T w e n t y S i d e d
I realize the pandemic has been horrible, painful, and endlessly annoying, but I really like what it’s done for our premiere videogame trade show. Presentations are so much smoother now that publishers are focusing on the home audience rather than marketing to a crowd of hungover, overworked, jet-lagged journalists who are all fighting for a wi-fi signal in a deafening convention center.
It’s nice that presenters can get their requisite boilerplate “games are important” prattle out of the way without stopping for applause every ten seconds. The stream remains focused on the trailers I’m trying to watch and doesn’t keep cutting back to a convention hall of attendees that don’t matter to me. I think the presenters feel a little less pressure since they’re not looking out over a sea of faces, which means they’re a little more composed and a lot less wooden.
Old E3 was designed for a world before social media. A world where you needed to market to journalists, and then those journalists would write magazine articles, and then next month those articles would reach the intended audience. Now the intended audience can view your marketing directly, in real time.
I hope we keep doing things this way, even when/if we’ve given COVID the shove.
Watch Dogs Legion: Bloodline
The Ubisoft house style isn’t really my thing, so I don’t usually care about the Ubisoft show. But this year I had something to look forward to. You might remember that I made Watch Dogs Legion my GOTY in 2020. I was really into the game and I was eager to see what Ubisoft would do with the DLC.
You might remember that I have a troubled history with this series. I hated the first game. Specifically, I hated “protagonist” Aiden Pierce. Chris already said everything I have to say about him, but with more composure and less swearing. I hated his visual design, I hated his character concept, I hated the way he selfishly continued to create problems for his family with his dumb hacker bullshit, I hated who he was as a person, and I really hated that the designer expected me to think he was cool.
At the end of my 2020 write-up I ended my thoughts on Watch Dogs Legion with this:
What I’m getting at is that the good parts of this game are unique to this game, and the bad parts of this game are the things it has in common with other Ubisoft titles. It feels like there are a bunch of really smart, creative people working on this, and the Ubisoft leadership just needs to get out of their way. I had a lot of fun running around cyber-London, punching strawman fascist cops, hijacking vehicles, and hacking computers. But as amusing as that was, I could tell there was an even better, smarter, more interesting game the team could have made from this same framework.
Don’t go back into the rut, Ubisoft. Run with this idea of emergent operatives. It works. You just need to commit.
So what I’m looking for in DLC is something that stays away from the Aiden Pierce stuff where you’re a “cool” protagonist brooding your way through a world that refuses to acknowledge how awesome you are, and instead I’m looking for more Legion-style stuff where you’ve got an emergent team with emergent abilities and emergent mission scenarios in a battle against a cartoon fascist government.
So what’s the first DLC going to be? A fresh slate of random abilities for your recruits? New emergent missions? Maybe even emergent mission chains! More options for shaping and equipping your team? Maybe multi-person missions where I need to bring several members of my team on a job? Maybe something like the Mass Effect 2 suicide mission where I need to choose squad members carefully to keep the whole team alive? There are so many cool places we could go from the foundation Legion gave us!
Link (YouTube) |
Introducing Watch Dogs Legion: Bloodline, where you get to play as Aiden Pierce.
Where is my team? What about my recruits and their various abilities? What about toppling this rotten mountain of corruption and abuse of power in the government?
Who cares! Play as Mr. Iconic Ballcap as he comes to London to fuck things up for members of his extended family with another selfish heist gone wrong.
I wish I could somehow express my displeasure to Ubisoft more strongly than not buying it. Fuck Aiden Pierce, his ballcap, this entire DLC, and the Ubisoft leadership that mandated this gutless infantile bullshit.
Far Cry 6
I don’t care about the Far Cry games at all. I’ve already whined about them at length in the past so I won’t make you sit through that pissing and moaning again. If you’re curious, I think Soviet Womble does a good job of poking fun at the game and he covers most of my gripes in a much more playful tone than I’m capable of.
On the other hand, I’m an enormous fan of Giancarlo Esposito, and he’s playing the villain this time around.
Ever since 1988, Alan Rickman has been the actor I love to see playing villains I hate. He sadly passed in 2016, and now it seems Esposito has stolen his spot as my favorite villainously typecast actor. Esposito is a joy to watch. He’s one of those performers that seems to elevate the material by just showing up.
Rather than buying the game, I’ll probably just watch the cutscenes on YouTube. I love the villain, but you play as the “hero”, and the hero in these games is always an obnoxious dipshit. It’s like a Star Wars game where you get to fight the awesome and cool Darth Vader, but you have to do so while playing as Jar-Jar Binks.
Bleh.
That’s it for Ubisoft. Next time we’ll see what Microsoft brought to Show & Tell this year.
Ludonarrative Dissonance
What is this silly word, why did some people get so irritated by it, and why did it fall out of use?
PC Hardware is Toast
This is why shopping for graphics cards is so stupid and miserable.
PC Gaming Golden Age
It's not a legend. It was real. There was a time before DLC. Before DRM. Before crappy ports. It was glorious.
The Witch Watch
My first REAL published book, about a guy who comes back from the dead due to a misunderstanding.
