Coming Through The Door Blasting Volume 1: "Fluff" Gameplay, Battlefield 4, Dark Souls 2

Written By: Tyler

In "Coming Through The Door Blasting," I will be taking aim at various video game issues, whether it's in the form of rants or confessionals... maybe a mixture of both. Consider it a series of video game related brain droppings (pixelated poops?). A lot of the opinions that I express in the "Coming Through The Door Blasting" saga (ha) will be reactions to what I've been reading around the net or hearing in person, so obviously there is a lot of generalization going on.

There's no rhyme or reason to when I will release each volume of this because I write them when I have some stuff I need to rant about and/or when the blog is low on content.


I Don't Think Dark Souls 2 Is For Me

I'll begin this with a full disclosure: I haven't played this game enough to feel like I can write a full review of it, and I probably never will. It's like a light version of a review-in-progress that will never bloom to a completed product. I would love to write a review of it, but I am just having an incredibly hard time getting into it, and some of that is on me and not the game, but I can't look at Dark Souls 2 as a masterpiece either.

I'm playing the PC version right now, and I've read that it's buggy in comparison to the console version, but since it's my point of entry on DS2, it's all I can talk about. The mouse lag is terrible and in a game of inches like this one, it's incredibly frustrating that you can't attack like you plan and intend to. The game is hard enough as is, this extra difficulty doesn't help because it's cheap. They also clearly want you to use a controller because the commands on the screen come up as, "Press A." My controller is broken, plus I'm playing on PC, so I don't think it's unreasonable to expect developers to optimize their PC games for the PC.

But that isn't why I can't really get into the game, that's just a port issue (I'm assuming) that doesn't exist in the console versions. This is going to put me at risk at receiving proclamations from people that I am a "casual gamer," but I think I'm past the point where ridiculously hard games appeal to me. I grew up with hard games, and I don't know if it's just because I'm getting older and feel like I've done my time with hard games, or if I just don't have the patience that I had when I was a kid and could only afford one game at a time -- thus making me play that same game for hours on end, regardless of how difficult it is. Or it could be that nowadays there are so many games to play that it's hard not to be pulled in a million directions, making me dedicate less time to games than I may have in my younger years. Maybe it's a mixture of all those things, but I don't like struggling my way through a point only to die and have to do it again. And again. And again. There's a death penalty where your life decreases whenever you die, though admittedly you can get a ring pretty early that helps with that by only allowing it to go down to 75%. I still don't like the idea of the death penalty. The game is hard, and each battle is difficult, and this was just unnecessary. Keep in mind, this is the point where I will concede that this whole paragraph is more of a personal problem than a game problem, except for the death penalty which I will defend as being pointless and stupid.

I don't actually think the game is this amazing accomplishment in game design either. I think it's a completely solid Action RPG, with some occasional thrilling moments and aspects I admire like the multiplayer (which I've enjoyed since Demon's Souls). I admit that when you finally complete an area and get to a bonfire it's a rewarding experience. The combat is difficult but I don't see anything awe-inspiring about it. Block/dodge, then attack. Sometimes there are multiple enemies which increases how stressful it is. I'm not saying the combat is easy, I'm just saying it's not really that in-depth.

I read somewhere that Dark Souls 2 puts its best material halfway through the game. If this is true, that doesn't actually excuse it. A game is different than a movie. Slogging through half an hour in a movie to get to the best part is different than slogging through a game for 20 hours.

Please keep in mind before you read the rest of this paragraph that this is literally just me asking questions and pondering out loud. These aren't concrete statements, they are hypothetical musings. I wonder if the game would be getting the accolades that it has been if it wasn't for the difficulty. If games back in the NES days had the same technical advancements that games of today do, would Dark Souls 2 really stand out? Or is this a moot point not even worth mentioning because the point of Dark Souls 2 is that it exists today and promises crushing difficulty and it's impossible and just plain dumb to compare it to games of yesteryear?

I know that if On The Gamely were a popular blog I'd start getting a lot of hateful comments here saying how I'm whining or crying, but if I were to give Dark Souls 2 a rating right now, I'd give it somewhere between a 7 and an 8. This is taking into consideration the fact that I believe a rating should consist of how "objectively" good the game is and your own personal taste. It is entirely possible to acknowledge a game is really good while also accepting the fact that it's just not for you. I am like that with Dark Souls 2, but I still see some problems with it. I'm glad there are a lot of people enjoying it though and I hope the series continues and makes a shit-ton of money because the variety of games is nice.


So I Took A Step Into The Realm Of Battlefield For The First Time This Past Week

I never played a Battlefield before because there are already too many shooters and another military shooter wasn't that appealing to me, despite the fact I'm in awe of the destructible environments and think it could add tremendously to the experience. I actually almost bought Battlefield 4 when it first came out but my computer couldn't run it. I consider myself lucky considering the difficulties the game has had since release.

