MetaRogue

When I first learnt about The Callisto Protocol and the fact that it was being helmed by the creators of the original Dead Space - one of the greatest survival horror games of all time AND one of my absolute favourite games of all time - I couldn't help but become very hyped about the upcoming new survival horror IP that promised to deliver something truly great. Never could I have anticipated that this game would go spectacularly down in flames as one of the absolute worst games of 2022. Despite all the fantastic trailers that showcased The Callisto Protocol's rock solid graphics and art design, the actual graphics and performance of the game is unapologetically atrocious. I barely got an hour into the game before the game crashed. That's not even mentioning the fact that the framerate dropped phenomenally during the first combat encounter. This is all in consideration of the fact that The Callisto Protocol is strictly a linear game and has only one job to do - to transition the player down a series of corridors and rooms that don't facilitate a great deal of exploration. As for gameplay, The Callisto Protocol is superbly underwhelming in every sense of the word. Combat is simply deplorable as it relies on melee weaponry and an overly simplified, yet ineffective dodge system that doesn't even work properly. Exploration is non-existent. The layout of most levels is dull and sequential. For example, my progress after two hours was gated by the placement of an infuriating lunge monster that leeched my health and as I was out of healing items, I simply couldn't progress any further. By the way, I was also playing on the easiest difficulty setting. Why anyone would play The Callisto Protocol through to completion is beyond me. The game is a colossal failure in every sense of the term. There's simply no enjoyment to be had, just endless amounts of disappointment at the prospect of what could've been. It really saddened me deeply that this game failed so badly. From it's abysmal narrative, it's atrocious technical performance, and lastly it's questionable linear design which stripped it of any great potential, The Callisto Protocol represents a blemish on a year that saw standout titles like God of War: Ragnarok and Elden Ring rise to prominence amidst a plethora of other games that defined 2022 as one the best years for videogames.

Whilst my patience quickly declined during its opening due to how demandingly twitchy its gameplay is, I can't deny that Ghostrunner is a well designed action-platform game. When I do eventually find the time (and the patience) to fully appreciate it, I'm sure I'll return to Ghostrunner at some point and experience everything it has to offer.

I feel very privileged to be the first to write a user review for the PS5 version of Severed Steel. In short, I had a blast with this game and I kind of felt sad when it was over. That being said, there were also moments of genuine frustration, but ultimately Severed Steel is one of the most frenetic, balls-to-the-wall rapid fire shooters that I've ever played. There were moments where I was literally jumping and lunging all over the place as I engaged slow motion bullet time to dodge bullets and projectiles whilst simultaneously dispatching bad guys in all manner of inventive ways. The destructibility mechanics of Severed Steel's levels are also impressive, allowing you to literally blast your way through walls and most obstacles. I must add that Steel's character design and inclusion of an arm cannon feels like an homage to Nintendo's Samus Aran of the Metroid series, though Severed Steels gameplay sets it decidedly apart. As a final note, I recommend playing this game on the lower difficulty range to get the most enjoyment out of it. And lastly, spoiler alert: There will be a sequel.

Signalis is a slow burn survival horror title that wears it's inspirations on its sleeves. Though I didn't spend much time with the game, I was deeply impressed by its clarity of vision and its art style. The overall influence of retro games and the early Resident Evil titles was very apparent during my limited playthrough and I truly regret not having the time or the patience to see it through to the end and appreciate it for all that it's worth.

I didn't get the chance to experience Alan Wake when it was first released in 2010. For a long time afterwards I frequently heard about how celebrated it was and how Remedy were brilliant game developers. I was very eager to experience a Remedy game for myself, but unfortunately Quantum Break was an Xbox exclusive that underperformed. Thankfully, Remedy released Control in 2019 and I wholeheartedly enjoyed that game (it was easily one of my top 10 games for that year). When Remedy released the second DLC expansion for Control in 2020 entitled AWE, I was excited to learn that AWE would connect Control with Alan Wake and I would finally have the chance to experience a smidgeon of the overall vibe of Remedy's masterpiece. AWE turned out to be a fantastic cross-over, albeit a little cryptic, but it ultimately delivered what it promised. When Remedy announced that it would be releasing a remastered version of Alan Wake this year I was pretty ecstatic to be able to finally play the actual game, and now I can finally share what I think of Remedy's opus.

Infamous: First Light is a great companion campaign to Second Son that brilliantly chronicles Fetch's backstory and allows players to witness the events that shaped her into the person that Delsin meets in Second Son. Ultimately, First Light lends a personal perspective on Fetch's story and her relationship with her brother, the loss of whom is the catalyst for her pain. All of this shines a proverbial light (pun intended) on Fetch and in many ways makes her a more relatable and emotionally compelling protagonist than Delsin who felt more wayward in his delinquent attitude. All in all, First Light's narrative was what I enjoyed the most despite it's brief duration and recycled map and checklist content - proof that sometimes all you need to do is to tell a decent, emotionally resonant story with relatable characters.

Darksiders 3 is an interesting mishmash of gameplay design choices that never quite coalesces into something great, but is fundamentally dragged down by a terribly mediocre story that is defined by awfully conceived characters and woefully written dialogue. It's a shame then, because the combat is relatively engaging despite some clunky design flaws.