Silent Hill Turbo HD II
I was trying to make fun of how Silent Hill had lost its way but I ended up making fun of fighting games. Whatever.
I’m from the future, they’re the only publisher so far that has brought on a somewhat worthwhile show and tell.
So Nintendo didn’t disclose anything on Breath of the Wild 2 or Splatoon 3?
Nintendo Direct hasn’t started yet, that’s in a few hours.
I’m from the future of your future. It was OK. BoTW2 looked alright? The new Metroid wasn’t that exciting IMO.
I have never seen anyone say they liked Aiden Pierce’s character. Why would Ubisoft think we wanted him back?
Check out the comment section of that trailer, it’s full of fans gushing about how cool the dude is.
*Checks out comment section*
Holy shit, you’re not kidding!
There’s a mass audience of game players that attach themselves to the most peculiar protagonists in the most strange ways. Once upon a time, when Halo 4 was first releasing, I was incredibly skeptical of the game since it had left Bungie’s hands and was now being passed to a studio built specifically to pump out nothing but Halo as mandated by corporate suits at Microsoft. I also was frustrated that Master Chief did not die at the end of Halo 3, as it feels like Bungie had planned for him to. Instead, you kept on playing the Chief in Halo 4.
What confused me was how many people I saw online rejoicing that they got to play as the Chief again. Now, I loved Halo as a franchise and played every game in the series up to that point. I even loved how the setting and narrative were told in the first two games (let’s not discuss the others). But the Master Chief was not himself a character, really, and he wasn’t really special compared to the Rookie in ODST or the Other Spartan in Reach. The only playable character with any personality was the Arbiter, and everyone hated him because they hated his levels. But no, we’re back in Chief’s shoes, and that’s wonderful.
People are weird, man.
So, video games are cool and should be popular, eh?
*A finger on the monkey’s paw curled*
This is how I felt about both the Dishonored series and the Deus-Ex prequels.
I love the world and gameplay of Dishonored, but Corvo is a total non-entity of a character, and his mask is a very “14-year old edgelord” piece of visual design that serves almost no mechanical purpose*, and zero plot/character purpose**, and is IIRC only ever seen by the player once or twice. That mask is like the prop equivalent of an out-of-place line obviously written for a trailer.
It felt really weird that he was even a playable option in D2. Super weird reading developer interviews where they said they did that because they loved his character and wanted to bring him back even though he had no place as a protagonist in the story. Like, what was there to love? He’s just a costume (that you never see), and a powerset (that could have been passed to Emily).
But apparently there’s a lot of actual Corvo fanboys out there? IDFK why.
*The zoom lenses mount to it, but that’s literally it. Goggles would do fine. Emily just carries a spyglass in her pocket for the same mechanic, yet still has lens dirt all over her vision at all times, indicating the devs must have been thinking of Corvo the whole time.
**EVERYONE knows it’s Corvo. Guards who spot you call you out explicitly. In-world newspapers and wanted posters attribute your acts to Corvo. The ONLY time the mask means anything is a tiny implication of “Masque of The Read Death” style chicanery at Lady Boyle’s party.
I enjoyed the Deus-Ex prequels. I don’t love them, but they were a lot of fun, and I enjoyed the sense of detail packed into them. But Adam Jensen himself is a straight-up SNL parody character. His transparently affected gruff voice acting, his 90’s cartoon mascot too-cool-for-school attitude, his glasscutter goatee and black trenchcoat, it all adds up to a character that reads very strongly as a teenager’s awkward fantasy self-insert OC (dont steel). I find him hilarious and impossible to take seriously, but apparently there’s lots of people out there who find him unironically cool?
I feel like a lot of it has to do with projecting oneself onto the character, especially in games which offer choice. In Dishonored, the mask goes on in first-person and now that’s [i]you[/i] behind the mask. At least, that’s my theory. I have trouble discerning a third-person character as “me” in any way versus first-person, and it’s often awkward when I’m playing a game in first-person and the protagonist has dialogue. See: the original Prey. I feel RE7 actually handled that element well since Ethan’s dialogue was 90% reactionary and in line with what most players would be thinking or feeling in that moment, but then RE8 gives him [i]more[/i] dialogue and has him make [i]infuriatingly[/i] stupid decisions and suddenly there’s less attachment. I didn’t necessarily “like” Ethan in RE7, but I certainly didn’t dislike him since there was nothing to remind me it wasn’t “me” in that moment. In RE8, almost every time Ethan opens his mouth I’m groaning or wincing and losing that connection.
If the vast majority of people playing games are like the vast majority of people watching television or film, then chances are they aren’t putting nearly as much thought into this stuff as I am. I’ve learned that good musical scores, good acting, and good production values are enough to get folks to like something, and if the subject matter is somehow relevant to that person’s interests or sense of identity then they’re willing to forgive flaws more often. At least, this is how I explain my sister’s love for the Underworld film franchise.