Regardless, since it's currently on sale for $25 I reckon if I'm going to get it, I better get it now. And getted it I did. I really dig it. I'm iffy on vehicles in most competitive shooters, but depending on the game you're involved in, they can help create some truly exciting and memorable encounters. On the flip-side, it can lead to getting completely dominated in the most frustrating way possible, but my experience with BF4 has been mostly positive.

I don't want every FPS to have destructible environments, but holy crap it adds a lot. One of the first games I played, I ran into a building, the wall got blown up, so I ran into the next room and that wall got blown up. This level of destruction wouldn't be at home in certain shooters, but it's welcomed in Battlefield.

I like the game looks, feels and sounds, too. It doesn't pass my favourite shooter (Killzone), but the battles are chaotic and intense, with explosions and death everywhere you turn. Battlefield and Call of Duty compete directly with each other, despite offering different spins on the military shooter, but Battlefield stomps all over CoD.


Not Every Game Has To Be 200 Hours

I'll try to make this one quick because the article is already longer than I intended, but I don't think every game has to be long, non-linear or open-world. I don't need a million side-quests and I don't need a lot of replay value. Replay value used to come from it just being a great game that you want to experience again, though I'm not saying that another type of replay value isn't a positive thing because it is. I'm completely okay with a "short" game -- within reason -- so long as it's a memorable game.

If Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 only had the campaign, that'd be a rip-off because even though I have turned my back on CoD, I still think the campaign was great though incredibly short. Two and a half hours is too short for a full-price game.

Ten hours really isn't too short. My favourite RPG of all-time, Parasite Eve, clocks in at rougly ten hours. Mind you, games were cheaper, but the economy was also different back then. I'd be completely fine with Parasite Eve being released today with the same length because the game was fantastic from beginning to end.

We, as gamers, demand more and more from a technical standpoint these days. Games are held up to different standards because the technology is so much more advanced and we pay for that. Unfortunately this means prices also increase due to various factors, so even though cheaper games would be welcomed, you just can't expect a AAA title to do that. At least we have indie games for an alternative.

That's not to say I'm going to bat for companies pumping out short games, and unleashing unfinished games and expecting us to buy DLC is definitely not on my agenda. Bravely Default had a pretty decent runtime, and I enjoyed the hell out of that (until the end, ugh), and games such as Watch Dogs will demand lots of hours from me. There are always going to be open-world/sandbox games and I welcome that, but there's also something to be said for a concise story. If a game can do all that at once, more power to it.

My problem with a lot of longer games is that the gameplay just gets boring at some point and I end up ignoring side-quests and just doing the story. Someone could argue that since these side-quests are just extra material that you don't have to do them, but in some games you could miss out on a bunch by not doing them. I can't put the amount of time that some people do into MMOs because there's a lot of "fluff" gameplay that is just trying to extend the playtime, like stupid level/world design that makes you walk farther than you should have to. Making long-ass hallways just to make the game longer isn't appealing. Doing a million repetitive side-quests is only fun for so long most of the time.

There are exceptions to this rule, and I can be hypocritical, like with my love for Diablo-style Action RPGs. It's not an exact science. I guess my main point is that developers shouldn't stretch out the game if it doesn't make sense to do so, because it actually has the adverse effect and detracts from the overall product.



The point of these articles is to encourage discussion, so please, comment in the comment box below or tweet me @ArtBathednCrime. Let's... get this party started?

Beyond: Two Souls Review... Man I Love That Movie!

Written By: Tyler Selig

Rating: 9/10

Verdict: Beyond: Two Souls isn’t a game for everybody. It’s very story-driven, and doesn’t always offer the most fascinating gameplay… but for those who want a unique experience and have an open mind, it’s worth every second.

 

Damn, what kind of mess did Ellie find herself in this time?

                Beyond: Two Souls is always going to be a memorable game, whether you love it or hate it. Like Heavy Rain and Indigo: Prophecy before it, Quantic Dream has created an experience that is very story-driven. You’ll notice I said experience and not game, because this is where the controversy is.

                What is a game? What should the focus of a game be? Should the number one priority always be making something that is fun to play? Or can we treat it like a movie, like a serious art form, where cutscenes and story run rampant? People are going to debate that for years to come, as video games have progressed from being simplistic, but amusing, experiences to more complex ones. The answer ultimately depends on personal issues. Nobody is really right or wrong in the argument.

                I’m welcome to all experiences, but if you asked me if I’d prefer a memorable story in a game that is boring, or a shitty story in a game with wicked gameplay, I’d generally go with the latter. Video games are my first love, and I will play them until I die. I am constantly referring to games as art. But on average, I’d much prefer a game that is thrilling to play, because at their core, that’s why I go to a game rather than a movie.

                But I approach all games as they are intended. I was just as excited to play Beyond: Two Souls as I am many other games, because I thought Heavy Rain had one of the better stories ever told in the medium.

               

                Let’s get down to the actual review here.

                The star of the game is Jodie Holmes, a troubled young lady (magnificently played by Ellen Page) who constantly has an entity named Aiden in her presence. The game takes place during fifteen years of her life, with chapters representing each of those times. Beyond: Two Souls runs a gauntlet of tones and even genres during these fifteen years so the last thing you can say about Jodie’s life is that it’s boring, as you play through her as a kid all the way up until she’s an adult. During this time she meets many different people of many different lifestyles that have an impact both positive and negative, and for the most part every chapter is wonderful at fleshing out her as a character.

