Parallax_M
BACKER
2008
This is probably one of the most infamous sequels / follow ups ever released. The game itself isn’t terrible but one truly can’t appreciate just how much this game completely abandons and misunderstands everything that made the original Fallout games special without playing them for yourself. It’s honestly unbelievable and a little bit hilarious. The whole thing speaks to what I perceive to be quite a lot of arrogance as well as a lack of respect for mainstream audiences from the people who made this game. Fallout New Vegas undeniably proved only two years later that a Fallout game doesn’t need to be dumbed down to be accessible and popular.
Exploration and atmosphere - as is the case with basically every Bethesda RPG - is quite solid in this game. It can be fun and honestly quite relaxing just to explore the map, listen to the radio, and check out locations you stumble upon. Combat is decent as well although was greatly improved in New Vegas.
The biggest problem for FO3 is obviously the writing and the whole design philosophy behind the game, which replaces the complex choices and speech-centric gameplay of the originals with a comically black and white morality system as well as progression based almost entirely on combat. One of the funniest things about the way this game is written is how it incorporates the lore of the original games. The way different factions are represented in this game is at times so baffling and so off the mark that one questions whether or not the people developing it ever played the original games. It feels more like they just listened to a drunk friend try to describe the original Fallout games:
“Yeah so there’s like the brotherhood they’re like super cool good guys and they got big armor and these awesome guns and they lkke fight the mutants who are the bad guys right and they’re like these big green dudes thay fuck your shit up. Oh yeah and in the 2nd game there’s like the enclave they’re kinda weird and I don’t remember much about them but they’re basically america but like super evil lol”
If you take away the Fallout label, this is a game that’s fun but not really anything special. With the fallout label attached this becomes possibly the most hilarious and disappointing bait and switch since Pac Man for the 2600. I've truly never played another sequel that breaks so completely from the essential character and appeal of its predecessor. I know there are some games out there that likely match Fallout 3 in this regard; I just haven’t gotten around to playing them yet.
The opening is also pretty hilarious. An hour+ long unskippable tutorial that begins with the main character’s birth and has nothing to hook the player and drive interest in the story is honestly insane. To quote Jay from RLM: “this is borderline experimental.”
Overall a pretty middling experience but an incredibly funny and fascinating piece of media - to me at least.
Exploration and atmosphere - as is the case with basically every Bethesda RPG - is quite solid in this game. It can be fun and honestly quite relaxing just to explore the map, listen to the radio, and check out locations you stumble upon. Combat is decent as well although was greatly improved in New Vegas.
The biggest problem for FO3 is obviously the writing and the whole design philosophy behind the game, which replaces the complex choices and speech-centric gameplay of the originals with a comically black and white morality system as well as progression based almost entirely on combat. One of the funniest things about the way this game is written is how it incorporates the lore of the original games. The way different factions are represented in this game is at times so baffling and so off the mark that one questions whether or not the people developing it ever played the original games. It feels more like they just listened to a drunk friend try to describe the original Fallout games:
“Yeah so there’s like the brotherhood they’re like super cool good guys and they got big armor and these awesome guns and they lkke fight the mutants who are the bad guys right and they’re like these big green dudes thay fuck your shit up. Oh yeah and in the 2nd game there’s like the enclave they’re kinda weird and I don’t remember much about them but they’re basically america but like super evil lol”
If you take away the Fallout label, this is a game that’s fun but not really anything special. With the fallout label attached this becomes possibly the most hilarious and disappointing bait and switch since Pac Man for the 2600. I've truly never played another sequel that breaks so completely from the essential character and appeal of its predecessor. I know there are some games out there that likely match Fallout 3 in this regard; I just haven’t gotten around to playing them yet.
The opening is also pretty hilarious. An hour+ long unskippable tutorial that begins with the main character’s birth and has nothing to hook the player and drive interest in the story is honestly insane. To quote Jay from RLM: “this is borderline experimental.”
Overall a pretty middling experience but an incredibly funny and fascinating piece of media - to me at least.
2013
Somewhat ashamed to say that this game was too difficult for me to complete. Giving it a good score, however, for its incredibly creative and immersive style as well as its truly novel and quite meta puzzles. Playing it feels almost like walking through a James Turrel-esque art instalation.