So if viewers are projecting themselves onto Aiden Pierce during most gameplay, but then not stopping to question certain decisions, or are perhaps just willing to roll with it because the scene’s direction, acting, and music suggest they’re supposed to be feeling a certain way, they just roll with it.
Naturally, this is not a 100% surefire thing. There are plenty of movies that fall flat on their faces or have so many issues that the number of people that can buy into it drop off more and more. But most people perceive entertainment more like a roller coaster ride of emotions to hop onto rather than something to contemplate or to make sense.
That’s my feeling, anyway, and it’s something I always try to keep in mind. It’s the only explanation that makes sense, at least.
I suspect for at least some people it’s even simpler than that: familiarity + positive association. I had fun playing this game for 60 hours, the player character didn’t actively put me off, therefore the PC is good and why change it?
Mario was basically just a pile of pixels for his entire first two console generations yet Nintendo has (correctly!) decided that sticking him in everything he can will be a draw for their fanbase solely because he’s that beloved.
I feel like the N64 and Charles Martinet’s voice of the character has only pushed that love forward, actually. At least, from my perspective growing up, I never really loved Mario the character so much as enjoyed his games. When I would sit down and draw characters from Nintendo Power or the various Strategy Guides that Nintendo Power would send out, I’d more often than not draw the Koopa Kids or Bowser over Mario himself.
While Super Mario RPG did some degree of characterization through everyone’s reaction to him, I think it was hearing his voice in Mario 64 that began to gave him some degree of personality. From there, Nintendo has done a good job of keeping him charming and wholesome, which is far different from a gritty mature hacker man in a trench coat that does some morally questionable things (I don’t recall the details, never bothered with the game).
Then again, there was that Mariomania marketing push in the early 90’s, so who knows? I think Nintendo just capitalized on making him a mascot after seeing how well the original Mario Bros. game sold systems.
Tell me about it. One of the biggest whines on the Dragon Age forums was that you didn’t keep on playing The Warden for every game. Personally, I can’t understand this attitude. The fact that they kept Shepard for all of Mass Effect was a major contributing reason for why I simply couldn’t make it through the intro to ME2. But it was definitely present all the way back to KotOR 2 when people were incensed that you didn’t keep playing Revan.
In most games the protagonist is usually the most boring character . . . when they’re not actively annoying. Plus it always annoys the crap out of me when you keep playing the same character but for some reason all of their acquired gear and stats vanish and they start out again as a Level 1 Fetus after you spent 40+ hours in the previous game turning them into a badass. Of course, the structure of the games makes this mandatory, but I’m also in favor of turning a necessity into a virtue by JUST DOING A NEW PROTAGONIST THANKS.
It makes me wonder if some people, once they’ve performed the mental task of identifying themselves with the protagonist of a game, can’t back out and re-identify with a new protagonist in the same “world”, so on subsequent visits to that world if they’re not playing their first protagonist they feel like “they” aren’t present in the world.
I think it’s more to do with marketing – getting people to buy something they’re familiar with is much, much easier than getting them to buy something they’re not familiar with. You see it in games, movies, smartphone brands, car brands, beer, soft drinks…..
For real. I expected most people to be at least indifferent towards the guy. Then again, I suppose that most people who don’t like him won’t even bother looking at the trailer.
Without saying anything I shouldn’t, the number of gamers who fervently want Aiden back is actually quite large. The size and enthusiasm of this crowd is definitely persuasive for Ubisoft as they look for ways to respond to Legion’s average reception.
I haven’t worked on Bloodline myself, so I can’t say much about it, but if you’re curious where I went after the game shipped, I’ve been part of the online content team since – most recently a part of the zombie mode that’s currently in alpha on PC.
All this talk about Legion that it makes me wonder why you haven’t touched Watch Dogs 2 yet as that’s considered the best game in the series, being the most polished and well executed Ubisoft sandbox formula game before they ruined it with grinding and microtransactions in the Assassin’s Creed games.
The really low-stakes plot that doesn’t take itself too seriously and vibrant visuals alsp takes out the dullness that plagues the series and puts the fun in the center, which is what really matters in these types of games.
It’s just superior to Legion in almost every way, which I think tried to fully ride on the new recruitment mechanic but Ubisoft couldn’t spin it into completely carrying the game in the same way the Nemesis System did for Shadow of Mordor/War so it just fell flat for most people.
Typolice:
Needs to be capital “L”.
Like I said yesterday – not very interested in any of these. Would have loved to hear your thoughts on Ubisoft’s new Avatar game, though. But then again, I don’t know if you’ve ever had any strong opinions on the movie. Maybe that’s why you forgot to mention the game…
Avatar? The Smurfs version of Dancing With Wolves? Was there any demand at all for a tie-in game?
Maybe it’s to encourage interest in one of the movie’s four planned sequels, the first of which is scheduled for release next year.
Why? I’m not really familiar with him outside of his turn in The Mandalorian and a few cutscene snippets from Far Cry 6, but that picture you posted seems to me to be about the sum total of his villain shtick. Just look faintly bored all the time. I thought he was the worst part of The Mandalorian.
His acting is pretty consistent in what I’ve seen him in, but I like him well enough. Not enough to get excited for him in FarCry 6, but I’m not disappointed, either.
