Showing posts with label Games. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Games. Show all posts

8.3.24

Dusk

I don't have much experience with the canonical 1990s shooters this is based on – your Dooms and Quakes – but it feels like this takes what made those games special and perfects it. You move quickly, the guns are loud, and the level design is stellar. The creators were taking ideas from Half-Life and Deus Ex as well as more cartoony keycard-based shooters, and one of the joys of the game is uncovering secrets that give you little power-ups. Exploration and attention is rewarded, and can give you a leg-up in encounters.

Dusk never gets tiring – it's always bringing something new to the table. In Episode 2 you start to see levels reconfigure. By Episode 3 you can swich the direction of gravity. Only in the last two missions was I ready for it to be over – there's a big combat arena where you face every enemy in the game in waves, and then two quite challenging boss fights. I dialled the difficulty down to get through it, and still had fun blasting away. 

31.12.23

My year in lists 2023

The annual accounts of what I've read, watched and played in 2023, in rough order of preference. Links below go to Goodreads and Letterboxd, which I update meticulously and obsessively throughout the year.


Books

At the beginning of the year I joked that in 2023 I'll be reading Russian literature, science fiction and erotica. I've stuck to that in a roundabout way, managing to get Brothers Karamazov under my belt, sampling some more Samuel R. Delany, William Gibson and John Crowley, and getting through a heap of D.H. Lawrence (although my favourite naughty novel was actually James Salter's crisp A Sport and a Pastime). I got so bored of A Theory of Justice over the summer that I fell back in love with comics, starting with some hefty Vertigo rereads and discovering some great new creators, notably Zoe Thorogood, Maria Llovet and Andrew MacLean. My biggest discovery was actually an old creator: Sergio Toppi, who made comics from the early 70s until his death in 2012, and inspired all the dudes like Dave McKean and Bill Sienkiewicz who revolutionised anglophone comics art in the 80s and 90s.

Tim Bale - The Conservative Party After Brexit: Turmoil and Transformation [link]
Frank Kermode - Lawrence [link]
Peter Pomerantsev - Nothing is True and Everything is Possible: Adventures in Modern Russia [link]
John Rawls - A Theory of Justice [link]
Mark Fisher - Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative? [link]
Rachel Cusk - Coventry: Essays [link]

James Salter - A Sport and a Pastime [link]
Samuel R. Delany - Dhalgren [link]
Fyodor Dostoevsky - The Brothers Karamazov [link]
D.H. Lawrence - The Rainbow [link]
D.H. Lawrence - Women in Love [link]
D.H. Lawrence - Lady Chatterley's Lover [link]
D.H. Lawrence - Selected Poems [link]
D.H. Lawrence - Selected Short Stories [link]
John Crowley - Engine Summer [link]
Sally Rooney - Normal People [link]
Shusako Endo - Foreign Studies [link]
Anne Carson - Glass and God [link]
Kai Ashante Wilson - A Taste of Honey [link]
William Gibson - Burning Chrome [link]
Michael Perkins - Evil Companions [link]
William Shakespeare - The Two Gentlemen of Verona [link]
Christopher Marlowe - Doctor Faustus [link]
Tom Stoppard - Rosencrantz and Guidenstern Are Dead [link]

Zoe Thorogood - It's Lonely at the Centre of the Earth [link]
Alejandro Jodorowsky / Milo Manara - The Borgias [link]
Sergio Toppi - Collected Toppi vols. 1, 5 & 7 [link] [link] [link]
Mike Carey / various artists - Lucifer vols. 1-8 [link] [link] [link] [link] [link] [link]
Jamie Delano / various artists - Hellblazer [link] [link] [link] [link] [link]
Kieron Gillen / Stephanie Hans - Die [link] [link] [link] [link]
Andrew MacLean - Head Lopper vols. 1 & 3 [link]
Andrew MacLean - ApocalyptiGirl: An Aria for the End Times [link]
Maria Llovet - LOUD [link]
Maria Llovet - Eros/Psyche [link]
Maria Llovet - Heartbeat [link]
Dave McKean - Raptor: A Sokol Graphic Novel
Wendi Pini / Richard Pini - The Complete ElfQuest vol. 1 [link]
Go Nagai - Devilman: The Classic Collection vol. 1 [link]
Atsushi Kaneko - Bambi and her Pink Gun vol. 1 [link]
Masaki Segawa - Basilisk vols. 1 & 2 [link] [link]
Tatsuki Fujimoto - Chainsaw Man vols. 1 & 2 [link] [link]
Tite Kubo - Bleach vols. 1 & 2 [link] [link]
Benoît Peeters / François Schuiten - The Obscure Cities vols 1 & 2 [link] [link]
Warren Ellis / Jason Howard - Cemetary Beach [link]
Ram V / Filipe Andrade - The Many Deaths of Laila Star [link]
Tillie Walden - On A Sunbeam [link]
Christophe Arleston / Didier Tarquin - Magohamoth's Ivory [link]
Juan Díaz Canales / Juanjo Guarnido - Blacksad [link]
Rokurou Ogaki - Crazy Food Truck vols. 1 & 2
Eldo Yoshimizu - Ryuko vol. 1
Hiro Mashima - Fairy Tail vol. 1


Films

My daughter is now old enough to go to the cinema, which has meant the only new things I've seen this year have been kids films. They are overpolished and manipulative and for some reason I weep at them regardless. I watched After Hours at the Prince Charles and The Wicker Man at the Southbank and both were great. With Licorice Pizza I've concluded rather boringly that PT Anderson is probably my favourite director currently making movies.

Cal Brunker - PAW Patrol: The Mighty Movie [link]
Chris Buck, Fawn Veerasunthorn - Wish [link]

Paul Thomas Anderson - Licorice Pizza [link]
Shunya Itō - Female Prisoner #701: Scorpion [link]
Bong Joon-ho - Parasite [link]
Martin Scorsese - After Hours [link]
Robin Hardy - The Wicker Man [link]
Barry Jenkins - Moonlight [link]
François Truffaut - A Gorgeous Girl Like Me [link]
Jean Rollin - The Nude Vampire [link]
John Milius - Conan the Barbarian [link]
Alan J. Pakula - All The President's Men [link]
Alfred Hitchcock- Rear Window [link]
Tim Burton - Batman [link]


Games

This year I've mostly beeing playing Baldur's Gate 2 in fits and starts on the 20-minute train journey to and from work – I know the game so well and the fights are so short that it's actually quite snackable for a giant and ancient CRPG. I'm on Throne of Bhaal now which isn't very good but I've never played it before and want to see how the story ends. I probably won't play the Larian game for another 10 years, but think it's awesome that so many people are into it. At home I've been poking at Hollow Knight, which has its frustrations but is ultimately a rewarding and beautiful platformer.