2013
This game being as enjoyable as it is feels almost like magic to me. Based on all the problems I have with it, it should be getting somewhere around a 6/10. However, whenever I return to this game, I find myself immediately wrapped up in its world and unable to put it down.
Contrary to what many claim, the writing on display here is not tantamount to gaming's Moby Dick. While the Last of Us has a lot of interesting ideas and brings up some interesting themes (I suspect accidentally in a few cases), it doesn't do much to actually flesh those ideas out. One of the biggest missed opportunities for this game (and the 2nd one as well) is it's failure to really interrogate the relationship between Joel and Ellie. The game does a good job at portraying the growth of this relationship in a way that feels real (which is certainly to be commended), but it completely ignores what I believe is the more interesting element at play here - the obviously toxic nature of Joel's relationship with Ellie. This is primarily a game about the relationship between two characters, and while their relationship is certainly well rendered, it's a shame that it's not explored in a more deep and critical way.
There are definitely things I really like about the way this game is written, however. Joel's characterization feels very real to me and somewhat effortlessly matches up with the gameplay you engage in as him. Unlike TLOU2's Ellie, I truly did believe, based on the way he was characterized throughout the game, that Joel would be capable of the callousness and violence and selfishness he displays. His character and exactly WHY he got to that place certainly could have been explored further, but I definitely have to commend the developers for creating an anti-hero that feels like a real person. Given how over the top video games can be (which certainly isn't a bad thing), a studio being able to pull off a realistic feeling anti-hero that the audience is supposed to take deadly serious is impressive.
The area where this game really shines for me, and the reason why I get so wrapped up in it despite its problems is the design of the world. There's something about this game that is truly immersive - more so than most games, and I'm honestly not well-versed enough in the language of game design to point out exactly why that is. Something about the level design or the visuals? I really don't know. All I know is that this game feels way better to play than it probably should.
I definitely disagree with the assertion some make that this game is total shit or bottom of the barrel slop that tricked the mainstream gamer into thinking it was a masterpiece. There's still a lot of artfulness and talent on display here, and the game's success reflects that. People who love this game aren't idiots and they don't love it for no reason. Is this game overrated? Yes absolutely. Some journalists and a lot of fans of gaming seem to have an irrational need for there to be a game with the writing and style and tone of prestige film in order to legitimize the medium as an art form. Back when this was released, TLOU was pretty much immediately crowned as this paragon of gaming as an art form. I have a couple of problems with this 1. TLOU is not written or directed or produced well enough to stand on the same level as the great masterpieces of film, television, or literature - it just isn't. 2. Games don't need to replicate prestige media to be art. Interactive media has the potential to create emotional and intellectual experiences for the player that other forms of media aren't able to. This is where the artfulness of a game should be assessed, IMO - how it utilizes the unique character of the medium to create a worthwhile experience for the player. As far as I see it, a game like Burnout 3 is just as capable of being art as any of the prestige AAA games we've seen over the past 10 years. Trying to shove something like this, or RDR2 or God of War (2018) into everyone's face and insist that it's high art and needs to be respected is really unnecessary and honestly a little bit embarrassing.
Are there games that are able to replicate the experience of and stand on the same level as other prestige media? Yes, IMO. Does TLOU do this? No. Does a game need to do this to be considered art or worth celebrating? Definitely not.
Contrary to what many claim, the writing on display here is not tantamount to gaming's Moby Dick. While the Last of Us has a lot of interesting ideas and brings up some interesting themes (I suspect accidentally in a few cases), it doesn't do much to actually flesh those ideas out. One of the biggest missed opportunities for this game (and the 2nd one as well) is it's failure to really interrogate the relationship between Joel and Ellie. The game does a good job at portraying the growth of this relationship in a way that feels real (which is certainly to be commended), but it completely ignores what I believe is the more interesting element at play here - the obviously toxic nature of Joel's relationship with Ellie. This is primarily a game about the relationship between two characters, and while their relationship is certainly well rendered, it's a shame that it's not explored in a more deep and critical way.