I assume a lot of people also know him from
Breaking Bad as Gustavo Fring, where he was a long running nemesis. This was a much better developed character that you went through an emotional rollercoaster with – and didn’t always hate, although you did usually fear.As for Mandalorian, I’ve only seen 130% of the show, so it might get better, but my main beef with him in that is the writing, not the acting. The Manalorian didn’t need a big long-running baddie to be good – 7 of episodes of S1 proved that (although maybe it needed a big baddie to feel like an actual Star Wars show vs. just a western set on Star Wars set pieces). His character, Gideon, doesn’t feel necessary, and doesn’t feel especially smart. Plot armor and goofiness in the writing. I don’t think it’s the actor’s fault.
I’ll second that: Esposito plays a memorable (and very well writtten) character in Breaking Bad, and its spinoff / prequel Better Call Saul.
I’m prety sure he gets his roles on the back of that; typecast is exactly the right word. I’ve seen him play a non-villain all of once, ever…and that was kind of a bait-and-switch where, surprise, he WASN’T the bad guy!
I think you could say that about quite a lot of The Mandalorian…
(again, I’ve only seen 2 or 3 episodes of season 2)
Oh, absolutely. Delightfully so. It’s a huge part of the charm. It’s the “Firefly”-like aspect of the show for me. The dialogue isn’t Joss Whedon, sure, but otherwise the fairly ridiculous problems and plots and the fairly self-contained stories that also have connections to future / previous episodes is a huge part of what I love about the show. It’s a spider-web of a bunch of story lines about people just trying to make it while the government(s) go around fucking things up for the common people, and I really enjoy that aspect.
Gideon feels like The Operative in Serenity. A face to the evil government – a single enemy. Plot armor and questionable motives. Not really as much fun for me as a viewer.
I just love how much Mandalorian captures the emotional / entertainment impact of Firefly for me, and I was disappointed when Gideon showed up.
But again, maybe the rest of S2 will change my mind about that.
Not sure where my brain was, but “130% of the show” should have been 1.3 seasons of the show, or… 100% of S1, 30% of S2.
I just thought you really liked it…
…plus there’s guaranteed to be a load of ‘Making Of’ documentaries out there…
That’s actually an interesting format. It doesn’t fit the literal use of percentages, but I kinda guessed what you meant even before explaining it.
I think Mandalorian relied (accidentally or on purpose) too heavily on knowing Gus from Breaking Bad to make his Gideon character intimidating. Like, your mind thinks- oh yeah! The guy who plays Gus. This is an awesome villain! But Gus is an awesome villain. Gideon on his own is pretty mundane.
His real breakout role was in Breaking Bad, and I think that was in no small part because he played the Villain with Good Publicity there; by the time the audience knows who he is and what he’s about, his many quiet moments come off as “viper waiting to strike” so that he can be menacing without any overt aggression.
Interesting, because my take on him was very different. Part of what makes the show so great, though.
I had a lot respect for Fring. It was so nice to see a calm, rational approach to running a drug empire. A perfect counterpoint to the psychotic Salamancas and the irrational ticking time bomb that was Walther White.He was capable of violence, sure. Ruthless, sure. But always with purpose, always with a clear goal or target in mind, and just so much *smarter* that the competition.
Watching Walt destroy Fring’s business was painful, in a way – like watching a drunken monkey tear apart someone else’s priceless painting.
Killing people 100 times his worth out of spite and childishness.
Agreed! Walter is very clever, but he has such deep flaws that he is only capable of tearing down well-run empires, but he is entirely incapable of building a sustainable empire of his own. I love the show so much.
Must’ve been a horrible year if the ubisoft’s latest dull buggy piece of crap was your goty lol
I would never defend Far Cry’s story – it’s downright weird at best.
But for offering multiplayer co-op, they (at least 5 and New Dawn) really are quite good, so I’m looking forward to this – just for another co-op shooter to play with my wife. Here’s hoping this time they’ll make it 3 player capable, so my daughter can join in.
I think Far Cry’s 3 story was decent.
So did I – at least, the first half, with the first villain. The way the game just kept going after he was dead, though…
Nevertheless, while that game was fine, I’ve never been interested in the sequels. I’ve played Far Cry, thanks Ubisoft. Wake me up when you’ve got a new idea…
I barely remember anything after Vaas. It’s a big generic blur until the ending where you can make a really dumb decision at the ending and then see the fruits of your stupid choice immediately. Though the “Dumb choice” bad ending is still better then the good ending, which is dull as dishwater.
Wait… this the same FarCry 3 where you play as a selfish childman asshole dudebro? Where the entire metaplot is about mocking adults who play video games?
That FC3?
Nah, not that one. I mean, metaplot?
The Far Cry 3 I played wasn’t smart enough for one of those. Must be a different game.
Far cry 3 has up to 4 players co-op already. So you could try that. I played it with my brothers and it was quite enjoyable.
Thank you! Especially since it sounds like the story might be better. I’ll check that out.