Biomutant is easily one of the most intriguing games of 2021 and it's unique premise is pleasantly refreshing. The story of my experiences with the game, both before and after release, is perhaps just as interesting as Experiment 101's debut IP. Biomutant first came to my attention in June 2020 when it's developer, Experiment 101, released a 9 minute trailer showcasing their upcoming project. My initial impressions after watching this trailer were interesting to say the least. From what I saw I felt that Biomutant looked fun and was different in a good way, but at the same time I got the feeling that it wouldn't be regarded as a great game, nor would it receive any game of the year nominations, it's greatest strength - the weird, post-apocalyptic children's cartoon-esque design of it's world and characters - also proving to be it's greatest weakness, as the overall vibe was so intensely alternative. Then, almost a year later, Experiment 101 released a gameplay demo of what the finished game would look like, and for me, Biomutant couldn't come out soon enough. Then when the game was finally released, my eager anticipation was soured by the reviews I read. Now that I've spent 58 hours with Biomutant, it's now my turn to provide my opinion of the game. Biomutant is an open world, action RPG equally like and unlike anything before it. It begins with a fantastically rendered cinematic that establishes a tone that the essence of the actual game never quite seems to capture. Afterwards you create your own unique 'biomutant' (or if you're like me and can't be bothered then go with the default character because that looks cool enough) and start your journey. At a glance, Biomutant looks like a gene spliced amalgamation of The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Horizon Zero Dawn, God of War, Assassin's Creed, Far Cry, Immortals: Fenyx Rising, Control, Mass Effect, Fallout, Devil May Cry, Titanfall, Batman: Arkham and Banjo Kazooie. While this is an impressive roster of inspired elements, the unfortunate truth is that Biomutant is a lesser imitation of it's inspirations - think Breath of the Wild at the quality level of Days Gone. Despite the dramatic setup of it's trailers and aforementioned intro cinematic, Biomutant's 'main story' is less a story and more a series of main quests that help you reach the end of the game. The cutscenes are rigid and disjointed, poorly conveying any sense of narrative. The cast of characters lack personality, spouting pun laden dialogue that wouldn't feel out of place at a positivity seminar. Quest design, both main and side, reminded me a lot of Assassin's Creed Odyssey (in a bad way) due to the simple singular 'fetch' or 'do' objectives which rob the game of any distinct, memorable quest moments. Another similarity to Odyssey was the sense of content bloat with some (if not many) side quests being linked to location objectives. In one instance I even noted that one side quest - 'The Lotus Captain' - was repeated four times among four different quest givers and were all tied to one single objective. Beyond it's over-simplified objectives, the real problem with Biomutant's quest design is that the payoff at the end of every quest never matches the setup. Oftentimes, most (if not all) quests conclude in a dissatisfying, anti-climactic way - which made me feel like I'd wasted my time. Another issue is that when you receive a new side quest, 90 percent of the time your new objective can be anywhere between 1000 metres to 3500 metres away from where you are. This is often immensely frustrating because you have to travel vast distances just to do simple, underwhelming objectives. Combat is the main drawcard in Biomutant (besides exploration) and despite being somewhat janky, is still relatively enjoyable. Enough weapon types, combos, psi-powers, mutations and the much touted 'Super Wung-Fu' keep encounters fun. The flip side is that the enemy AI is dumb, melee feedback and sound registration is virtually non-existent, and melee inputs are slightly delayed. Around the 15 hour mark I obtained a powerful shock rifle which allowed me to stun-lock enemies indefinitely, making every combat encounter laughably easy. While exploring Biomutant's world may seem akin to Breath of the Wild, it's nowhere near as alive. Enemies defeated in the world never respawn and NPCs perform rigid animations or pace back and forth aimlessly, never interacting with the world. I observed some NPCs trying to chop wood, but instead they simply knocked the log off the chopping block, only to place it back in position and repeat the process over and over. Colour alignment puzzles are repeated ad nauseum, depriving any sense of variation or inventiveness. For all it's faults, Biomutant NEEDS and DESERVES a sequel to re-code it's genetic make-up. When it comes to quantity, Biomutant is great, but this deeply affects it's quality, making it a generic mutant.

Looking back, it's hard to believe that this 17 year old game is primarily responsible for being the inception point of Ubisoft's biggest open world FPS franchise. Nevertheless, Crytek's debut game helped establish the fledgling studio back in 2004, making valuable contributions to the FPS genre alongside other FPS greats like Half-Life 2 and Halo 2, and setting up the formula for Crytek's follow-up spiritual successor, Crysis. What made Far Cry stand out 'back-in-the-day' was it's non-linear missions and hybrid gameplay of stealth and action. While it could be frustrating to play because you didn't know exactly where you were getting shot at from in the jungle, Far Cry's maps were fun to explore. On the flipside, Far Cry could be very boring and frustrating to play at times because of how imperfect or imbalanced it was - a trait which Crytek's next game, Crysis, shared. But on the whole, Far Cry is a great 'Golden Era' FPS game that is frequently overlooked and often underappreciated. So now every time you play a modern Far Cry game, just remember to remind yourself that Ubisoft has A LOT to thank Crytek for.

Just Cause 4 was my introduction to Avalanche Studios open world explode-athon series and after finishing it I felt somewhat obligated to play Just Cause 3. What immediately surprised me was that Just Cause 3's graphics were better - which didn't make a whole lot of sense because sequels are meant to have better graphics than the games that came before them. On the gameplay front JC3 is the definition of a mixed bag: It's destruction physics are somewhat impressive and you're incentivised to blow a lot of stuff up, but that's about it when it comes to variety. JC3's world looks interesting, but is ultimately bland and not much fun to explore. Locations in the world also feel copy-and-pasted and are merely places where you blow up all the conveniently red labelled objects that require destroying so you can 'liberate' that area. Unfortunately JC3 leans too heavily on dotting its map with hundreds of locations that have similarly repetitive objectives, making its world feel hollow and generic. What really contributes to this hollow feeling is that NPC's are virtually mindless inhabitants who simply occupy places so that way you don't feel lonely when exploring or discovering new towns. The story is also laughably bad (though not as bad as JC4 which just felt downright aimless and trivial). Rico Rodriguez is just terrible - his only means of strategy is to simply 'blow stuff up' and 'shoot his way to victory' all the while defying the laws of physics and reality through sheer dumb luck and shoddy writing. The supporting cast of characters is also no better, proving to be even more questionable than the main protagonist. The mission objective design is also annoying and archaic, and more often than not I would have to rely on pure luck to complete a mission because of how poorly the missions were written and implemented. This made getting through the main campaign feel like a chore instead of a fun explosion filled extravaganza. Combat is the only thing worth caring about in JC3 and even that comes with some serious caveats. Shooting feels stiff and imprecise, and most weapons feel underpowered. Another frustration comes from the fact that reinforcements just keep spawning endlessly, meaning that defeat comes from simply being overwhelmed (which is always a cheap tactic in my view). I spent roughly 10 hours with Just Cause 3 before deciding to call it quits. Even though I had plenty of things left to do, I couldn't be bothered doing all of them as I would have simply been repeating the same things that I had done in those 10 hours and nothing more. The truth is that real fun occurs when there are a variety of interesting, compelling and entertaining activities available to partake in instead of simply dressing up duplicates of the same activity so the only level of distinction is merely based upon their appearance.