Bioware / Beamdog - Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn [link]
Valve - Half-Life 2 [link]
Team Cherry - Hollow Knight
Sierra - Gabriel Knight: Sins of the Fathers

3.9.23

Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn

I've replayed this game probably more than any other. Part of that is familiarity – I grew up with Baldur's Gate and know its story and systems back to front, so there are absolutely no barriers to entry when picking it up again. That, however, is not the biggest draw. It's not really build variety either. While there are plenty of classes and kits to choose from for your main character, ultimately you will still end up with a party comprising some combination of fighers, mages, healers and ulitily. What makes the game special is the personalities that come alongside those mechanical considerations. This is where Bioware really mastered how to make the player care about RPG companions.

Baldur's Gate is in some ways like an extremely complicated version of Pokemon.  You pick your six little guys and go at it. There's a big cast to choose from and you won't be able to take them all. Your party needs to be well-rounded, able to tackle the various obstacles and encounters you have to face. There is fun to be had levelling up your toons and aquiring the gear that will make them into god-like beings that can take on other god-like beings.

But it's the personalities that matter. Character and mechanics interact in ways that present the player with interesting choices. Not everyone gets along – characters with a good alignment will have trouble tolerating characters who are evil, to the point where one may leave or start a fight with another. Keldorn is an experienced paladin who can wield the most powerful sword in the game, but will not abide being in a party with Viconia, an evil drow cleric with a valuable amount of magic resistance. You can't have both in the party for very long. Generally the good companions tend to be dual or multi-classed – they trade in raw power for versatility. The evil companions are more focused on realising the full potential of their specific class, and so tend to be more simple to use out of the box. Either way, there are at least two playthroughs of the game you can do with a completely different set of tools to address its challenges.

It helps that the characters you get are fun to hang out with. This is an old game – its innovations have become part of the modern CRPG landscape, but features like party conflicts, romances and player strongholds may feel embryonic to a modern player. The companions in the first Baldur's Gate are extremly lightly sketched – being little more than a portrait, a collection of barks and a paragraph of backstory. The game was designed to transpose the Dungeons & Dragons tabletop experience into a single-player computer game, and that's about as much information a tabletop group would need before they meet in a bar and go hunt for gold and experience in a dungeon.

After the release of Baldur's Gate, the developer discovered that players were actually quite attached to the companions they had created. forgoing ones that became available later because of the investment put into those that were available earlier. When making the sequel, they made sure that companions rewarded that investment and had more stuff to say and do throughout the game. Companions talk a lot more in Shadows of Amn, not just with you but between each other. One of the joys of replaying the game is seeing the interactions that crop up between party members, some of which can be quite unexpected. Two companions can start a relationship when in your party. Korgan, in many ways a deplorable bloodthirsty dwarf, nonetheless expresses admiration for the upstanding Keldorn and his skill in battle.

They are also very funny. In this playthrough I took the gnome Jan with me for the first time, who is a kind of jester figure – constantly telling meandering stories that inevitably circle back to his obsession with turnips. But there is more going on under the surface. A bit like the fool in a Shakespeare play, Jan is subtle when deploying his japes. His tall tales can be a way of puncturing the pretences of other characters while maintaining plausible deniability (just about) . If you have the knights Keldorn and Anomen in the party, Jan will be quite merciless in skewering each of them in turn – those exchanges are some of the funniest bits of writing I have seen in an RPG.

Jan's companion quest is quite short, but reveals a completely new facet to his character. When he discovers a former lover is in trouble, the jokes stop completely and he becomes a tragic romantic figure. There are nuances to many of the other characters you take with you. Jaheira has to deal with the death of her husband, but also the schemes and betrayals of her superiors in the organisation she works for. Her strong sense of direction is unmoored by her association with you, which is complicated further if you decide to become romantically involved. Eventually her stern demeanour breaks apart and she even starts enjoying a joke or two. Anomen is an arrogant wannabe knight who excels in giving exactly the wrong advice in every situation. Helping him pass his trial and resolve his daddy issues can make him into less of an idiot, and lead him to eventually apologise for his behaviour. Keldorn is a veteran of many struggles against evil, but you learn that in the course of performing his duties he has neglected his family. That leads to an agonising choice for the player – granting his request to retire and spend time with his loved ones, or retain his extremely valuable skills. I insisted he remained in my service, but had to live with the knowledge that I was effectively breaking up a family as a result.

Some of these characters were directly drawn from the developers' own D&D tabletop games – they were thought about and refined over time, which may have helped add unexpected dimensions to them. As players would have been familiar with the tropes of the genre, there was an attempt to subvert stereotypes. Korgan is an axe-wielding barbarian, sure, but he is also a poet with a talent for turning a phrase and engaging in ethical debates with his more upstanding fellow-travellers. Baldur's Gate sets the floor for what good writing and characterisation should be in CRPGs. Planescape: Torment, a game from the same era and made in the same engine, probably still sets the ceiling 20+ years on. The band between them is what we should expect from the genre.

Baldur's Gate has one advantage over Planescape in that its combat is a bit more sophisticated. The first Baldur's Gate game is a low-level D&D adventure – your party will be swinging and missing a lot, and you will be killed by wolves and bears while out in the wilderness if you're not careful. That in itself provides a certain amount of challenge and interest for the player (although I imagine some may also find it frustrating). Shadows of Amn carries on the story and banks the experience you would have gained in the first game – you now have a mid-level party with more spells and abilities at your disposal. The monsters you fight also have their immunities and quirks to contend with.