This is late and there’s another post so it might pass unnoticed but this is *very* relevant to my interest. What form of co-op do those games offer? I have a friend with whom we’re always looking for games we can play through together (as in: play the actual story) and while Far Cry is somewhat outside of our field of interest themathically I keep saying that poking a stick in your eye is fun with friends so I think we might potentially be interested at some point. IIRC FC3 had some kind of separate co-op campaign but from little I’ve found about it didn’t feel like it was worth it.
Far Cry New Dawn and Far Cry 5 both behave the same. Once you get through the initial ~30 minutes of gameplay, they become drop-in/drop-out and there’s no difference between the single-player and multi-player experience (other than the extra person). The host’s quest progression defines what’s available.
Everything is two-player compatible, with the exception of a couple of escort missions where the vehicles are two-person vehicles – in which case one player and the NPC have to take the mission car, and the other player has to take the other car. Even the mission where you’re escorting in a two-seater plane/boat that’s the NPC’s pride and joy – there’s another one around the corner for the second player to grab.
Only downside of FC multiplayer is the two of you are rubber banded together on the map – if you get too far apart, it’ll yank you to the same area.
The second player isn’t usually acknowledged, and there’s some things only the main player can do, I think – like opening quest doors. But for the most part it’s really well done.
Other MP successes for us (me+wife, me+daughter, me+family):
Division 1 and Division 2 – excellent drop-in-drop-out co-op. Fun and incredibly detailed environments with lots of discoverable art / environmental story telling – only ruined by the constant fights in the street when you’re going from point A to B.
Destiny 2 – Used to be a hard recommend, but they went F2P and this went way downhill. Used to be a much more guided campaign experience and a lot of fun. Now it’s pretty confusing for a new player.
Borderlands 1, 2, 3 – very similar to FarCry. Tons of fun if you’re ok with mindless mayhem.
… Minecraft – for obvious reasons, it’s great for Mp if you like the gameplay.
Diablo 3 –
Torchlight 2 –
Don’t Starve Together –
Spelunky 2 –
Overcooked 2 –
I’d love other suggestions, but this is an old post, and the MP crowd seems underrepresented here.
I really want something more casual to play for ~30 minutes during the week – like Spelunky, but without the skill cliff.
Thanks for the info on Far Cry, I’ll have a closer look. Like I said we tend to play games that you can “play through” with a friend. Like the Saints Row series, Borderlands, Outwards, The Raft and so on.
Same. Playing together is the main point, but I really want the story to help pull me through to the end. Without the story, I get bored – even if the story is stupid.
Look, I’m not gonna lie: I’d play the shit out of that game.
Ubisoft had a very bright spot for me this time, which was the sequel to Mario vs Rabbids. I loved the first game (X-Com style, but obviously much more cartoonish) and its DLC, and I wasn’t expecting a sequel, but now I can’t wait. Assuming they keep the same style and don’t screw it up with microtransactions or anything like that it’ll just be another really fun ride. Helps that since the CD-i deal Nintendo won’t just give its main characters to anyone who asks, so if you see them in a game not developed by themselves it’s bound to be quality work.
I never cared for Aiden Pierce, but I didn’t hate him either. Frankly, I think every character in that first Watch Dogs game was a blubbering mass of idiocy, so singling him out feels like an exaggeration. Though I guess since you naturally spend more time with him than with everyone else you’re bound to get sick of him faster. He does dress like a stupid edgelord, I’ll give you that. It certainly didn’t help that the alternate uniforms didn’t actually let you make him look any different, as they were all just recolors.
Agreed about Mario vs Rabbids. Just a charming, perfect little thing. It was tactically crunchy and effortlessly accessible in a way I didn’t expect to be possible (in that I never had a sense of one having to give ground to the other). Mario and Rabbids are two flavours I didn’t expect to go together but Ubisoft (Ubisoft!) pulled it off.
One of those games I just don’t expect these days, old and jaded as I am. Something that felt bold, fresh, new. Willing to take a little risk (even if it was a fusion of two established IPs and XCOM’s proven design). The kind of game that gets you excited about games again.
“Yousa only masta of evil, Darf!”
Lol.
Play into that tongue-in-cheek fan theory about Jar-Jar secretly being a genius Sith Lord, and you’ve got the makings of a great comedy game. Make all Jar-Jar’s special abilities animate as if he messed up, like a dodge move that involves him falling over backwards and springing up instantly. Give it a nonsensical plot about Jar-Jar saving the universe in the background of more serious Jedi doing something else, occasionally checking in to get harangued by them for being useless.
But secretly he’s saving the day, he’s the key to all of it.
Could be fun!
I did have a pet theory until the end of Phantom Menace that Jar-Jar wasn’t a ridiculous clown, but basically an agent of the Gungans. His antics were a trick to make the Jedi and Naboo ignore him or assume he didn’t understand while he gathered information. It made a fair amount of sense at the time, since he just *happened* to run into the Jedi while scouting a military landing site, and then he just happened to be a convenient guide for the Jedi, took out a couple of battle droids by “accident”, and many other points.