After all the hype and anticipation, Death Stranding turned out to be far less than I expected and it's disappointing to hear myself say that. (Full review pending)

Great sequels are the product of recognising what works, what doesn't, and where you need to innovate. While it might be the third main entry in the series, Far Cry 3 is Ubisoft's second outing with the Far Cry franchise and it is superior to it's predecessor in every conceivable way. Not only that, but Far Cry 3 also established gameplay paradigms that would influence many other open world games, leading to what would come to be known as the 'Far Cry Effect'. (Full review pending)

Doom Eternal is a perfect sequel that moves faster, hits harder, and feels better than it's predecessor. Don't get me wrong, Doom 2016 was an absolutely astounding reboot that reinvented and reinvigorated the Doom franchise by setting the new benchmark for fast paced FPS games, but Doom Eternal brilliantly builds upon those established elements with panache and flair. (Full review pending)

Back in 2014, my original opinion of Watch Dogs was influenced by the fact that the game released 6 months after Grand theft Auto V, a game that is STILL popular today. Watch Dogs was understandably inferior to such an industry defining title and predictably I regarded it as such. However, after 7 years and two sequels later, I've come to the conclusion that the first Watch Dogs is the strongest entry in the series because of it's story, it's side content, and the overall focus of it's gameplay systems. I'll be honest and say that I'm sorry that I ever doubted this game. (Full review pending)

Watch Dogs Legion gives off the sheen of innovation with it's 'play as anyone' gameplay mechanic, but it's more of an impressive conceptual gimmick instead of a meaningful avenue of player choice and expression. On the surface, Legion looks, sounds and feels like the best entry in the franchise, but the truth is that it's the weakest of the Watch Dog games and is surprisingly shallow in almost every aspect. (Full review pending)

Watch Dogs 2 is a sequel that is better is some respects and not so much in others. While the hacking has not only been improved, but expanded upon, it's narrative and main characters are the main detracting points from it being better than the original Watch Dogs.

Final Fantasy XV is the product of a literal decade of development and a significant number of changes made during its conception. Such a monumentally lengthy duration of hard work on a highly anticipated game brings a fairly hefty level of expectation that is often invariably difficult to meet. In most instances highly anticipated games, like FFXV, don't match the hype and fall short of the mark. This is unfortunately the truth with Final Fantasy XV, but at the same time it isn't a complete catastrophe ****. Final Fantasy XV also happens to be the first Final Fantasy game that I've ever played and that's a good thing because my expectations are practically non-existent and because the game is designed as much for veterans as it is for newcomers.

Battlefield Hardline is one of my favourite Battlefield games to date because it's a welcome change in direction. By altering the series' focus from 'soldiers at war' to 'cops and robbers' lends a fresh perspective on modern conflict. Another reason why I enjoyed Battlefield Hardline is because it liberally borrows stealth gameplay elements from the Far Cry games - a franchise which I admittedly admire. However, in hindsight Battlefield Hardline didn't fully meet my expectations, in particular it's story. From the outset (and the fact that Visceral were developing the game) I expected Hardline's narrative to be mature and sophisticated. Most importantly, I wanted the story to be 'different'. Unfortunately, Hardline's story is yet another typical run-of-the-mill cop story that features a predictable betrayal element to justify fighting on both sides of the law. Even despite the premises' lack of originality, I still think it could've been handled better. The only saving grace is that there is one side character who feels fresh and provides most of the humour through how witty he is (you know who I'm talking about). Another point of criticism is the game's reliance (or more accurately, over-reliance) on stealth. Now, I know I said I liked how Hardline liberally borrowed the stealth gameplay elements from the Far Cry games and I really dig that, but when I finished the game and recalled how much of the game's missions and scenarios focused on sneaking around and taking enemies down silently, I was genuinely surprised when I realised how much of the game's total length I had spent doing just that. Approximately 85% of Battlefield Hardline's campaign gameplay revolves around stealth. The real problem with Hardline's over-reliance on stealth is the simple fact that the stealth gameplay never really changes or ever truly evolve beyond the stealth gameplay formula established by the Far Cry franchise. This leads to A LOT of repetition and subsequent fatigue and boredom. Especially given the fact that I basically played the game for 8 hours straight. Battlefield Hardline isn't great, but at the same time it isn't awful. While I liked how it borrows from Ubisoft's FPS juggernaut, Hardline's cop premise hangs by a thread to the point where it feels like window dressing until laughably even that gets ditched in the final mission where the game literally goes full Far Cry 3. And when something fully becomes the thing that it's imitating and abandons it's identity, nothing more needs to be said.