The Pokemon comparison kind of works here as well, in that what is a simple game of rock-paper-scissors matching a strong element against a weak one becomes a complicated game where your party has to counter the various abilities and buffs of your enemies. Mages are particularly tricky, throwing up protection spells that can make weapons useless and turn spells against you. The game rewards a thorough knowledge of the spell book (and there are a lot of spells in Baldur's Gate), as that is what will allow you to circumvent the problem magic users pose. Mage duels ultimately become a game of wits, where you rifle through your collection of spells to try and disrupt and defeat your opponent.

Combat in Baldur's Gate is often quite short. The game doesn't waste your time with mobs or enemies that have giant healthpools. The point of an encounter is not to provide some friction on the journey to fulfilling a quest, but to set up a challenge and ask you to work out how to resolve it. Some encounters feel impossible until you figure out a way around them. Beholders, a prestige enemy in D&D (and an excellent monster design), can be devastating, casting extremely disruptive spells at you very, very quickly. Mind Flayers, another famous D&D enemy, are even scarier, being very resistant to magic and able to kill you very fast if you engage them in melee. These are unfair fights if you fight them fairly. Finding ways to trivialise them is very satisfying. The game rewards an understanding of its systems, not just the determination to grind enough levels to make you strong enough to attempt its fiercest challenges.

Baldur's Gate is slightly less successful when it comes to using the environment as part of encounter design. Maps are basically flat, and the main variable is the shape they come in. There are some tricks you can pull. The ground floor of the De'Arnise Keep, an early-game dungeon, allows you to snipe the trolls in the great hall from balconies. Mind Flayers are usually found in dungeons with long corridors, allowing you to block them up with summons and keep your party safe from their brain-devouring abilities. Rogues are designed to excel at underhand tactics. Attacking from the shadows behind an enemy gives you a 'backstab' damage multiplier. They can also set traps, so you can bait enemies to follow you down to an ambush and then blow them up. Both manoevers are quite fiddly to execute, however. In practice, the simple formula of having tanks in the front and mages at the back is usually enough.

One of the cool things about Baldur's Gate is that everyone plays by the same rules. If you kill an enemy that is using a valuable item, you will be able to loot it afterwards. Mages have only so many spells – exhaust them all and they become defenceless. You can stumble across enemies willy nilly and trade barbs before the fight starts if you like, but you can also be smart and scout ahead unseen, and launch a pre-emptive strike. All these tactics become essential for veterans who know the game well and play at higher difficulties. Baldur's Gate systems are robust enough to still provide a challenge in successive playthroughs.

But as I wrote at the beginning, that isn't really why I come back to these games. My latest run was done on normal difficulty and I became obscenely powerful about half-way through. Building up my team to be absolute beasts was rewarding, but the real delight came from the fondness I built up for the companions I took with me. That's what will keep me coming back for more.

20.5.23

Half-Life 2

Who needs choice, anyway? One of the core values of great games is supposed to be providing the player with a range of tools and options to choose from in accomplishing a goal. And yet Half-Life 2 is quite prescriptive. You are on rails throughout – there is only one way through a level. And there is very overt signposting about what you need to do to overcome the obstacles in the way. Here's an infinite stash of rockets because you're going to be using rockets now. The crates have a bunch of grenades in them? It's grenade time.

The game is so expertly tuned to provide the player precisely what they need at precisely the right time that it always feels quite artificial. Immersion is elusive when the guiding hand of the developer is everpresent. The overarching narrative nods to this, in that Gordon Freedman is a pawn used by the G-Man to intervene in a mysterious inter-dimensional "Great Game", where you're supposed to tip the scales in the struggle between the rapacious alien Combine and the human resistance. Valve's Portal games make the metaphor more explicit – the player is literally in a designed maze where their lack of agency is very evident, and the goal is to realise the disturbing nature of this situation and escape. It's a more satisfying commentary on the constrained freedom games have to provide a player.

All that aside, it's very easy to get swept up in Half-Life 2's narrative. The original Half-Life was set in a claustrophobic underground base where the goal was survival and the lesson was not to trust the authorities to save your ass when disaster strikes. The soldiers aren't there to rescue you, but to kill you. Half-Life 2 transposes that sense of oppression onto an entire city. You are in a police-state ruled by Breen, a human puppet of an alien empire, and you quickly join forces with the clandestine resistance. Breen is a very satisfying villain. His propaganda broadcasts have a dark humour to them, but you discover that he has in part bought into the Combine's project, seduced by their offer of wonderous scientific discoveries. The fact that the resistance are the ones who have cracked the secret of local teleportation and the gravity gun shows up Breen's arrogance and his uselessness. He is a weasel, and an effective goad for the player to carry on fighting.

This is a very fun game. Half-Life 2 is a fairground ride where you do one exciting thing after another. Even if there is only one solution, executing it is still very satisfying. The choices you make are smaller and more immediate – which weapon do you prefer to use, will you run in or crouch around, how much do you want to mess around with the gravity gun and the environment around you. The challenges are well paced, with calmer exploration sections giving you a breather from the fights. The majority of the game is not particularly hard, although I did struggle a bit with the rocket fight against the striders towards the end. The finale is very confident – you breach the citadel and lose all your weapons bar the gravity gun, which becomes a one-click kill machine. The thrills and spills are put behind you as you traverse (and get carted around) an entirely new non-human environment. It's an inversion of Half-Life's difficult Xen section – and a great capstone to a great game.

30.12.22

My year in lists 2022

The end of the year is about making lists, so here's everything I've watched, read and played in 2022. The below is ordered roughly by preference, and the links go to my jottings on here, Goodreads and Letterboxd.

Films

I was living away from my wife and kids for a few months this year and filled out the evenings by watching films. A lot of films. The Truffaut deep dive didn't bring up many pearls, but the top half of the list below are definite favourites. Only one trip to the cinema to see something new this year, and I'm happy it was Everything Everywhere All At Once.