There are definitely things I really like about the way this game is written, however. Joel's characterization feels very real to me and somewhat effortlessly matches up with the gameplay you engage in as him. Unlike TLOU2's Ellie, I truly did believe, based on the way he was characterized throughout the game, that Joel would be capable of the callousness and violence and selfishness he displays. His character and exactly WHY he got to that place certainly could have been explored further, but I definitely have to commend the developers for creating an anti-hero that feels like a real person. Given how over the top video games can be (which certainly isn't a bad thing), a studio being able to pull off a realistic feeling anti-hero that the audience is supposed to take deadly serious is impressive.
The area where this game really shines for me, and the reason why I get so wrapped up in it despite its problems is the design of the world. There's something about this game that is truly immersive - more so than most games, and I'm honestly not well-versed enough in the language of game design to point out exactly why that is. Something about the level design or the visuals? I really don't know. All I know is that this game feels way better to play than it probably should.
I definitely disagree with the assertion some make that this game is total shit or bottom of the barrel slop that tricked the mainstream gamer into thinking it was a masterpiece. There's still a lot of artfulness and talent on display here, and the game's success reflects that. People who love this game aren't idiots and they don't love it for no reason. Is this game overrated? Yes absolutely. Some journalists and a lot of fans of gaming seem to have an irrational need for there to be a game with the writing and style and tone of prestige film in order to legitimize the medium as an art form. Back when this was released, TLOU was pretty much immediately crowned as this paragon of gaming as an art form. I have a couple of problems with this 1. TLOU is not written or directed or produced well enough to stand on the same level as the great masterpieces of film, television, or literature - it just isn't. 2. Games don't need to replicate prestige media to be art. Interactive media has the potential to create emotional and intellectual experiences for the player that other forms of media aren't able to. This is where the artfulness of a game should be assessed, IMO - how it utilizes the unique character of the medium to create a worthwhile experience for the player. As far as I see it, a game like Burnout 3 is just as capable of being art as any of the prestige AAA games we've seen over the past 10 years. Trying to shove something like this, or RDR2 or God of War (2018) into everyone's face and insist that it's high art and needs to be respected is really unnecessary and honestly a little bit embarrassing.
Are there games that are able to replicate the experience of and stand on the same level as other prestige media? Yes, IMO. Does TLOU do this? No. Does a game need to do this to be considered art or worth celebrating? Definitely not.
2019
Not my favorite of the persona games but the best one by a pretty wide mile IMO. This is the only Persona game that doesn’t have some massive problem bringing it down.
P1: simultaneous ease and over complexity of combat / encounter rate too high
P2: encounter rate way too high / IS story too convoluted
P3: Only controlling Makoto (I understand why the developers did this and it is an interesting idea just not one that benefits the game IMO), forced romance arcs, monotonous dungeon design
P4: Certain writing decisions that heavily conflict with the game’s supposed core message (see my review on P4G), monotonous dungeon design.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge persona fan and love all of these games despite their flaws and gave almost all of them 8 or 9/10 ratings. P4G is my personal favorite due to nostalgia and a very strong emotional connection I have to it.
That said, persona 5 is the first and only persona game to stand as a cohesive whole, expertly utilizing what makes the series unique and special, and lacking any substantial flaws that bring the game down. P5R certainly isn’t a perfect game but it’s close to it.
The story - despite being very long - is incredibly engaging both due to the memorable characters and it’s page-turner conspiracy plot. Each target for a change of heart exists as a really clean and concise mini-plot, which keeps things fresh and makes the game’s substantial length feel justified and tolerable. While story isn’t anything particularly deep or artistic - it makes frequent use of tropes, can be a bit cartoonish at times, and doesn’t really have any deep or complex criticisms of the power structures the phantom thieves battle against - it really doesn’t need to be and it succeeds as a fun, suspenseful, emotionally engaging, and life affirming story. While I think the Persona 2 duology and Persona 3 pack more of an emotional punch and have more interesting things to say, Persona 5 absolutely hits the mark with its storytelling goals and does this kind of story with more style and grace than almost any other similarly-minded game.
Dungeons and gameplay are overall improved when compared to the earlier persona games. Proper demon negotiation is a fantastic addition the series that was sorely missing. The use of carefully designed and planned dungeons as opposed to the generic corridors we saw in P3 and 4 makes the dungeon crawling fun, engaging and overall more challenging than the previous two games.