The Order 1886 is a game that possesses a compelling narrative, a fantastically realised premise and top notch graphical details that still look brilliant today. Unfortunately when it comes to actual gameplay, The Order 1886 is a decidedly underwhelming experience, always hinting at every moment the full scale of it's unrealised potential. The result is a great looking game that feels more like playing a tech demo showcasing the PS4's graphical fidelity. It's a pity then because despite it's failings as a game, I would've really liked to have seen how the overall narrative would've moved forward in a potential sequel that could've also made amends in the gameplay department. (Full review pending)

For me, Strange Brigade's appeal lived and died within the span of a single afternoon. After nearly 3 hours of playing the game, I simply refused to waste any more time with it. It's rare for me to play a game for such a brief amount of time and not give it the benefit of the doubt or a second chance at least. The truth of the matter is that Strange Brigade's flaws far outweigh it's strengths. Strange Brigade's story is set during the 1930's and follows the eponymous 'Strange Brigade' as they attempt to stop an ancient evil. While the premise may seem adequate, the actual execution of the narrative is where everything falls apart. Without any prior introduction to who the characters were or what the Strange Brigade is and why it exists, the story wastes no time in getting underway, but at the expense of allowing the player to comprehend the basic aspects of the game's narratives in terms of character origins, relationships, and other meaningful elements that provide depth from a storytelling perspective. What compounds this problematic format is that the story bounces from one scenario to the next with no meaningful connections. Furthermore, none of the characters have any emotional depth - they're simply just caricatures with no personality whatsoever. At a glance you'd be mistaken for saying that Strange Brigade's combat is competent - this couldn't be further from the truth. Aiming your weapon of choice feels ok, but when fired they sound and feel less powerful than they should. When it comes to enemy variety, Strange Brigade meets the bare minimum. The way in which Strange Brigade implements it's difficulty curve is by simply increasing the number of enemies on your screen with each subsequent encounter, opting for quantity over quality. I quickly found this design tactic to be boring instead of challenging. I encountered more flaws in Strange Brigade that caused further frustration. One flaw in particular related to when I aimed my weapon at enemies, specifically when they got too close to me. Even though my target reticule was aimed squarely at the approaching enemy, my shots would miss them entirely - in laymen's terms I would shoot over their shoulders as they lumbered towards me. This annoyed me because there would be moments when I would think that I was aiming my weapon correctly only to waste ammo before taking damage. These moments felt cheap and frustrating because they could've prevented if this particular gameplay flaw had been corrected. Another problem I encountered with weapon aiming was during moments when I would aim at a rapidly approaching or close proximity enemy. For some reason every time I aimed at an enemy who was directly in front of me, my character would inexplicably take a step forward toward them, thus causing the previously mentioned problem of shooting over their shoulders or past them. This happened nearly every time to the point where I handed the controller to someone else to prove if this was an actual design flaw or if it was just me. It turned out that I was right because the other person had the same problem as well. Besides the design flaws, Strange Brigade struggles to maintain player's interest. While the moment to moment combat may be passable, there's nothing much to incentivise to taking on waves and waves of enemies. There's no XP gained from killing enemies and the puzzles in the game can sometimes be baffling with how their logic works. What's even worse is that there are some puzzles that require you to restart the entire level if you fail them (and this is quite easy to do). Another dumb design choice is that you can only carry one healing potion. This is frustrating if you're playing solo because the number of enemies doesn't change. So even if you save up that potion and spot another lying on the ground you won't be able to stockpile them up for later. On top of this, the game has yet another dumb design choice. When running low on health you can use your potion to heal yourself OR you can use it to revive yourself at the nearest sarcophagus. Forgive me for saying this, but this gameplay mechanic is simply stupid because of the aforementioned inability to stockpile potions, meaning that you can only revive yourself once unless you can obtain another potion. And just to be clear, don't even bother trying to backtrack to find that potion that you walked past in a previously explored room because Strange Brigade DOESN'T allow backtracking - once you've moved beyond a certain checkpoint, previously explored rooms become inaccessible. I know - fun, right? There are weapon mods that can alter your weapons behaviour, but buyer beware because these mods are permanently destroyed if you want to 'swap' mods, forcing you to grind previously completed levels if you want to reobtain a previously collected mod that you liked. In summation, Strange Brigade is a game that doesn't deserve to be as clever as it thinks it is.

Risk of Rain 2 is the first rogue-like game that I've played in a long time and I can honestly say that it is fun to play. From the get-go Risk of Rain 2 has a great overall vibe, it's art design is fantastically retro and colourfully vibrant, and it's gameplay design feels solid. After a few button presses, you're launched straight into the action and when you've come to terms with the game's mechanics and learning curve, you're on your way to having a blast as you fend off waves of increasingly difficult enemies. Speaking of enemies, the enemy variety in Risk of Rain 2 isn't only fantastic on a gameplay level, but is also absurdly creative in terms of visual and artistic design, ensuring that the things that you're shooting never look dull or copy-and-pasted. The only criticism I can direct towards Risk of Rain 2 stems mostly from it's nature as a rogue-like. These are games designed for short term gameplay where your progress is reset upon defeat and I simply don't see much point in 'wasting' my time on something where my progress isn't cumulative. Another issue I have is the method in which most of the other Survivors are unlocked. To achieve this you must do obscure things that require a guide and dozens of hours of trial-and-error run throughs. All in all I quite like Risk of Rain 2 and I heartily recommend that you give it a go and see how far you get.

Remnant: From the Ashes was a game that surprised me. Learning that Chronos: Before the Ashes served as an overhauled version of the prequel to Remnant, I had hoped that it would be as good. Sadly, Chronos is nowhere near the same quality as Remnant, coming across as a poor imitation of it's Zelda and Dark Souls inspirations. *Full review pending*

A sequel by name only, Far Cry 2 marked the beginning of Ubisoft's ownership of the franchise after it purchased the rights to Crytek's IP. From the outset there are no ties to the original game, it's sci-fi conspiracy-esque tone, setting or characters. Instead Ubisoft opted for a more grounded and realistic setting. This approach kind of leeches any form of imaginative or 'far' fetched storytelling that defined Crytek's original game. Ubisoft's learning curve with Far Cry 2 is very evident as many of the game's elements feel prototyped, metaphorically throwing things at the wall to see what sticks. Far Cry 2 is by no means a bad game, but the overall impression is that Ubisoft still had a lot of things to learn in their quest to uncover the core identity of what a 'Far Cry' game is.