Daniels - Everything Everywhere All At Once [link]

Paolo Sorrentino - The Great Beauty [link]
Jane Campion - In The Cut [link]
Wong Kar-wai - 2046 [link]
Steven Soderbergh - Out of Sight [link]
Yoshihiro Nakamura - Fish Story [link]
Mike Nichols - Primary Colours
Clive Barker - Hellraiser [link]
Sion Sono - Love Exposure
Gregor Jordan - Buffalo Soldiers
Norifumi Suzuki - Sex and Fury
Rian Johnson - Knives Out [link]
Susan Seidelman - Desperately Seeking Susan [link]
Jon Watts - Spider-Man: No Way Home [link]
Spike Jonze - Being John Malkovich [link]
Alfred Hitchcock - North by Northwest
Jane Campion - Holy Smoke [link]
Lana Wachowski - The Matrix Resurrections [link]
François Truffaut - The Soft Skin [link]
François Truffaut - Anne and Muriel (Two English Girls) [link]
François Truffaut - Shoot the Piano Player [link]
François Truffaut - Jules and Jim [link]
Christopher McQuarrie - Mission: Impossible - Fallout
Francis Lawrence - Constantine
Mark Cousins - The Story of Film: A New Generation [link]
Lorene Scafaria - Hustlers [link]
Nagisa Oshima - Violence at Noon [link]
Shohei Imamura - Warm Water Under A Red Bridge [link]
Masayuki Miyano - Lala Pipo: A Lot of People [link]

Books

I've started cross-posting my Goodreads reviews on here and it really looks like I mostly write about books now. Harold Bloom never fails to encourage you to up your reading game. After devouring his Bright Book of Life I tried a bit of Virginia Woolf (not for me) and Leo Tolstoy (a bit better), and am planning on finally tackling a Dostoevsky next year. Three weeks in Japan meant some Japan-focused reading (Ian Buruma's short history, Kawabata, Mishima, Empire of the Sun). Took a conscious break from science fiction (Rachel Cusk, Donna Tartt, Alan Hollinghurst) but I think I'm going to go back to it with a vengence in 2023. This year I strayed out of my comfort zone, next year I'll marinade in it.

Stephen King - On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft [link]
Harold Bloom - The Bright Book of Life: Fifty-Two Novels to Read and Re-Read Before You Vanish [link]
Duncan Weldon - Two Hundred Years of Muddling Through: The Surprising Story of Britain’s Economy from Boom to Bust and Back Again [link]
Ian Buruma - Inventing Japan 1853-1964 [link]
Ernest Gellner - Nations And Nationalism [link]
Gene Wolfe - Castle of the Otter / Castle of Days [link]
Joshua Clover - The Matrix (BFI Film Classics) [link]
Jordan Ferguson - Donuts (33 1⁄3 series) [link]
Scott Plagenhoef - If You're Feeling Sinister (33 1⁄3 series) [link]
Anne Billson - Buffy the Vampire Slayer (BFI TV Classics) [link]
Liara Roux - Whore of New York: A Confession [link]

J.G. Ballard - Empire of the Sun [link]
John M. Ford - The Dragon Waiting: A Masque of History [link]
Leo Tolstoy - Anna Karenina [link]
Donna Tartt - The Secret History [link]
Alan Hollinghurst - The Line Of Beauty [link]
Florence Dugas - Sad Sister [link]
Rachel Cusk - Outline [link]
Gene Wolfe - Gene Wolfe's Book of Days [link]
Virginia Woolf - Mrs Dalloway [link]
Angela Carter - The Infernal Desire Machines of Dr Hoffman [link]
Yasunari Kawabata - The Sound of the Mountain [link]
Yukio Mishima - Thirst for Love [link]
Samuel R. Delany - Equinox (Tides of Lust) [link]

Adrian Tomine - The Loneliness of the Long-Distance Cartoonist [link]
Inio Asano - Downfall [link]
Warren Ellis / Chris Weston - Ministry of Space [link]
Peter Milligan / C.P. Smith - The Programme
James Tynion IV / Martin Simmonds et al. - The Department of Truth, Vol 1: The End of the World [link]
Junji Ito - No Longer Human [link]
Tom of Finland - The Complete Kake Comics
Doug Petrie / Ryan Sook - Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Ring of Fire [link]
Brian Wood / Rebekah Isaacs et al. - DV8: Gods and Monsters [link]
Peter Milligan / Esad Ribić - Sub-Mariner: The Depths [link]
Warren Ellis / Jacen Burrows - Bad World [link]

Games

I beat Disco Elysium and Dark Souls this year and honestly feel like I can retire from gaming. It's not going to get better than that, is it? Dragonfall was very good prestige TV, and given I don't watch TV there might be room to do a few more RPGs like it. Otherwise I've been enjoying narrative-light systems-heavy games on mobile, which are convenient snacks and a bit easier to digest. Probably will be some more of that in 2023.

ZA/UM - Disco Elysium: The Final Cut [link]
FromSoftware - Dark Souls Remastered [link]
Harebrained Schemes - Shadowrun: Dragonfall – Director's Cut [link]
Mega Crit Games - Slay the Spire
Subset Games - Into the Breach

7.8.22

Shadowrun: Dragonfall

After my Dark Souls oddysey I needed a change of pace. Dragonfall is a relatively short, text-heavy, cyberpunk, turn-based tactical RPG with indie origins – about as far removed from the tense, otherworldly duels of Lordran as you can get. And it was a good time.

The game does two things particularly well – mission design and companions. Most of the play is about you and your team of hackers-come-mercenaries doing jobs for various (usually nefarious) paying clients, and the variety never lets up. Heists, assassinations, rescue missions, investigations – you name it, your team will do it.

The game is at its most interesting where it throws several challenges at you that you have to manage at the same time. A great example of this is an escort mission where enemy 'riggers' (robot specialists) can turn the extremely powerful supersoldier robot you are trying to escape with against you. Putting this thing on the front line is a high risk, high reward strategy – he can do lots of damage, but is also more likely to be charmed and join the other side. Having that happen to me was a great "oh shit" moment. It's a massive swing in advantage, so I had to rapidly switch my priorities and take new risks in order to get the monster back on my side.

Another example is the way the hacking mini-game mirrors and is integrated with the combat in the real world. Your hacker companion Blitz's loyalty quest involves a tag team effort in cyberspace and meatspace, culminating in an epic confrontation where Blitz races to defeat the enemy hacker and turn four turrets to assist you while you face off against a horde of security personel. Pulling that off is supremely satisfying, and captures the feeling of a great heist story – where things work out just in time and against impossible odds.

