spvrinna
2022
Un gioco carinissimo che vorrei finire, ma non ci riesco. Non so cos'è, mi piace durante la seduta ma non ci penso tanto dopo averci giocato. Credo lo stile di gioco non mi trovi proprio il favore, e va bene così. Ogni giorno divento più consapevole di ciò che mi provoca artisticamente, sia per piacere che per disinteresse.
2022
Un'idea interessante ma sfortunatamente non riuscivo a rinteressarmi alla storia dopo aver preso una pausa d'alcuni giorni. M'intristisce perché godevo del gioco mentre giocarci, la scrittura è davvero piacevole e ben fatto -- un traguardo da non trascurare dato che il gioco tratta principalmente di lettura. Sono sicuro di esser in grado di completarlo ma oramai m'è passata la voglia. Raccomando ci provate se v'interessa scoprir un mondo da qualche parte tra quello di Game of Thrones e i Signori Degli Anelli.
2023
A largely inoffensive sequel. The changes are not plentiful nor mind-blowing, but I can't complain since it held my interest to the end.
The overall experience goes from "been here, done that" to "oh, that was neat", but never really ventures beyond either end of that range. For every cool puzzle, there were 10 moments of jank I felt in the combat, where I'd get stun-locked into an instant death. Taking damage (and definitely getting stunned) upon simply making contact with the enemy should have been reevaluated. Blasphemous 1 had this issue too, but you'd expect an improvement in a full-on, numbered sequel. That's actually a large problem in general here, that this feels like Blasphemous 1, but just... more of it. It's not really a sequel as you'd come to expect from video games.
I'm not a fan of the cutscene direction; the art style feels too clean for the aesthetic the games have been trying to capture. At times it ventured into "way too anime" (disparaging) and I couldn't help but roll my eyes. The lack of real emotional or mechanical difference in the endings was something I was disappointed by. Either you have the item that gives you the cutscene, or you don't. Either way, the final fight is the same, and very easy. Neither ending here achieved much of anything for me. You either save everyone by defeating the final boss and ascend to heaven, or you... save everyone by defeating the final boss and ascend to heaven, except this time you get a cutscene with all the characters from the first game.
I know for me, the cool setting and characters were not enough to save the game from its faults this time. I enjoyed it, but it hardly leaves the impression that Blasphemous 1 did. Hopefully they continue to support the game with DLC and post-launch updates, just like the previous game. They've still yet to top everything that was introduced in the Wounds of Eventide update.
The overall experience goes from "been here, done that" to "oh, that was neat", but never really ventures beyond either end of that range. For every cool puzzle, there were 10 moments of jank I felt in the combat, where I'd get stun-locked into an instant death. Taking damage (and definitely getting stunned) upon simply making contact with the enemy should have been reevaluated. Blasphemous 1 had this issue too, but you'd expect an improvement in a full-on, numbered sequel. That's actually a large problem in general here, that this feels like Blasphemous 1, but just... more of it. It's not really a sequel as you'd come to expect from video games.
I'm not a fan of the cutscene direction; the art style feels too clean for the aesthetic the games have been trying to capture. At times it ventured into "way too anime" (disparaging) and I couldn't help but roll my eyes. The lack of real emotional or mechanical difference in the endings was something I was disappointed by. Either you have the item that gives you the cutscene, or you don't. Either way, the final fight is the same, and very easy. Neither ending here achieved much of anything for me. You either save everyone by defeating the final boss and ascend to heaven, or you... save everyone by defeating the final boss and ascend to heaven, except this time you get a cutscene with all the characters from the first game.
I know for me, the cool setting and characters were not enough to save the game from its faults this time. I enjoyed it, but it hardly leaves the impression that Blasphemous 1 did. Hopefully they continue to support the game with DLC and post-launch updates, just like the previous game. They've still yet to top everything that was introduced in the Wounds of Eventide update.