For some reason I've never been overly swayed by the allure of playing a Capcom game. Monster Hunter World was interesting and impressive in it's early hours and I even somehow managed to accurately predict that it would be nominated for GOTY 2018, but despite these points of praise I found the game's core gameplay loop to be repetitive, boring, somehow pointless and somehow devoid of fun. My impressions of the Resident Evil 2 Remake were uncannily similar - despite all the praise and the quality of the production values, the RE2 Remake was another 'popular' Capcom game that just didn't appeal to me for the same reasons. I think the main problem with both of the aforementioned games is that they are made for a very specific type of gamer: Diehard Capcom fans who play games not for fun, but to prove something to others/themselves and convince themselves that whatever Capcom cranks out is 'fun' despite it's deliberately designed gameplay flaws. Thankfully, Dead Rising 4 isn't quite as bad as it's other Capcom counterparts and even manages to be somewhat fun, but at the same time it can't quite escape the tractor-beam pull of it's nature as a Capcom branded product. I've never played a Dead Rising game before, so I came to Dead Rising 4 with few expectations. The story starts off really strongly, with the voice-acting and writing being more than adequate and establishing the game's narrative tone from the get-go. In terms of character movement, HUD and overall control scheme, I couldn't help, but notice some similarities with Days Gone (obviously Sony Bend were inspired by certain elements of DR4). Overall the gameplay in DR4 is engaging and, dare I say it, actually fun to play - to the point where I actually saw the game through to the credits. However there are still issues that dampened the overall experience for me. Let me start off by saying that I really liked the character of Frank West. As the player character and lead protagonist, Frank has a great on-screen presence and personality, and his quips are frequently funny. Frank's charm and charisma stem from being wizened and jaded in equal measure by past experiences and his strength and determination in the face of adversity is made believable and relatable by how he is portrayed emotionally. However, this doesn't stop Capcom Vancouver from displaying Frank's zany and sociopathic side with how he deals with threats to his safety, regularly swearing or firing off humorous or witty one-liners. While I like Frank's personality, I found his choices and motivations within the narrative to contradict the morality of his character. The same can be said for most of the other characters in Dead Rising 4's main story. Because everyone has an agenda or an ulterior motive or some hitherto unknown past, the story becomes a meaningless mess because everyone's motivations undermine their capacity to focus on survival, and thus the ability for logical storytelling is cast aside in favour of edgy nonsense. Another problem with the supporting cast is that none of them are particularly memorable. Furthermore, the game lacks a primary antagonist and when it does attempt to provide one near the end it feels rushed, underdeveloped and obligatory, serving the usual fare of spouting twisted-logic monologues that confuse instead of providing clarity. As a final note about the story, the ending is insultingly disappointing and makes all the players' efforts meaningless. On the gameplay front, Dead Rising 4 is the 'funnest' Capcom game I've played so far. The combat is adequate with assigned light and heavy attacks, dodge roll and combo finisher. The real star of DR4's combat are the combo-weapons which are insanely overpowered. Within the first few hours I gained access to weapons that were weird, wacky, but unbelievably fun to use. It's this aspect of the game that is Dead Rising 4's biggest drawcard. There are also combo-vehicles that, much like their combo-weapon counterparts, are really fun to use. DR4 also features investigative elements that require you to use Frank's camera and a skill tree system that has over a hundred skills. There are random events, side missions and safehouses to unlock. All of this guarantees a total of 30-40 hours of gameplay. Where DR4 falls down is with it's enemy variety and this really hurts the combat (and the game) a lot. You will spend most of your time killing lots and lots and lots and lots and **** zombies. I'm not kidding. Killing zombies is basically the main backbone of Dead Rising 4. The big problem is that the basic zombies in DR4 are mindlessly easy to beat and there are literally thousands of them constantly spawning all the time. There are a few other types, but they're just as easy to defeat. At nearly 24 hours and 28000 zombies quelled, I'd had my fill of Dead Rising 4. While it could be called 'Dynasty Warriors with Zombies', DR4 is brainless fun and nothing more.

Borderlands 3 is an underwhelming conclusion to the Borderlands trilogy that absolutely squanders the narrative build-up and hype that was implied at the ends of both Borderlands 2 and Borderlands: The PreSequel. While it's shooting and RPG mechanics are adequate, it's story, dialogue, mission, and level design are inadequate to justify 7 years of waiting after Borderlands 2 (or 5 years if you were waiting after Borderlands: The PreSequel).