Then that, well, didn’t turn out to be true.
Makes sense. Jar-Jar is a genius, after all.
“Yousa war da chosan one, Anni!”
Oddly enough, I’m curious about Rainbow Six Extraction, but I feel it’s another example of them abusing a name and infuriating the fans. Ghost Recon: Breakpoint is not a Ghost Recon game and contains nothing that fans of Ghost Recon enjoy. While Extraction is clearly built off of the tech running Siege, everything about it has nothing to do with Rainbow Six. Cripes, nothing about it has anything to do with Tom Clancy. It’s an example where they should have given it a new name altogether, though I suppose then people would just gripe about how it’s clearly using the Siege tech and isn’t worth $60. Wait, nevermind, people are already claiming it should be DLC to Siege.
If it hops on Game Pass I might give it a spin, but right now it is not worth the cash. It looks like it could be neat, but there’s no shortage of co-op games coming in the future, especially when Back 4 Blood [i]is[/i] on Game Pass.
Far Cry 6 is actually catching my eye, but the game director has already stated in separate interviews that the game is and that it isn’t political, and it just has me shaking my head at the blatant attempts to cater to what seems to be a split demographic but actually isn’t. They want to let the games press feel that, yes, this game is going to criticize all the things they dislike in the world, while assuring gamers that, no, this isn’t going to stand on a soap box and lecture you. Ubisoft keeps getting these attention-grabbing settings or scenarios (see: Watch Dogs Legion) but then ultimately have nothing to say about them one way or the other. It’s effectively shock rock in video game form.
I’m of the opinion that good art can be influenced by both politics and the creator’s feelings towards them, but ought to be focused on a good story first rather than moralizing and preaching to the audience. It’s one thing to get the audience to think, it’s another to tell them how to think. I don’t trust where Ubisoft stands on this, so while Far Cry 6 is the first time I’ve been interested in the franchise for years, I’m still cautious about it and will wait until I hear feedback from others I trust.
I’m glad to see Mario + Rabbids is getting a sequel, even if I found the original to not be quite what I’m looking for in a tactical game. Perhaps I’m too Final Fantasy Tactics and Fire Emblem rather than X-Com? Either way, seeing that Ubisoft is willing to use resources to make a game that’s unlike everything else in their portfolio is heartwarming.
In the end, I don’t think I walked away from Ubisoft with any “must play” titles, but that’s to be expected. I don’t even recall the last time I purchased a Ubisoft game…. actually, it might have been Mario + Rabbids. That’s just how out-of-my-wheelhouse they’ve become.
Oh! I forgot! They’re trying to make movies! Gosh, that Werewolves Within trailer was an embarrassment.
tl;dr – not so old woman yells at cloud (as in, the digital cloud, not the old timey water vapour thing that I heard some of those boomers like to yell at).
I am always angry at everyone involved when game studios or publishers perform their marketing for and through journalists.
“We had an interview with the developers of Upcoming Game, exclusively here at Gaming News Site where we only post a very rough summary!” Like, wtf man, just post the damn interview, I don’t want to read your half-assed three paragraph summary where half the information isn’t actually new to us, only new to you, and we learn three months later that you left out the most juicy bit because you thought it unimportant.
“New trailer, first actual gameplay shown for Upcoming Game!” Proceeds to reupload the trailer on the Youtube channel of their gaming news site. As do all the others. I have made it a habit to seek out the original video on the channel of the studio, publisher, or the game itself (as bigger games often have their own official Youtube channels). I know how this rodeo works, Youtube etc operate entirely base upon “engagement”, i.e. clicks, views, dis/likes. You deserve none of that “engagement” for the mere act of reposting the trailer and polluting all search results with your useless channel. Just embed the original video in your article or whatever.
“We spoke with Gaming News Site for our first look at our Upcoming Game.” That first look is then only in the fucking print edition. Or if it exists as a digital edition, then through some subscription service, or as a paywalled blog post (no matter how you spin this, these articles are rarely more than glorified blog post, except that many blogs are better informed and articulated). That article is effectively just advertisement. I know it, the game studio knows it, the gaming news site knows it. And I am not going to pay to read an ad.
“We were shown behind closed doors 30 minutes of exclusive gameplay footage of Upcoming Game, we will now describe what we saw.” Excuse me, WHAT? Show me the footage or GTFO.
If it makes you feel any better, I suspect generalist games sites (as opposed to specialist blogs like Shamus’s) are steadily becoming as much of an irrelevance as the magazines they succeeded in this new Aeon of Stream. PA would only need to change a few words and they could put out this comic again:
https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2003/04/30
(Somehow, in my country, a lot of those magazines are still going, nearly twenty years later… albeit in an increasingly dishevelled state.)
well, at least this is useful to go around the YT age limitation (you know, the one where YT asks you for an ID or to enter your credit cards details and no, I’m not giving this), because even if the trailer from the editor/developer is “age”-restricted, the reupload often isn’t.