2022
If you can believe it, this Ubisoft-tier open world-having live service looter action-adventure RPG's major problems have nothing to do with the gameplay: the writing is, at best, serviceable and, at worst, baffling. I must admit however that somehow I didn't drop it before seeing the final credits, but I think that's largely because my favorite of these characters, Batgirl, is the least offensive and has the best outfits and gameplay, so I was chilling.
I would not pay money to play this, which is why I recommend pirating it like I did or otherwise just skipping it.
I would not pay money to play this, which is why I recommend pirating it like I did or otherwise just skipping it.
2017
Not my cup of tea.
2015
Pretty funny game, but I got stuck at Undyne and didn't feel like powering through it.
This review contains spoilers
A HUGELY disappointing sequel. I couldn't even be bothered to finish this one.
What makes Breath of the Wild special and one of my favorite games of all time is the exploration. Exploring the world is in-and-of-itself enjoyable and rewarding.
What makes Breath of the Wild difficult to replay is everything else. The asinine armor upgrade system, weapon durability and combat simplicity, and the inconsistency of the main content (shrines and dungeons). When the world is no longer new to you, these other issues make the game truly difficult to stomach, and is the main reason the game continues to decline in my estimation. So you'd think with a sequel, they'd double down on what made the game so great that first time and resolve the glaring issues that plagued follow-up playthroughs, right?
Nope. Instead, Nintendo decides to try and shoe-horn the Breath of the Wild template into their older Zelda format, with a much higher emphasis on story, condescending accessibility, and linearity. Now, the story wasn't great in Breath, but it had the good sense to be almost entirely optional and mostly second-fiddle to the gameplay. In Tears of the Kingdom, I just wanted to play the game, but was forced to suffer through a linear, story-heavy section on boot-up, without even an options menu where I could change the voice acting language to something less ear-grating. Seriously, the English voice acting is abysmal. I played around with a few options, but ultimately decided on using the original Japanese, which I can't really judge because I don't know Japanese.
This opening section is essentially a replacement of the Great Plateau in meta-ludological terms, but with greater importance placed upon the story, and a far less compelling distribution vehicle. There's no "cutting down a tree to use as a make-shift bridge in order to cross a chasm" here. In its place is the contrived placement of logs and a pre-made sail you can utilize to create a boat. It feels less like you've found a solution to the problem and more like you found THE solution the developers wanted you to encounter. There are a few moments in the game that echo this experience for me.
The problem with this opening however, and the greater game at large, is not the gameplay. As much as I might not enjoy it, it's serviceable. It's everything else I dislike.
The story is generic and predictable, and receives far too much focus, relative to its quality. None of the issues, except for MAYBE weapon durability [debatably], were addressed. Armor upgrades are still tantamount to brainless fetch quests, combat is mostly unchanged in that it's shallow and lacking the quality-of-life features other games of its type employ -- such as the ability to swap enemies while targeting. I will say that the renewed emphasis on story lead to some much more interesting regional plots, and the decision to make them centered around characters we can interact with was far more compelling than Breath of the Wild's solution of having the champions already be dead. More than that, I'm partial to themes of resolving imbalances in nature, which is the case for at least 3 of the regional plots. Additionally, all the dungeons are unique and fun, albeit short and pretty easy, topped-off with different and memorable bosses of varying quality, all of which are easily better than the X-blight Ganon from Breath. I think the dungeons' mechanical designs were superior in Breath, but the varying approach, bosses, and aesthetics of the temples in Tears do enough for me to say that the overall experience is better here than it was in the previous entry. The biggest issue with the temples is the game's obsession with spoon-feeding you the solutions. In every temple, the player will try to activate the main contraption, only for it to be made clear that the player is missing a few components of the solution to pass to the next area. Great. But then the game stops, the voice of the champion echoes in your head and explains to you in pain-staking detail what exactly you need to do, as if the game didn't just show you what your objective is. It's pointless and condescending. Then when you finally complete the temple, a variation of the same cutscene plays out regardless of what number temple this is for Link. I respect and want a non-linear story for Zelda going forward, but more consideration needed to be afforded stuff like this. If Link is on his third temple, literally none of the information given by the champion is new, yet the game has to assume the player knows nothing because it could be their first temple. I suppose you could say that the champion is explaining it to the regional character and not the player, but then more effort needed to be made to make these even a little interesting. The champions don't even have faces, and their dialogue is altered only slightly to reflect their "personalities".