At the very start, Journey to the Savage Planet hints at an adventure that will feel consistently fresh and exciting with a new premise that glistens with potential. In reality, that excitement wears off roughly 1 to 2 hours into the game and the other 6 hours you spend with JTTSP feels somewhere between an exercise in futility and a gruelling test of your patience. JTTSP is slim in terms of narrative - you play as a faceless, space-suited protagonist whose job is to survey a new planet, catalogue the local wildlife, and make sure the place is suitable for human habitation. Things don't go as intended with the discovery of ancient alien ruins that hint at a pre-existing society and you get tasked personally by the company's CEO to uncover the truth. I'm not going to lie - JTTSP's story is absolutely barebones (with no meat). You simply follow the quest marker, hope that you have the right equipment to reach where you need to go, do a thing, then go to where the next quest marker is while listening to the AI spout occasionally humorous lines of dialogue. Occasionally the game will gate your progress with a boss fight that you'll need to beat to unlock a new Metroidvania-esque item that will allow you to access new areas. And it's at this point that I need to talk about combat. Combat in JTTSP is a mediocre exercise of frustration and patience. At the very start you will only have access to a basic melee slap (that is humorously, a backslap). Shortly afterwards, you get access to your first (and only) weapon: A laser gun. Using this thing is hilariously underwhelming because of how awkward it feels to aim, how long it takes to recharge and how weak and ineffective it is to use. Combat is by far JTTSP's weakest leg to stand on - and it leans on it far too heavily and far too often. At certain points within the game, you will need to complete mini-boss encounters and major boss encounters. JTTSP tries to implement challenge into these encounters by including the outdated 'hit-the-glowing-parts-to-defeat' mechanic. This turns combat into a frustrating dance of positioning yourself correctly and shooting the tiny glowing bits . What compounds this is how awkward it feels to aim your gun, but also the fact that you need to hit the glowing bit at exactly the right angle otherwise the damage dealt by your gun will be registered as negligible. On top of this, some enemies can do AOE attacks that are difficult to gauge in terms of location because of the limited first-person perspective. As an explorer, you can scan new wildlife and flora, but even this mechanic gets old quickly because of the fact that you'll different variants of previously discovered animals. Plus scanning new things doesn't reward you with resources or XP, but instead is simply just a checklist to complete. JTTSP also features puzzles, but these are of varying quality and after an hour or two you'll become very familiar with them. There's also some platforming in the game, but it's hindered by how demanding it can be at times alongside the restrictive first-person perspective. The available upgrades are another lacklustre feature of JTTSP, not just by what they provide, but by how they're gated. To upgrade any equipment, you simply need resources (Carbon, Aluminum etc.) which can be easily obtained, but to unlock new upgrades for purchase you need to level up your Explorer Rank. What's confusing about this aspect of the game, is that you need to complete various challenges that range from obtuse to ridiculous - like blowing up a certain number of creatures using a certain tool or technique. This is something that I find not just questionable, but simply stupid because it would make more sense that scanning new things would level up your Explorer Rank instead of doing nonsensical challenges that have absolutely nothing to do with exploration or discovery. Another core feature of JTTSP's appeal is it's approach to humour - from a marketing perspective that is. For me, I found JTTSP's humorous tone to be occasionally funny, but for the most part I found it to be either cringe inducing or just straight up sarcastic, sociopathic and mean. To me, the game's tone felt like a combination of The Outer Worlds and the movie, Evolution - a combination that in retrospect just simply doesn't work. I spent a total of just over 8 hours with JTTSP at roughly 60% completion, but by that point I had reached my limit. In reflection, I honestly felt like I had wasted my time playing the game and couldn't be bothered collecting 'all the things'. If there's one redeeming factor to JTTSP it's the soundtrack which is brilliantly composed and understated. JTTSP is a game that, just like magnesium, burns very bright very quickly, but then fades just as fast, leaving not even a glow once it's out. It has praise worthy ideas that are completely overshadowed by mediocre gameplay mechanics and an almost non-existent story.

Dragon Age: Inquisition is an excellent threequel that unites the disparate gameplay philosophies of it's two predecessors and FINALLY establishes the core identity of the Dragon Age franchise. Unfortunately, that being said, the game still has issues, many of which are glaringly obvious flaws that hinder the experience and prevent it from being truly great. While I can't deny that Dragon Age: Inquisition is a massive RPG with a generous wealth of content , I can say that it is an experience defined by design choices that feel awkward and counterintuitive. When it comes to story, dialogue and quest design, Inquisition is the definition of a mixed bag. You assume the role of the self-insert hero, The Inquisitor, who can save the world because of their unique ability to close Fade rifts and stop Demon-geddon. To truly do this, you must assemble the Inquisition - a fantasy taskforce of badasses whose job is to broker peace and unite nations while staving off the oncoming demonic invasion. While the overall premise and narrative setup may hint at the 'most epic chapter in the Dragon Age anthology', in reality Inquisition's story and dialogue feel laboured, plodding and dull. It takes a while to get things moving, but even during Inquisition's more 'exciting' moments, the execution of these moments feels underwhelming and uninteresting. As for companion characters and their personalities and dialogue, they too suffer from the same underwhelming quality of writing. Even the side-quests you take part in to attain these new companions feels uneventful and oftentimes uninspired. I know it's wrong of me to criticise the creative talent responsible for providing me with sources of entertainment, but these are the same people who produced the Mass Effect trilogy, and while that could be boring at times, it still had plenty of interesting characters and story moments. On the combat front, Inquisition wonderfully marries the meditative pace of Dragon Age: Origins with the frenetic action of Dragon Age II, but with less than perfect results. For me, I found Inquisition's combat to be plodding and frustrating when compared with other 'smaller' more action oriented games that had better, more satisfying combat. To perform basic attacks, you simply hold down the attack button. While I have no issue with this per se, I do have an issue with enemies not reacting to getting hit by attacks. This results in battles looking like clumsy, awkward encounters with everyone swinging their weapons around with scripted animations. On top of this, there are no options to block, parry, dodge or sprint which further compounds my frustration and dislike with Inquisition's combat. With it's collection of sizably large open world-like maps, exploration in Inquisition should feel exciting, but in actuality it's not. While your characters can jump, they can't ledge grab and the world's design feels dated. Furthermore, your 'trusty' mini-map in the bottom corner of your screen in next to useless because it is mostly transparent and only highlights enemies and points you in the direction of quest objectives, acting more like a compass than a mini-map. What I really don't like about the mini-map is that it provides no helpful information on the topography of the land or whether you're following a path or what to expect when it comes the orientation of the world. This is by far the worst mini-map I've seen in a videogame and makes me wonder if Bioware got lazy and took shortcuts with its design implementation. Another point of criticism is the menus and the inventory system. For one thing, the menus feel convoluted and try to mimic the 'Mass Effect look'. Secondly, on the character screen, the font colour and type is all wrong, and the text boxes are awkwardly implemented (plus all the RPG jargon gives me a headache - just give me well explained stats and I'm good to go). When it comes to inventory, Bioware should have allowed players to carry more stuff. With a game as big (an obvious understatement) as Inquisition where players will pick up thousands of items, there needs to be A LOT of inventory space. This is one of my biggest frustrations because I would constantly need to clear out my inventory every 10 minutes. In all honesty, I think that Inquisition is a good game that is absolutely buried beneath bad design choices that hinder more than they help. I can see what the game is trying to be - an fantasy adventure of epic proportions - but what holds it back are things that make the experience more boring than it actually is. Maybe one day I will come back to it when I have finished every other game and appreciate it for what it is because I won't be actively thinking to myself that "I could be playing something MUCH BETTER THAN THIS". In the end, I think Dragon Age: Inquisition defeats itself with the immense scale of its own size and ambition, further compounded by poor design choices and underwhelming writing.

