builds around it. With each passing episode, the story becomes more intense, and the player more invested. It is definitely a story with a well built arc narrative, and rising to a brilliant climax. The ending literally left me in tears, and I know that is just some obligatory response to display how emotional attached I became with the game but it was true. The characters all had well written progression and fully fleshed out to the max, even little BB kind of became the star of the show for me. The game was an experience unlike any other and is certainly cemented itself a spot on my list of favorites.
https://themadnessofdionysus.wordpress.com/2019/12/17/death-stranding-2019/