E3 is the most frustrating time of year when it comes to gaming for me. Usually the couple sites I visit will have a few articles a day, and it’ll be easy to sift through all the Shoot Man 29 news to get to the stuff that interests me. During E3 every site will have a new article for every new baseball cap DLC for Watch Dogs, or in the best case scenario be inundated with UbiSandboxes and Shoot Man 30 and Rifle Boy 18 games, so I’ll spend ages scrolling trying to find anything I care about, give up, and only find out that my favorite game of all time got a sequel announced a week after it’s come out when I come across spoilers for it.
I exagerate a lot, but I think it E3 is a real reminder of that whole “gaming niches” thing from a few weeks ago. It’s the only time that everyone in the gaming community is paying attention to the same event, and you get the situation I described above: I’m sat there waiting for them to get to the indie game section, bored out of my mind by the half an hour of sports and racing games, the sports game guys clock out after the FIFA section, and everyone’s upset that too little time is going to the thing they care about and too much to the things they don’t. I think it goes to show how much potential and variety gaming has a medium, but it also highlights how little sense it makes to have an event that’s just “the gaming event”. The only show that really makes sense to me is the Nintendo one, because people tend to be Nintendo fans in the same way people are Disney fans – they sort of blanket care about the whole brand. I don’t think there exist people out there who care about every game Ubisoft puts out – they’ll zone in for WatchDogs and zone out for Far Cry, then zone back in for Assassin’s Creed, or whatever series they happen to like.
With the digital format, there’s actual events that are probably more fitting to your tastes if you’re looking for indies. Guerrilla Game Collective had two separate events that had a whole bunch of indie games of varying types and genres. I think most people continue to look at the big publishers out of habit.
That, and, I mean, just who is the Guerrilla Collective, anyway?
Tribeca Games Showcase had some neat looking indies as well, and the Future Games Showcase was all indies. The problem that I, personally, run into is that there are so many indie games, and so many of them are the same genres with the same art styles. Artistic indie narrative platformers with Tim Burton inspired art styles? Here’s a dozen. Twin-stick shooters with neon lights and dazzling lightning everywhere while sparks burst across the screen? I’m sure I’ve seen that game… or, two? Wait, are these all different games or the same? Ah, another side-scrolling or top-down Souls-like with retro pixel-art that’s somehow far more grotesque than any of From’s games. Seen a few of those, too.
There was always a sort of “mind numbing” element to E3 due to the immense sensory input of game trailers, but the sheer number of indie developers that exist, let alone are now able to be presented by different, smaller organizers, has only added to that brain-mushing onslaught of trailers and announcements. It’s kind of a shame, because the desire to help indies stand out has only made them blend together more.
“the hero in these games is always an obnoxious dipshit”
That’s definitely the case in Far Cry 3, but otherwise the player character is fairly understated in 2, 4 and 5 (possibly even silent in 5, I can’t remember).
The protag in 1 and 2 was decent. 3 is a complete and total shitshow of a character. I haven’t played 4+ yet but I’ve heard nothing untoward about the protags in those.
Jack Carver was a whiny jerk with a grating voice and a hideous shirt. There really wasn’t anything likeable about him.
FC2’s protagonist was a characterless mute, but I’d argue they’re still a jerk. Since the character you chose to play as wouldn’t appear in the world and was rendered silent and devoid of personality, it encouraged you to choose the character you liked the least. Ergo, he is a jerk.
4’s was completely generic. 5 had a silent protagonist that was devoid of any personality.
Holy crap. I have been following you for a very long time and I’ve rarely if ever commented. I have enjoyed a ton of your work and writing. But I’m shocked at the sheer vitriol and toxicity of this overall post. This isn’t even entertainment or news. It just comes off as “infantile bullshit” as you like to say. It’s so nasty, unpleasant and unnecessary I’m likely to unfollow you on RSS and never visit again.
The witty and informative Shamus that critiques things in clever ways is completely absent here. On display is a raging manchild with a keyboard spewing hatred. I don’t even particularly like Ubisoft so this isn’t a defense of them, just appalled at you.
You must be new here, this is not nearly the first time Shamus has expressed his strong dislike of something in words (Spoiler Warning: Mass Effect 3’s Kai Leng comes to mind), nor will it be the last.
If it bothers you that much, I’d suggest never coming back and to either stop using the internet or grow a thicker skin and don’t let other people getting angry about something offend you.
Not trying to sound confrontational, but I’m curious – which informative critiques are you referencing? Because what I like about Shamus’ writing style is the fact that all those witty, informative, and analytical deep dives are always interspersed with his own brand of frustrated rage.
And that’s what I love about Shamus – yes, he’s very rational and analytical, but he’s not cold and calculated. On the contrary – he’s very, very emotional. This makes his voice unique in the field of game commentary. When it comes to game reviews and analysis, usually, you either get robot-like information-based analysts, or ones who are nearly-incoherent balls of rage and excitement. Shamus is a very rare combination of cool-headed analysis that still feels passionate about the topic. And sometimes that passion comes in the form of frustration and rage.