For series veterans or SMT veterans difficulty will likely be a bit of an issue. The persona games have always by and large been easier than other SMT games. I don’t see this as a bad thing but I understand that other people might. P5 is about the same as 3 and 4 when it comes to difficulty, which I believe suits it fine. It’s a good introduction to SMTs combat style without being too alienating and still offering some challenge for veterans on the highest difficulties.
A lot of people choose their favorite persona game based on which one has their favorite story and companion characters. For me that’s probably Persona 3. The idea of showing how a down to earth and realistic group of teenagers copes when being faced with not only their own deaths but the death of humanity is great and is done remarkably well in that game. Persona 5 takes a much more bombastic and to be honest Hollywood approach, which I think it does really well. Everyone is free to have their preference for the kinds of stories they engage with and I totally understand people not liking the direction P5 went with. That said, P5 and P5R undeniably elevate the series to a new level when it comes to artwork, design, polish, gameplay and overall cohesion. It’s a wonderful game, the perfect blockbuster game if you will, and I would recommend to almost anyone.
P1: simultaneous ease and over complexity of combat / encounter rate too high
P2: encounter rate way too high / IS story too convoluted
P3: Only controlling Makoto (I understand why the developers did this and it is an interesting idea just not one that benefits the game IMO), forced romance arcs, monotonous dungeon design
P4: Certain writing decisions that heavily conflict with the game’s supposed core message (see my review on P4G), monotonous dungeon design.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge persona fan and love all of these games despite their flaws and gave almost all of them 8 or 9/10 ratings. P4G is my personal favorite due to nostalgia and a very strong emotional connection I have to it.
That said, persona 5 is the first and only persona game to stand as a cohesive whole, expertly utilizing what makes the series unique and special, and lacking any substantial flaws that bring the game down. P5R certainly isn’t a perfect game but it’s close to it.
The story - despite being very long - is incredibly engaging both due to the memorable characters and it’s page-turner conspiracy plot. Each target for a change of heart exists as a really clean and concise mini-plot, which keeps things fresh and makes the game’s substantial length feel justified and tolerable. While story isn’t anything particularly deep or artistic - it makes frequent use of tropes, can be a bit cartoonish at times, and doesn’t really have any deep or complex criticisms of the power structures the phantom thieves battle against - it really doesn’t need to be and it succeeds as a fun, suspenseful, emotionally engaging, and life affirming story. While I think the Persona 2 duology and Persona 3 pack more of an emotional punch and have more interesting things to say, Persona 5 absolutely hits the mark with its storytelling goals and does this kind of story with more style and grace than almost any other similarly-minded game.
Dungeons and gameplay are overall improved when compared to the earlier persona games. Proper demon negotiation is a fantastic addition the series that was sorely missing. The use of carefully designed and planned dungeons as opposed to the generic corridors we saw in P3 and 4 makes the dungeon crawling fun, engaging and overall more challenging than the previous two games.
For series veterans or SMT veterans difficulty will likely be a bit of an issue. The persona games have always by and large been easier than other SMT games. I don’t see this as a bad thing but I understand that other people might. P5 is about the same as 3 and 4 when it comes to difficulty, which I believe suits it fine. It’s a good introduction to SMTs combat style without being too alienating and still offering some challenge for veterans on the highest difficulties.
A lot of people choose their favorite persona game based on which one has their favorite story and companion characters. For me that’s probably Persona 3. The idea of showing how a down to earth and realistic group of teenagers copes when being faced with not only their own deaths but the death of humanity is great and is done remarkably well in that game. Persona 5 takes a much more bombastic and to be honest Hollywood approach, which I think it does really well. Everyone is free to have their preference for the kinds of stories they engage with and I totally understand people not liking the direction P5 went with. That said, P5 and P5R undeniably elevate the series to a new level when it comes to artwork, design, polish, gameplay and overall cohesion. It’s a wonderful game, the perfect blockbuster game if you will, and I would recommend to almost anyone.
Really sad to have shelved this one but circumstance has forced me to. Was about halfway through this game and enjoying it a lot when I got the worst flu I’ve ever had and would have ended up in the hospital for dehydration were it not for my partner’s physician dad giving me prescription anti emetics he had lying around the house. Tried playing more of this game when I was laid up in bed which was a huge mistake. Literally can’t even think about this game without feeling nauseous now. Huge shame because I was enjoying it quite a bit.