The fact that you are doing these things with a team of complicated people whose loyalty has to be earned makes the game all the more involving. The player character is the newbie who is put in charge on a whim, and not everyone in the group is happy about that. Eiger, an army veteran with an inflexible attitude, is actively hostile to you at the start of the game, and you have to tread carefully to win her over given she doesn't respond well to flattery. Glory is stuffed full of cyberware to the point where her humanity has been erased. Recovering her sense of self requires patient excavation through regular conversations after missions. Getting to the stage where you can exchange jokes with Eiger, or see Glory smile, is both rewarding and meaningful, and speaks to the quality of the writing in the game.

Your connections with the team stretch across to the community they are based in. The leader you replaced was an indispensible part of what made the anarchist 'Flux-State' of Berlin actually function. By taking on those responsibilities, you inherit relationships with the merchants, charity workers, drug addicts and information-dealers of the Kreuzbasar (not to mention the ghouls who keep the sewers running). In my playthrough I took that responsibility very seriously, to the point where I allied with a dangerous AI who would keep the place safe against the encroachments of dragons and corporations (largely the same thing in the Shadowrun setting).

The game draws out the implications of having an anarchist society being propped up by community leaders with huge amounts of influence. There are bad actors in the Flux State – drug dealers, unscrupulous doctors, gun-runners. Your predecessor Monica kept people in line and the show on the road, but all of that gets put at risk when she's gone. The AI Apex absorbs Monica's consciousness and loyalties, and in my playthrough I gave it everything it wanted so that I could protect this community. But at the end, the contradiction of handing over that much power to an unaccountable force in order to protect an anarchist society is laid bare.

In the canonical ending of Dragonfall, the Flux State of Berlin is overrun by the corporations. There's nothing you could have done. You prevented the place being burned to the ground, but the dragons have their way with it, and it's implied that your team actually ends up working for a powerful dragon called Lofwyr. If you side with Apex, the AI is true to its word in that it effectively organises the resistance against the corporations, and the outcome is a truce rather than a rout. But Apex does not follow up on its promise to destroy the dragons. Instead it becomes another power-player in the world – striking deals with dragons and treating people as pawns.

The definitive edition adds an ending where you can join the bad guys and really take out the dragons for good. That option leads to a literal apocalypse – the magic embodied in dragons is loosened upon the world with horrific results. It's a clear metaphor for the danger of having a power-vacuum – an idea the game keeps returning to. There are worse things out there than dragons, and sometimes it's better to deal with the devil you know. Although it is a story set in an anarchist community, Dragonfall is deeply pessimistic about the prospect of such a community being sustainable over the long-term. Hierarchy and power will reassert themselves one way or another. The fall of dragons means chaos and destruction, not freedom.

19.7.22

Dark Souls

I'm lucky I got into games so late because I just get to play the greats one after the other. If Dark Souls isn't the greatest (and plenty of people think it is), then it really is up there. I've just beaten it and have also watched and listened to a bunch of people who really love the game talk about what makes it so special (The Bonfireside Chat podcast has been a great companion during my playthrough, and this recent YouTube essay on the trilogy by Noah Caldwell-Gervais is also very insightful). All of that discourse has clarified for me what makes the game work so well, but also why it doesn't quite find its place in my personal pantheon of RPGs.

A lot of that is down to my preferences when it comes to story and character, which I've found is usually more important to me than mechanics and gameplay. What is Dark Souls about, anyway? In a lot of ways it's about the experience of playing Dark Souls. The plot of the first two thirds of the game is explicitly about testing you on whether you are good enough to progress to the final third. The powers-that-be are on the lookout for a chosen one, and set up challenges to see if the player passes – escape from a prison, ring two bells on opposite ends of the world map guarded by (many) bosses, navigate a trap-filled castle and finally break into the capital city and defeat the last remaining champions of the gods. The world is searching for an individual with the discipline and determination to get through its toughest challenges. Achieving that makes you a powerful enough sacrifice to keep the world going. Ludonarrative consonance is a revered property in games, and Dark Souls takes it to the nth degree. It even hangs a lantern on its demanding nature. Giving up on the task is to "go hollow" – a metaphor for losing purpose and giving up on the game. Dark Souls is littered with these hollows, emphasising that most players won't get to the end. It also makes your achievement if you do feel that much more special. 

There is actually a choice at the end of the game. You can do as you are told and sacrifice yourself to keep the age of fire going, or you can keep your power and walk away ushering in the age of dark. The consequences of these two choices on the world are ambiguous, and future games will reveal that the two ages recur endlessly anyway, making the decision less significant. It’s more meaningful from a role-playing perspective. Is your character a chivalrous sort who will sacrifice themselves on behalf of others, even if the world they save is imperfect and its masters are liars? Or do you prefer to kill all the gods and have the remaining powers-that-be (and the game) explicitly acknowledge your greatness, even if that makes you a lord of nothing? Kindling the flame is selfless but foolish. Walking away is selfish and sinister. It's not a clear-cut good or bad decision, but it holds weight in terms of how you wish to view your character. Its broader meaninglessness may be another ludonarratively consonant comment on the game itself. Well done, but was it really worth the effort? The New Game Plus starts immediately after anyway – your story also recurs endlessly. All players eventually have to get of the treadmill. We all go hollow in the end.

The approach to storytelling in the game is inspired by the Japanese lead designer's teenage love of Anglophone pen-and-paper RPG game books and monster manuals. Reading in a different language meant he could only partially understand the descriptions. He was piecing together fragments, often relying on visual clues. Dark Souls replicates this experience. NPC dialogue is short, ambiguous and cannot be trusted. You can learn a bit more by reading item descriptions (your character has no history or memory but does have a psychic ability to glean knowledge from their possessions, i.e. their D&D lore ability is at 100). Any connections you make are always provisional, and most are tenuous. The pieces don't always fit. Moreover, when it comes to choosing between having more consistent lore and making the gameplay work, the developers usually go for the latter. For example, the fact that bosses and minibosses don't respawn, but hollows do, doesn't make a huge amount of sense. Surely more powerful creatures would be able to withstand death better than minions. But that would make the game too difficult and irritating to play, so very wisely the developers don't do it.