The main advertising for the game makes the sky seem like the main draw of the game, and it's unfortunate this turns out to be a fake-out, because the overworld is almost entirely unchanged from Breath of the Wild. That feeling of exploration is almost entirely gone for me, and the sky world isn't large enough or as considered to fill that void. The fake-out comes from the underworld, the Abyss I believe it's called, receiving far greater focus and effort, but personally I found this to be really uncompelling to explore. I think it's a cool idea to light up the terrain, but it sucks the wind out of the sails a bit when you can only see where you're going after having gone there. Breath of the Wild felt so carefully considered with every single hill, mountain, or cliff, and that seems totally absent for me here.
I stopped playing before completing the Fire Temple. I'd done everything else except the Lost Woods. I just didn't care enough to go back since I knew the only thing waiting for me was the conclusion to a story I just didn't care about. I don't think this game is for me, and maybe I'll appreciate it more if in the future Nintendo makes an actual successor to Breath, but as of right now it's one of the more disappointing games I've played in a minute.
P.S.: having a dragon fly around in the TUTORIAL area pissed me off so much because the existence of dragons in Breath and their varied reveals across playthroughs is legitimately a magical gaming moment, and here it just kinda feels cheap and underwhelming. A nitpick, I know.
What makes Breath of the Wild special and one of my favorite games of all time is the exploration. Exploring the world is in-and-of-itself enjoyable and rewarding.
What makes Breath of the Wild difficult to replay is everything else. The asinine armor upgrade system, weapon durability and combat simplicity, and the inconsistency of the main content (shrines and dungeons). When the world is no longer new to you, these other issues make the game truly difficult to stomach, and is the main reason the game continues to decline in my estimation. So you'd think with a sequel, they'd double down on what made the game so great that first time and resolve the glaring issues that plagued follow-up playthroughs, right?
Nope. Instead, Nintendo decides to try and shoe-horn the Breath of the Wild template into their older Zelda format, with a much higher emphasis on story, condescending accessibility, and linearity. Now, the story wasn't great in Breath, but it had the good sense to be almost entirely optional and mostly second-fiddle to the gameplay. In Tears of the Kingdom, I just wanted to play the game, but was forced to suffer through a linear, story-heavy section on boot-up, without even an options menu where I could change the voice acting language to something less ear-grating. Seriously, the English voice acting is abysmal. I played around with a few options, but ultimately decided on using the original Japanese, which I can't really judge because I don't know Japanese.
This opening section is essentially a replacement of the Great Plateau in meta-ludological terms, but with greater importance placed upon the story, and a far less compelling distribution vehicle. There's no "cutting down a tree to use as a make-shift bridge in order to cross a chasm" here. In its place is the contrived placement of logs and a pre-made sail you can utilize to create a boat. It feels less like you've found a solution to the problem and more like you found THE solution the developers wanted you to encounter. There are a few moments in the game that echo this experience for me.
The problem with this opening however, and the greater game at large, is not the gameplay. As much as I might not enjoy it, it's serviceable. It's everything else I dislike.