Wolfenstein: The Old Blood trails behind The New Order, but it still offers decent FPS action for fans of the franchise. As a prequel chapter, it ticks all the boxes and does all the things that it should do to deliver the Wolfenstein experience that everyone expects. There are some obvious issues, but The Old Blood is a faithful companion chapter that pays homage to the original Wolfenstein games whilst also providing a glimpse into the world before the events of The New Order altered the timeline. All in all, another win for MachineGames.

Mortal Shell is another example of a promising game that is afraid to step outside the shadow of it's obvious inspirations. In nearly every aspect, Mortal Shell follows the Dark Souls textbook to a fault, but the original elements it introduces to the Souls-like genre do nothing but worsen the overall experience. For one thing, you can't block attacks or wield shields in Mortal Shell, the alternative to doing so is a defensive move where you 'harden' your 'shell'. This is by far one of the worst forms of defence given the fact that it fully restricts your movement and your ability to harden is limited by a timer. Another aspect that Mortal Shell gets fundamentally wrong is its dodging mechanic which is clunky and requires a double tap to actually roll away from incoming attacks. Furthermore, Mortal Shell requires two separate forms of currency - Tar and Glimpses - to upgrade your different Shells. The only problem is that these can both be difficult to obtain and be easily lost through carelessness - I foolishly used a special mask that returned me to the respawn point only to discover afterwards that doing so sacrificed all my accumulated Tar and Glimpses. For the developers to brazenly implement such an insulting feature that further compounds an immensely challenging/frustrating experience adds to the growing list of things that are a detriment to Mortal Shell. Damage scaling and hitbox detection are other issues that contribute to Mortal Shell's underwhelming and unfair combat. Common enemies do WAY too much damage - and this is just in the game's starting area(!). Hitbox detection and overall perception of depth is another thing the game gets wrong: I encountered a large monster called Grisha very early in the game and I had a lot of trouble gauging the 'reach' of its attacks because it would suddenly close the distance - without warning - due to the unpredictable nature of its attack animations. This was one of the things that contributed to my decision to stop playing the game - and I had only been playing for roughly 3 hours. Healing in Mortal Shell is another fundamental thing the game fails to do adequately. To heal, you either consume food (that has a painfully low amount of regen per item consumed) or absorb damage from incoming attacks when you harden (which actually seemed negligible despite the game's assurances that it works). Considering that maintaining your health meter in a Souls-like is an essential component of the core experience, this is yet another detracting factor to Mortal Shell. Being true to Dark Souls' example, Mortal Shell is predictably light in terms of narrative direction, but is even more ridiculously obscure than its source of inspiration. I virtually had no clue as to what the game's story was or what I was doing or where I was going or even what the main character's purpose was. It was just a vague 'go here, unlock new Shells, fight enemies, progress forward, fight bosses, rinse, repeat, and reach game's ending - Hurrah! You finished Mortal Shell!'. This is simply appallingly underwhelming and lazy because you shouldn't need to read a Wiki page on what the story is or why the world is the way it is, nor should it be a simple case of the developer saying (but not actually saying) "Well, you've played a Dark Souls game, so you know the gist". In the end, Mortal Shell just feels like a waste of time and a 'hollow' (Dark Souls reference) imitation of the game it tries to emulate. But by simply being frustrating for the sake of being frustrating doesn't add much to the experience or make it 'better because it's harder'. Regardless of its length or talented developers what ultimately undermines Mortal Shell is its determination to be unnecessarily difficult.

Dark Souls 2: Scholar of the First Sin is a fantastic excuse to revisit Drangleic with improved graphics and seamlessly experience the game's three DLC expansion packs - if you're up for the challenge. Personally, I find the inclusion of certain enemy types in particular areas that weren't previously in the base version of the game add a bit too much challenge and make the early hours of the game significantly more difficult than necessary - this is just my opinion because I'm not a hardcore Souls gamer. Nevertheless, the overall game design and vibe of Dark Souls 2 remain hauntingly enticing.

Evolve sports a unique premise, but one that comes with certain limitations. As a multiplayer game, it succeeds at what it aims to achieve, but as a single player experience it leaves much to be desired. By far and large, Evolve establishes a narrative concept that is ripe with potential. In the opening cutscene, we're treated to character interactions and banter that are exceptional in the quality of how they're written, establishing complex characters and relationships in its limited running time. At this point I was absolutely impressed with what the writing team had accomplished, and I would've loved to have seen more backstory and developments throughout a fairly lengthy story-based campaign. Unfortunately, however, Evolve is primarily a multiplayer experience and lacks a traditional story campaign, which is a huge missed opportunity in this regard. Foregoing said story campaign, Evolve features some tutorial missions that provide a small glimpse of what its campaign could've looked like if the development team had committed the time and effort into it. I enjoyed these brief moments of promise and further lamented the decision not to flesh out Evolve's relatively impressive universe with a fully fleshed out narrative. The game also has an Evacuation mode that kind of tells a story based on your performance in missions, but it's basically just playing multiplayer modes with bots and a loose narrative context. Evolve shows promise in its combat and gunplay - my favourite aspect being that all hunters have jetpacks which makes traversal SO much fun. Unfortunately, this is where the fun ended for me. Maps are vast and well designed in terms of environments and verticality, but are mostly populated with creatures that aren't much fun to fight. What further compounded this lack of enjoyment was that no matter how well I tracked or attempted to catch up to the monster, I just simply couldn't catch up in time before it reached it's maximum level. When I did find it, I got crushed every single time. One thing I did look forward to with Evolve would be trying out all 12 of its different hunters, but 8 are gated by the game's progression system which is egregious in the extreme. To unlock the other 8 hunters, you must play multiple matches using the four different hunter archetypes (i.e. Assault, Medic, Support, and Trapper) and level up all of their 3 unique abilities (to maximum, presumably). Once you have done this, you unlock the next hunter tier in whichever class you've committed the most amount of time to and must repeat the process to unlock the last hunter in that class. In theory, this sounds achievable, but in reality its an exercise in futility. What undermines this system is that the amount of points you receive at the end of every match is far too little to make meaningful progress and the amount of points required to level up each skill is far too great. And considering that Evolve's gameplay loop isn't that fun to begin with, everything becomes a tedious waste of time. If Evolve featured dedicated single player content, then it could've been a better overall experience and thus, a better game. Instead, it's sticks to multiplayer guns and ends up being a lesser experience with a lot of wasted potential.