For me, the evocative suggestion of something is not as powerful as a deeper exploration of something. Dark Souls does a lot with minimal dialogue and item descriptions, but ultimately I find RPGs with a surfeit of dialogue and writing more narratively and emotionally engaging. Solaire and Siegmeyer are probably the most fully-developed characters you meet in the game. They are well-written and well-voiced, but you can sum them up in a sentence. Their stories are tragic, and much of that tragedy is effectively conveyed visually at the final point you meet them. That might be powerful enough for some players, but it wasn't for me. In Solaire's case there is a bit more digging you can do to connect him to other characters in the game, but making that link is intellectually rather than dramatically or psychologically satisfying.

Bosses and areas also have backstories that relate to each other. That's commendable, but it also doesn't add up to very much for me. The daughters of chaos may be the best (and saddest) example. These fire witches made a decision with good intentions that had horrible and profound unintended consequences. That’s mostly it. The epic nature of their mistake has a pathos to it, particularly as it’s communicated by a whole environment, but it’s still quite depersonalised. The situation is so far removed from your experience that it's difficult to engage with it. It's interesting background while you go around dealing with the demons they have unleashed.

The emotional satisfaction of the game is in the play of it. It's a wild rollercoaster compared to the subtle character moments you glean if you look hard enough. The sense of relief at finding a new bonfire, the checkpoint from which you can comfortably bank your winnings and start taking risks again, feels like a sigh made with your whole body. The adrenaline rush of whittling away a tough boss’s health while trying not to make mistakes, and the sense of achievement at getting it right, is just as physical. Your heart beats faster at the sight of these monsters you have to fight. The game does everything to heighten that experience – bosses are always bigger than you, sometimes ten times bigger, which adds to their intimidating nature. Famously, Dark Souls audio is mostly diegetic. Non-diegetic music is mostly saved for bosses and that contrast significantly ups the tension. The challenge-reward loop is the basic building block of a game – Dark Souls focuses on that and refines it.

You cannot play Dark Souls in a lazy way. Weak enemies will murder you if you don’t put the effort in. Eventually I levelled and min-maxed to the point where that wasn’t true, but for most of the game I couldn’t just let my guard down and underestimate an encounter, even one I had done many times before. If you let three hollows in the Burg gang up on you, you could be in some serious trouble. The game is less taxing on your reflexes than later entries. Enemies move slowly, and you do too. The trick is to read an encounter, learn the move set, execute a plan, and iterate when it doesn’t work, rather than constantly reacting quickly to new information. Getting impatient is usually a recipe for disaster, and players often talk about the wisdom of taking a break when you get stuck or hit a wall.

Dark Souls is notorious for being difficult. Actually, the game is more welcoming that the discourse (and perhaps the community) around it might make it appear. There is no difficulty slider or story mode in the options menu, but you can make the game more or less difficult by the decisions you make in the game. The most obvious way the game helps you out is giving you the opportunity to summon help for certain bosses. There are costs associated with it – it's tied to a resource that feels rarer than it is, and it also gives the boss extra health. Even so, in most cases it makes the boss easier to beat by dividing its aggro, giving you more opportunities to safely deal damage while it's distracted. 

Dark Souls is an action game where mastering your move-set and the move-set of enemies is important to your success. Reacting to an enemy's actions – attacking, blocking, healing and dodging at the right time – is part of the play. Brilliant players who have mastered this dance can rush in and duel enemies ‘fairly’, but there isn’t a mechanical reward for it. The only reward is the player’s own sense of achievement. The idea that the 'real' way to play the game is to dedicate the time to mastering your movements to the point where you can beautifully take down everything and avoid getting hit is a fiction. Most players won’t (and some players can’t) do that. The developers knew this and made sure there were a range of options available to tackle the challenges they set for the player.

Reactivity or reflex is in any case something that becomes more significant in the successors of Dark Souls than Dark Souls itself. The sense of direction is evident from the DLC, where bosses start to move faster. For the most part though, Dark Souls is quite generous with telegraphing an enemy's intentions. They move slowly, and their wind-ups are often quite easy to read. The job is to learn how they move, bait their attack, block or avoid it, and counter-attack while they are in their recovery animation and therefore vulnerable. You also move slowly and may have your own wind-ups and recovery animations, but generally the pace of combat is generous enough to accomodate players who lack twitchy reflexes, as I do. You have more time to decide what to do than you might think.

Some expert players challenge themselves by trying to get through the game without levelling at all – a "soul-level one run". That just goes to show that Dark Souls is still an RPG and levels do eventually count. The game is very explicit about this – the branches from the opening area can lead to places with tough enemies that you will struggle with when you start out. It's a signal that you should come back when you are stronger. It's a lesson that applies throughout the game – if you're in a tough spot, you might need a boost by grinding up a few levels and upgrades. Every level not only allows you to increase a stat, but slightly improves your defence. I survived Manus, the final boss of the game, mostly because I had over-levelled and upgraded to the point where I could soak the collossal amount of damage he was dealing out, and could button-mash my way to victory. It wasn't very elegant, but it worked.

One thing that is very elegant is the economy in the game. Souls are experience points but also currency – you use the same resources to improve your base stats and your gear. The latter might be even more important than the former. Upgrades are gated by finding one-of-a-kind embers, as well as a resource called titanite which you can buy from merchants or find as treasure or drops from enemies. These items are indications of where in the upgrade path you need to be in order to find a level manageable. This added bit of complexity might be confusing or annoying, but it also means that any weapon you find can be viable if you upgrade it. Move-set is more important than stats, and if you find something you like you can stick with it to the end of the game. The variety of weapons and builds that you can try out also means the game is very replayable.

The game gives several opportunities to grind up levels and upgrades. A famous exploit to do so in Darkroot Garden could have been patched out, but it wasn't and you could see that as a concession to players having a hard time. Although move-set is important, this is still an RPG, there is a power curve and you can work to stay ahead of it. Even if you don't want to grind your way out of problems, a big part of playing the game is working out the tools and strategies that can mitigate a difficult encounter. I’m a coward with bad reflexes, so mastering the move-set wasn't going to get me over the line. Cheese did instead. The simple trick of using a bow to pick off enemies one by one, and bait them into environments where I was more comfortable fighting them, is viable throughout. There aren't many ambushes in Dark Souls. Enemies don't patrol – you can look at them as much as you want before you decide how to attack. The bow meant I could break up what looked like impossible encounters into manageable bits. There's no penalty for this – whatever works. In my head cannon I was wily rather than brave. I used the environment against my enemies. My bag of tricks, including very powerful limited-use fire spells, meant I could beat bosses who are far more powerful than me.