Think back on some of Shamus’ more popular pieces – his analysis on Fallout 3’s story, various parts of his Mass Effect Retrospective, his video on Silver Sable, his reaction to the trailer for the upcoming Gotham Knights, his various misadventures with Windows and Microsoft… It’s completely normal for a person to feel frustrated when the hobby he loves goes in a direction he despises. As I’ve followed his coverage of the Watch Dogs series, I wasn’t in the least bit surprised about his frustration with this post. Just like all the other readers, it seems, since I haven’t read a single other comment that is surprised or taken aback by his reaction.
That being said, though, I think I understand where your reaction is coming from. Up until recently, to me Shamus always seemed like an ocean of serenity who occasionally drops an F-bomb or two in order to appeal to the masses, and not seem totally dead-pan. I thought the only reason his analysis felt so genuine was due to his writing ability, rather than him being genuinely frustrated. That was until I read his article “It’s Not Dark Souls, It’s Me” where he reveals a lot about the way he reacts when – in one form or another – things go in a direction he finds displeasing. Turns out – shocker! – he is actually human, and he gets angry whenever he experiences something very frustrating. Now, to people like you or me, some of the things he finds very frustrating may seem inconsequential to us (which is normal – the same is most likely true about things we find very frustrating).
So the way I see it, the difference here is that readers like myself choose to just go along for the ride. We get frustrated along with him, and commiserate with him (or laugh at his frustration; sometimes AT THE SAME TIME :D).
Choosing not to do so is also. Like all writing styles, Shamus’ style of writing isn’t for everybody. But claiming that this was never an aspect of his writing is simply not true. Yes, some things frustrate him more than others – which naturally translates to his writing – but it’s always been this way. And given the fact that this conference only showed a couple of short trailers which show very little of substance to critique just means that he doesn’t have a lot to talk about, and the focus in this particular post was his feelings towards something he finds deeply frustrating.
You consider that to be ‘sheer vitriol and toxicity’?
You don’t spend much time on the internet, do you? That’s pretty tame criticism.
What!? Alan Rickman’s dead? Worst news I’ve heard all year :(
Any games that have ‘names’ from mainstream work tend to be . . . well, the more that person is in the game the more the rest of the game suffers for it because these people are rarely doing this stuff for the love of art and are a massive strain on the budget.
And, honestly, rarely worth the effort.
See – Johnny Silverhand. Raul from New Vegas. Etc.
Huh? The cutscenes are, by far, the worst part of Far Cry 3/4/5. They’re a bunch of overindulgent, clunky, banal lectures given to the player by the villain, who is clearly the developer’s favorite toy and who needs to be rubbed in your face as hard as possible. Far Cry 4/5’s protagonists were mostly blank slates- especially 5’s- and didn’t bother you nearly as much as 3’s during the gameplay, which remains as a really solid open-world shooter.
I agree. I’m sure the story will be dross. But I’ll spool through it for the scenes where Esposito gets to do his thing. :)
I’ve seen enough videos of gameplay and cutscenes (and had a roommate play a significant amount of Far Cry 3, sans headphones, right next to my bed whilst I was vaguely trying to do something akin to relaxing, and I couldn’t help but take some minimal level of notice), and they strike me as precisely the kind of games I would never voluntarily play.
However.
Credit where credit is due: I also saw the Spoiler Warning new year special videos (hell, I saved local copies of ’em and still dip in), in one of which the gang “played” Far Cry 4 and found the Super Secret(tm) alternative ending, and one cannot help but admire the incredibly ballsy way the developers pulled that off. I especially adore the Spoiler Warning’s collective tongue-in-cheek hypothesis that the hidden ending is in fact the real one, and that both the canon ending and, in fact, the entirety of the playable game, is the troll ending. I’ve no idea how this thing came to be; I can only assume it was frustrated developers’ collective raging against the presumably otherwise stifling, formulaic nature of their project. Off-hand, I can’t think of any other mainstream game that ever tried something so daring, especially because the alternative ending contains absolutely ruinous spoilers for the “proper” game and, it seems, could theoretically be stumbled upon by any random player in the world booting up the game for the very first time on release day, if they were merely interrupted by some worldly concern or other in the right way at the right moment.
Going off at a complete tangent, since I’m now reminded of it and I doubt I’ll ever find a better occasion to make this remark: rewatching the old Spoiler Warnings recently, I was seriously weirded out and did a literal double-take at the “White Gold” running joke of The Last of Us, because it entirely accurately predicted the recent behaviour of my fellow countrymen during a major crisis. Many idiots in my part of the world did indeed irrationally hoard toilet paper in the initial months of the COVID-19 outbreak, ironically so much so that they created an instant and entirely avoidable shortage of a non-perishable good, and shops had to literally ration the stuff, which was just surreal; doubly so when one considers that every household in my area was also still getting centimetre-thick wads of “free” local advertising “newspapers” stuffed through their letterbox at least once a week, whether they wanted them or not; apparently as a nation we’ll cheerfully eat our fish and chips out of newsprint at the best of times because it’s traditional, but we’re too fussy to even consider wiping our backsides with it in the already-unlikely event that our ample supplies of real toilet paper somehow run out during the worst global plague since 1918.