                The game tells its tale in non-chronological order, and I’ve seen some reviewers say that the plot is hard to follow. I never once had a difficult time understanding what was going on. The chapters are appropriately put on a timeline so as long as you can remember what chapters are what, it’s extremely easy to follow just by that alone.

                The game does do a good job of justifying this storytelling method, however, but I won’t ruin anything. Just know that it does make sense, and it wasn’t merely David Cage flexing his narrative prowess or him attempting to confuse you.

                But what a story it is. For the most part it is extremely compelling, roping me into its world in such a way that very few games have. Whether its Jodie struggling with hauntings as a little girl, to being homeless, to assassinations of warlords, the focus and strength of the game is the story. I felt emotional many times throughout my play through, and the ending hit me like a sack of bricks. Some will criticize the constant tone shifts throughout, but I agree with David Cage’s reasoning behind it when he said that life is full of different tones, it isn’t just one flat note (that’s not an exact quote). This is important because the game isn’t so much about central conflict as it is creating a realistic person, even if what goes on with her is supernatural. Jodie Holmes is a fully realized human being just like Joel and Ellie were in The Last of Us. In fact, while the stories are different and Beyond: Two Souls is more spiritual and elaborate, I’d say the story in Beyond: Two Soul’s is every bit as good as The Last of Us, maybe even a little bit better. Even though David Cage seemingly threw in as many different ideas as he could, this is his most focused narrative yet.

                Beyond: Two Souls is touted as an interactive drama, and that’s mostly true. It’s clear it’s pushing video games as close to film as it can before it actually becomes a movie and gets played in cinemas instead of at home.

It has an epic score composed by Lorne Balfe and produced by Hans Zimmer, which would feel at home in any movie of this type. The songs are beautifully constructed, and are able to induce sadness, panic, and horror, among other emotions.

It is a beautiful looking game graphically, with realistic movement due to the amazing motion capturing that they did. They put their work in to make it look visually appealing and you know, like a movie.

That’s where the problem lies with some people. “It’s not fun to play,” they say. They condemn it for “being a movie.” I get this criticism, but I’ll come to the aid of the game somewhat in this regard. It’s true that the game is light on actual game play. There are many times that the game play just consists of quick-time events, or merely pressing up with no freedom to go or do elsewhere. The game is extremely linear though I feel that’s understandable as to not break the narrative flow. However, they did include a neat mechanic of Aiden, being able to float through walls and do other things to help Jodie out. The problem is, this is such a cool idea and it’s always very obvious what you have to do as the game doesn’t allow you to explore and solve any puzzles. It’s as simple as finding the dot, pressing the control sticks in the way that the game tells you to, and ta-da, you’ve progressed.

It’s definitely something to criticize or at the very least put out in the open for people to judge for themselves, but it doesn’t bother me nearly as much as others. I was so into the story that it allowed me to overlook that, and other flaws such as a sometimes irritating camera, which made it hard to walk into rooms on occasion. Or the fact that it’s almost impossible to die, which again, is a minor annoyance but I understand what they were trying to do. These are issues that may bother certain gamers, and it’s understandable, but you approach a game like this in a different way than you do a game like, say, Battlefield.

Honestly? Just wanted a reason to post a picture of Ellen Page.

When you break it down, Beyond: Two Souls is what I call “gameplay-lite.” I firmly believe that this is a step in the right direction for Quantic Dream making a game that manages to blend story and gameplay in a classic way. Nowhere is this more obvious than the aforementioned assassination of a warlord chapter. They throw you into a foreign territory, and your objective is to sneak in. This is classic stealth gameplay, but it doesn’t go as far as it can. While you can freely move, the path is linear, and the game holds your hand in regards to taking out the enemies. Oh, and forget about shooting enemies when you want, because that’s pretty much scripted as well and you don’t actually get to aim. So while you have a lot of moments where the gameplay again is simply pressing the right stick over, or rapidly tapping X, there are moments where it genuinely feels like they attempted to “make a game.”

Beyond: Two Souls is a flawed game, but it’s one of those flawed games that come along every so often where despite the problems I have with it, I am in love with it. With some games, it does something so well that the issues I do have with it seem so minor. In this case, the story is above so many games that it’s unreal. I can still rate this a 9 because when I was done playing it, I thought, “Wow.” It’s the type of game that will stay with me.

But in closing, I will say this: I sincerely hope that Quantic Dream decide to put some emphasis on fleshing out their gameplay mechanics for their next one. At the end of the day, I appreciate the shit out of what they accomplished here, but games are going to be games, and I want to play. Give me an amazing story, give me astounding gameplay. I don’t know why I kept thinking of The Last of Us while I played -- maybe because of the controversy with Ellen Page and Elli -- but that’s why The Last of Us deserves a 10/10 and this is a (solid) 9.