Dark Souls is not always clear about where to go or what to do next. There are many secrets. Some very important resources and checkpoints are hidden away. This is mitigated by the online elements of the game, where players can leave each other messages pointing you in the right direction (or the wrong one). The game also has a more explicit multiplayer aspect, where you can duel other players or call on their help to defeat bosses. Unfortunately, the discovery of a dangerous exploit meant that the Dark Souls servers on PC were down during my playthrough (the developer is apparently working on a fix). That meant I avoided getting randomly murdered by more able players, but it also meant I didn't participate in the sense of community that this game could generate. That shared experience might be a part of why some players have such an affection for this game, although as someone not particularly interested in multiplayer generally I didn't see it as a great loss.

Although I had to lean on external guides and commentary to find my way around, it's undeniable that Dark Souls is a masterclass in level design. As Duckfeed's Gary and Kole like to say – knowledge reduces distance. Progress in Dark Souls is governed by bonfires, and the game withholds your ability to teleport between them until the final third. Instead it wants you to fight your way through to each new bonfire. Unfamiliar new areas feel huge and daunting – but you will eventually be able to run through them without a care in the world. It's most impressive trick is to use verticality to create shortcuts between seemily distant parts of the world map. The opening up of such shortcuts, allowing you to bypass entire areas with enemies you've struggled against for so much time, provides a huge sense of achievement and relief. And seeing how the world connects together provides its own sense of satisfaction.

So much of the significance of Dark Souls is wrapped up in the experience of playing it. It is about the emotional journey of finding safety after danger, overcoming an enemy or situation that seemed impossible, and the determination to keep going despite the hostile and desolate world you find yourself in. These ups and downs are what games are about, and for all its evocative but ambiguous lore, Dark Souls is a very gamey game. It's perfectly legitimate to ignore the story entirely and just enjoy the ride – the finely balanced combat and the expertly designed encounters and levels. Dark Souls is a very honed product – story and character stuck tightly to mechanics rather than spinning outwards to create new significances. My favourite RPGs (New Vegas, Torment, Bloodlines) are more diffuse, where NPCs and side-quests peel off more easily from the gameplay. They also tend to have a much higher word count, and that might be the underlying factor in my appreciation for them. For me, writing in games matters an inordinate amount, and Dark Souls cannot compete with these other overwritten western RPGs. It's a fantastic game, but not among my very favourites.

27.2.22

Disco Elysium

I want another 50 games like Disco Elysium. This takes the writing-first approach of Planescape: Torment and removes all the combat elements so that everything is about your character's interactions with the world, and the different bits of it you can unlock with your skills and choices. At times it feels like an adventure game, where you are collecting items and asking questions until you tick your tasks off the list. That may sound linear and boring, but thankfully the game's story, characters and universe are so rich that I was compelled to explore as much as possible, sinking a glorious 50+ hours following every lead I could find.

Even if the gameplay is limited, there is enough of it to be satisfying when your build allows you to pass a check. Die-rolls govern your every interaction, modified by your skills and prior actions. There's always a chance to succeed or fail – at the first big climax of the game, where your amnesiac detective examines a dead body, I managed to pass a 3% chance perception check which massively upends your assumptions about the cause of death, and I felt a huge surge of elation even though it was just a piece of (amost literally) blind luck.

There's a pleasing ludo-narrative consonance to developing your skills. You wake up not knowing anything and are tasked with investigating a murder. But as you tick off bits and bobs in pursuing the case, you gain experience points, which allow you to level up your skills and slowly learn, or re-learn, how to be a cop.

Even better, your skills can talk to you – giving you tips and dialogue options that can push you in the right direction. But not always – sometimes their advice works against your interests. This was the second revelatory moment in the game for me. In a conversation with a femme fatale character I passed a volition check which made me realise that all my other skills, particularly the one helping me detect lies, were being hoodwinked. My character was being seduced, almost mesmerised, by the figure he was talking to, to the point where my thoughts and impulses were betraying me.

If skills are a bit like companions, chipping in here and there with advice, the game adapts the standard RPG alignment system to give you options to explore and subscribe to different cop personalities (sorry cop, superstar cop, honour cop) and political philosophies. The latter are more well developed, and in the final cut version of the game include specific 'vision quests' revealing the implications of your political allegiances. In my playthrough I picked the boring moralist (or centrist) option, which I thought went furthest to minimise harm. But in this world, the moralintern are the ascendent power, and the game makes clear the damage caused by keeping things as they are.

The game's reflections on politics are commendably nuanced. The representative of the libertarian faction (a negotiator for a shipping conglomerate) is personable and helpful, but the organisation she works for is sinister and dangerous. The representative of the dockers union is unpleasant, slippery and corrupt, treating you as a means to advance his own ends. But ultimately those ends are more noble than they at first appear. Generally, the game is ambiguous about whether the sacrifices required for liberation are worth the price in blood, sweat and tears. A moralist abandons dreams of a better world for the crushing, unfair reality of today. But realising those dreams risks unleashing horrors that are far worse than the status quo.

The game's final comment on these alignment options might lie in the character of the killer – an old revolutionary that remains committed to a dead cause, with a psyche so poisoned and curdled by ideology that it starts unleashing random death on the neighbourhood. Committment to a grand project is suspect, the game appears to suggest. A better avenue for your energies is the limited good you can do in your interactions with people.

The one discordant note for me came towards the end, where the game inserts a kind of deus ex machina in the form of an alien creature imparting wisdom on our player character, whose bender is at root inspired by a break-up he never got over. The Insulidian Phasmid urges you to let her go: "Turn and go forward. Do it for the working class". The implication is that being hung up on a lost love is preventing you from reconnecting with the world and the downtrodden people in it (it's not for nothing that the only essential skill check to pass in the game is a Shivers one – it's the skill that plugs you into the rhythms of the city). But the following line puts a sour twist on that laudible sentiment: "She was middle class. It doesn't take a three-metre stick insect to tell you that". The tone is resentful, and implies that any inter-class relationship is inherently tainted and unworkable, which is a gross idea to latch onto one of the final climaxes of the game.

