I’m honored! I do hope you enjoy Hollow Knight, it really is a standout.
That’s the thing about Kena, everything feels slower and less responsive than I’ve come to expect from other games. Parrying is weird too because it does this camera…jolt to focus on the enemy you parried, but it’s more like a cut than a pan, so it’s really jarring for my brain and requires a moment of readjustment each time.
I fucking loved playing as a Great Old One Warlock in 5e. Eldritch Blast with Agonizing Blast (I assume that’s an option in BG3?) is so versatile. Maybe I’m just easily persuaded because now I’m leaning toward Warlock again lol.
How is it for role-playing? I think that was my favorite part with the character I had.
I just finished Hollow Knight this week (basic ending, didn’t go out of my way to find items I didn’t organically come across). Metroidvanias and 2d side-scrollers in general haven’t traditionally been my thing, but I was persuaded by Monty Zander’s video and…yeah, it’s as good as everyone says. The world is surprisingly immersive for its format and the gameplay is tight and rewarding. Abilities and enemy variety were always changing the way I played, and the different areas each had their own identities and obstacles. The sense of excitement on unlocking a new area and getting to explore it was on par with Elden Ring.
Unfortunately, I moved on to Kena Bridge of Spirits, which I think is a pretty good game so far, but it has some AA jank that I think stands out more after the fine tuning in Hollow Knight, and the combat is a lot more rote. Trying not to be too harsh though because not everything can be what Hollow Knight is, obviously.
I’ve tried the original Life Is Strange twice, and both times I >!failed to save Kate!< because I don’t have an infallible memory and quit out of anger.
Right? Ranger is probably at the bottom of my list just cause in 5e (as has been noted everywhere else), it seems to lack its own identity. If you’re familiar with those rules, do you feel like BG3 does anything to make the Ranger more worthwhile than the tabletop version?
Two roll buffs and healing word is tempting. Good to know you get a thief early, although there’s also the question of whether to do one of the origin characters or not…
Earlier in this video, Games as Literature does tie the “none of this would have happened if you’d just stopped” theme (i.e., the “hero” is the cause of the problems or at least a driving force for their exacerbation) as inherited from its direct inspirations: the Heart of Darkness novel and Apocalypse Now. So in the broader scope, the game is still addressing the original works’ anti-imperialist and anti-war themes while also adding the gaming industry meta-criticism.
But you make a good case that Yager added that extra layer clumsily by failing to direct its own additions with appropriate precision. Honestly, when I played this game a few years after its release, I interpreted it much the same way that you have here. But as I was watching this video I felt the pieces fit really well and just thought it was a really interesting perspective.
then maybe laying on so thick on how the player, and solely the player, is at fault for pushing it to the end, is if anything counterproductive to that.
This is the argument I’ve seen many other creators make that I’ve never bought into. No one’s going to stop playing a game they purchased just because the game is accusing you of being responsible for the actions of the characters within it.
The argument that this creator is making, I think, is an assumption that if you are playing this game, then it’s intrinsically because you’re entertained by war shooters. Now that only really applies through a certain time period. Eleven years on from it’s original release, the only people playing it for the past few years are likely doing so because of its reputation as a meta-critical narrative. But it was released into an environment saturated with similar games based on real locations and real conflict involving real people. And I don’t think the intent was to target the player exclusively or even specifically for criticism, but rather that environment as a whole. Why was the industry uncritically making games glorifying violence inspired by real events (and Games as Literature does point out that the catalyst for this genre–MW4–was more cynical about its violence than the later games it inspired), and why were we enjoying them? And the response doesn’t need to be, and really shouldn’t be, “I should feel bad about this.” The argument is that the response the developers seemed to be aiming for is something like “Am I being mindful about the way my enjoyment of this entertainment reflects or maybe even shapes my view of and interaction with the real world,” if that applies to you. In other words: Do you feel like a hero?
With this interpretation, I disagree that the developers believed the issue “is all in the players’ agency and mindset.” You’re not being scolded for playing through this war shooter, you’re being urged to reflect on why people play through these kinds of war shooters, especially when the violence (as is common for the genre) becomes increasingly militaristic and (arguably) carelessly nationalistic. I concede there’s an argument to be made it’s too heavy-handed with that message or too accusatory in the wrong direction, but that’s just a risk for this type of art and is ultimately a subjective response.
Prey is a masterpiece of world-building, level design, and gameplay. I can’t overstate how special that game is. Without spoiling anything, its opening “level” was one of the coolest, awe-striking experiences I’ve had in gaming.
I’ve completely lost interest in the Bethesda-style RPG in the 12 years since Skyrim’s release, but I am very hyped for Baldur’s Gate 3 (having not played or seen much of early access at all).
I’m just hoping it’s at least another quality leap in storytelling from Divinity Original Sin 2 as that game was from the first.