The story is generic and predictable, and receives far too much focus, relative to its quality. None of the issues, except for MAYBE weapon durability [debatably], were addressed. Armor upgrades are still tantamount to brainless fetch quests, combat is mostly unchanged in that it's shallow and lacking the quality-of-life features other games of its type employ -- such as the ability to swap enemies while targeting. I will say that the renewed emphasis on story lead to some much more interesting regional plots, and the decision to make them centered around characters we can interact with was far more compelling than Breath of the Wild's solution of having the champions already be dead. More than that, I'm partial to themes of resolving imbalances in nature, which is the case for at least 3 of the regional plots. Additionally, all the dungeons are unique and fun, albeit short and pretty easy, topped-off with different and memorable bosses of varying quality, all of which are easily better than the X-blight Ganon from Breath. I think the dungeons' mechanical designs were superior in Breath, but the varying approach, bosses, and aesthetics of the temples in Tears do enough for me to say that the overall experience is better here than it was in the previous entry. The biggest issue with the temples is the game's obsession with spoon-feeding you the solutions. In every temple, the player will try to activate the main contraption, only for it to be made clear that the player is missing a few components of the solution to pass to the next area. Great. But then the game stops, the voice of the champion echoes in your head and explains to you in pain-staking detail what exactly you need to do, as if the game didn't just show you what your objective is. It's pointless and condescending. Then when you finally complete the temple, a variation of the same cutscene plays out regardless of what number temple this is for Link. I respect and want a non-linear story for Zelda going forward, but more consideration needed to be afforded stuff like this. If Link is on his third temple, literally none of the information given by the champion is new, yet the game has to assume the player knows nothing because it could be their first temple. I suppose you could say that the champion is explaining it to the regional character and not the player, but then more effort needed to be made to make these even a little interesting. The champions don't even have faces, and their dialogue is altered only slightly to reflect their "personalities".
The main advertising for the game makes the sky seem like the main draw of the game, and it's unfortunate this turns out to be a fake-out, because the overworld is almost entirely unchanged from Breath of the Wild. That feeling of exploration is almost entirely gone for me, and the sky world isn't large enough or as considered to fill that void. The fake-out comes from the underworld, the Abyss I believe it's called, receiving far greater focus and effort, but personally I found this to be really uncompelling to explore. I think it's a cool idea to light up the terrain, but it sucks the wind out of the sails a bit when you can only see where you're going after having gone there. Breath of the Wild felt so carefully considered with every single hill, mountain, or cliff, and that seems totally absent for me here.
I stopped playing before completing the Fire Temple. I'd done everything else except the Lost Woods. I just didn't care enough to go back since I knew the only thing waiting for me was the conclusion to a story I just didn't care about. I don't think this game is for me, and maybe I'll appreciate it more if in the future Nintendo makes an actual successor to Breath, but as of right now it's one of the more disappointing games I've played in a minute.
P.S.: having a dragon fly around in the TUTORIAL area pissed me off so much because the existence of dragons in Breath and their varied reveals across playthroughs is legitimately a magical gaming moment, and here it just kinda feels cheap and underwhelming. A nitpick, I know.
2018
Feels kinda cheap, but the story is good. Not sure if that's due to the strength of the original script, though.
2020
Super noioso. Che delusione dopo Furi. In modo buffo non riuscivo a capir come mai il protagonista fosse talmente arrendevole. Poi mi resi conto che c'eran risposte «corrette» e «scorrette» e ero io che arrende per tutta la durata. Figurati.
Questo è la miglior aggiunta al gioco nella totalità di Dark Souls III. Mentre il resto d'esso sembra compiacersi della nostalgia, La Città Ad Anelli è l'unica esperienza che prova a ricontestualizzare il lore e luoghi precedenti in tal modo che sentano nuovo. Finalmente, affrontano l'aspetto insoluto più grande della serie: cioè cos'era «l'anima oscura»? Se v'interessa la storia e c'avete prestato attenzione questo pare davvero l'addio finale della serie. I capi son tutti fra i migliori di tutti i giochi FromSoft ed i livelli son così duri per farvi incazzare ma rimangono sempre sommamente gratificante da esplorar a compimento.
2018
Celeste is a supremely smart and fun 2D platformer. The game introduces one small concept, and slowly over the course of the level expands and rethinks that one element over, and over, and over again. It's so inventive in its game design. That being said, my general disinterest in 2D platformers precluded me from finishing this game. Maybe I'll get back to it one day.
2022
Pretty fun moveset. The dodge feels more responsive than the vanilla version. If you liked the base game a lot, you'll love this.
2019
Legitimately the best 3D Sonic game ever made.
2016
A fun bullet hell with some excellent music. My only complaints are that some bosses aren't as good as others, the dodge can feel a bit off, and you can't skip the walking sections between bosses. Other than that, I enjoyed this quite a bit.
It's fine.