That's a small exception that proves the general rule, which is that Disco Elysium is written with great thoughtfullness and tenderness for its large cast of characters. It is also very funny, and has a knowing sense of its own inherent ridiculousness. But even in a playthrough committed to exploring its most farcical elements, the creators ultimately pull the player towards the great sadness haunting the setting – the threat of existential nothingness that warps every attempt at progress. The poetry of the game is inescapable, and is its most impressive and unique feature. It's a great novel disguised as a roleplaying game, a new milestone in interactive narrative. And I want a lot more of it.

4.11.21

Divinity: Original Sin 2

Although this game has a reputation for having a wacky Discworld-esque tone, the overarching plot goes to some dark and heavy places. The path to divinity is covered in blood – gaining and maintaining power necessarily involves war and murder on a grand scale. The game’s bad guys do terrible things, but it’s all in the cause of averting even more terrible things from happening. There are no good options really. To govern is to choose between horrors. 

The original sin of the title does not refer to the burden humanity lives with for disobeying god. The gods are the original sinners, destroying their own race to acquire power and worshippers. The creation of different creatures in their image is not an act of benevolence, but selfishness. Our souls are food. We are farmed animals with the illusion of freedom. The game sets you up to escape this false consciousness and follow in these footsteps to godhood. And it has you killing things every step of the way.

Combat really is integral to the game – there aren’t many peaceful options like in other RPGs. Thankfully combat is the USP of DOS2. Things like elevation, positioning, environmental effects and objects on the map significantly affect each encounter. Winning a fight isn’t just down to the items and abilities you use, but how these interact with elements in the arena. The range of options and tactical possibilities are extraordinary, and pretty daunting when you are starting out. But DOS2 rewards you for understanding its systems and figuring out its exploits.

Although the combat borrows ideas from immersive sims (barrels of various dangerous materials you can move around and blow up, for example), the game is not actually that immersive. Where the developers had to choose between realism and keeping the play as engaging and challenging as possible, they pick the latter. For most people, that's probably the correct choice, but it does make the artifice very apparent, and for me that has downsides. 

The best example is the way the game maintains its difficulty curve all the way through its runtime. Most RPGs get easier as the player amasses more experience and better items. The more side quests you do, the more overpowered you become. In DOS2 on normal difficulty, you have to go everywhere and fight pretty much everything in order to get enough experience and levels to keep up with your enemies, and if you’re not a completionist like I am you will fall behind. Thankfully the fighting is never dull and most of the storytelling is not embarrassing. But it's still a pretty relentless XP farming treadmill to have to keep on. In fairness to the developers, the explorer difficulty setting seems to be designed for players who prefer to have that more traditional RPG experience, where you can pick and choose what you do and still make it through the game.

A more prevalent point of dissonance is equipment, which is assigned a level and gradually loses its utility as you encounter stronger enemies. If you’re not constantly upgrading, again, you will fall behind. Although there is a slight justification for the low-level items at the beginning and the OP ones at the end (you start off in a prison and end up in the literal city of god) it doesn’t really hold together. There’s no reason why Orivand’s mace should be so much weaker than Lothar’s hammer. It just is because it’s in Act 1. In a more freeform RPG like Fallout 2 the journey from periphery to centre makes the shift from pistols to laser weapons feel more consonant.

Those older games also provide opportunities to sequence break and acquire awesome loot early. In Baldur’s Gate you can get the best long sword in the game outside the first dungeon. It’s a tough fight and you have to throw everything at it, but the treasure you get as the reward is very satisfying. In DOS2 every bit of loot you find has an expiration date, which devalues the satisfaction you get in acquiring it. I actually kept the level 2 Gloves of Teleportation on Fane all the way through to the final fight, but I really shouldn’t have. The game doesn't encourage a sentimental attitude to your stuff. To be fair, again the developers seem to have thought about this and added an optional mod allowing existing items to be upgraded for a price, which would significantly reduce the amount of inventory management required to keep your party battle-ready. 

Rivellon itself never feels like a coherent place in the way that the Sword Coast or the Fallout universe does, where the player is a small part of a big world with its own dynamics and developments. DOS2 trades in the more traditional linear hero's journey narrative for a tangle of storylines akin to something like Game of Thrones, where your party turns out to be at the centre of every web of intrigue. You don't exist in the world, the world exists for you.

It's a big game, with so many plot strands to pursue that it becomes a struggle to really care about any one of them. Characters like the Shadow Prince, who would be the overall villains in a different game, are met and dispatched very quickly and are used to tie together several arcs in quite an artificial way. With so much stuff happening, the individual story beats lose their impact, even though most are actually well-written. Sebille's romance is unexpectedly sweet. She ends up trusting you enough to teach you the magic that turns her into a slave – an apt metaphor for how love is about being comfortable with your vulnerabilities around another person. Lohse's quest to rid herself of the demon in her head has well-observed overtones of an abusive relationship. And Fane's resolve to document the world with a sense of wonder unavailable to its inhabitants is quite touching.


All of these moments are buried under an avalanche of game-spanning narratives involving a heap of not very distinctive factions, all of whom – elves, dwarves, lizards, magisters – are planning or committing atrocities of one kind or another. By the time you get to the ending slides, it's difficult to care about the fates of these people or places, whereas in a good Fallout game that would be one of the highlights. The politics of this world is just great power competition, which you can put a stop to in order to fight an extra-dimensional Satan figure. The choices are not very interesting, and neither are the results. The game doesn't really pass judgement on your actions. It's for you to reflect on the power you've gained, and whether the mayhem and murder along the way was worth it.

All of this nitpickery is an attempt to justify why I've not fallen head over heels for a CRPG that by general consensus is one of the best things to play right now. Because the play really is exceptional. A DOS2 fight is more stimulating than the complicated rock-paper-scissors nature of a Baldur's Gate 2 encounter – which at higher levels is just about buffing, debuffing and countering the enemy's immunities. Encounter design in DOS2 is better than anything else out there. The variety never lets up, and while there are duds (those respawning necrofire lizards in Act 4 are a pain), generally every battle is a new puzzle that's a joy to solve. And yet ultimately I still care more about the fate of the world in Fallout and my character's story in Baldur's Gate. Those games are intellectually and emotionally richer than DOS2, where the writing is serviceable and mostly serves to get you to the next brilliant bit of combat.