Generation Zero is categorically one of the most broken and haphazardly put together games that I have ever played. From a distance it looks like Avalanche Studios attempt to do a 1980's version of Ubisoft's Far Cry, but with robots instead. Up close, however, it's a buggy, unfinished mess defined by some good ideas, but filled with disappointment and unrealised potential. On paper, Generation Zero has all the building blocks to make a relatively good open world FPS game. The setting and atmosphere are fairly well done, the enemy design is commendable in terms of appearance and type, the gunplay mechanics are reasonably adequate with the design and sound effects being at the level of quality that you'd expect from a game of this calibre, and the character customisation and overall 80's vibe rounding off the game's praise-worthy aspects. Unfortunately, this is where I run out of positive things to say about Generation Zero. Never before have I played something so egregious, so overwhelmingly badly designed, so absolutely broken, like Generation Zero, that it honestly made me wonder how this game ever got published as a final product in the state that it was when it was released. While the opening hours of exploring Generation Zero's world holds the allure that most open world games possess at the start of their journeys, the promise of what lies ahead in Generation Zero falls magnificently short of all expectations. Generation Zero immediately segregates itself from other games by completely lacking a strong narrative to drag players into it's setting and scenario or even make them connect with the game on any emotional level (besides frustration). All it possesses is a vague notion about uncovering what happened to all the people who once lived here and why there are robots roaming everywhere. This may point the player in a certain direction, but this is further compounded by how Generation Zero's mission structure is designed. When it comes to missions, Generation Zero is absolutely woeful. You'll receive a mission, but instead of placing a map marker on where you need to go, Generation Zero eschews this in favour of making you read some text to uncover clues about where your objective is located. In theory, this is a unique and somewhat innovative process that gets the player to engage with the game world and think about where they need to go instead of simply following a waypoint marker. Unfortunately this is where Generation Zero falls apart because the text references certain locations as a guide, but what ultimately undermines this process is the fact that most locations on the map screen are unmarked, leading to a frustrating amount of guesswork and copious amounts of wasted time trudging back and forth hoping to find the right place. What's even worse is that the waypoint marker will only appear when you're within 10 metres of your objective. This also happens with the game's only side activity, destroying robot transmitters. While I mentioned that Generation Zero's gunplay is reasonably adequate, that doesn't necessarily mean that combat is satisfying. While weapons seem to pack a punch, in reality they don't when used against the game's primary antagonists, the robots - who also happen to be the only 'living' things that you will encounter in the game. What undermines combat in Generation Zero is the fact that taking down any of the game's six types of robots requires A LOT of ammunition. Furthermore, all robot types pack a punch, whittling down your health in seconds. What further compounds these issues is the game's atrociously buggy nature. Even when I was outside the range of an enemy's melee attack or even on the OTHER SIDE OF A WALL, I would still take damage regardless of how 'safe' I was. I've simply never played a game where the walls completely lack substance. Another issue was how the game wiped my exploration progress every time I exited the game. Over the course of some hours, I would discover towns which would then be labelled on my map. When I restarted my game from where I left off, I would find that all the location labels on my wipe would be removed and I would be left without a clue on what each town was called (because all of the towns have Swedish names). But what really destroys any chance that Generation Zero has of being a mildly entertaining game is simply the metric ton of bugs and glitches that absolutely plague this game and ultimately ruin the experience. I remember this one time where I was chased halfway across the map by a massive horde of robots. Another time, I was overwhelmed by an aggressive legion of large robots and I took shelter in a building - I waited inside, but nothing happened so I peeked outside cautiously only to see all the robots standing there looking at me, doing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. It was SO BAD it was HILARIOUS. In short, Generation Zero is an underwhelming mess **** that should never have been published.

What can I say that hasn't already been said about TLOU2? I'll begin my review with a positive statement: I LOVED The Last of Us (Part 1). Everything about that game resonated with me on every tangible level. It was a tour de force. It was Naughty Dog's magnum opus. It was everyone's Game of the Year for 2013. I played the game on PS3 and then again on PS4 - twice in fact (my first playthrough, then a New Game Plus playthrough). What more needs to be said? I really, REALLY LOVED The Last of Us. Everything - from the characters, to the story, to the gameplay - and when I reached the ending, I felt something that no other game had quite made me feel before. In every sense of the word, The Last of Us is an exceptionally excellent masterpiece. And that is why it pains me to talk about The Last of Us Part 2. After all the hype, the information spiels and red herrings, The Last of Us Part 2 is the second biggest let-down of 2020 (the biggest let-down of 2020 being Cyberpunk 2077). I knew fully well that the story would encompass the theme of 'Hate' to contrast the original game's theme of 'Love' - I thought that it would be interesting and might pay off in some way - but in truth, I never could have predicted how epically disappointing it would be. I don't know what happened, but Naughty Dog took the theme of 'hate' and ran with it into 'uncharted' (pun intended) territory to a degree that made TLOU2's narrative grossly unlikeable and managed to alienate their fans. If anything, Naughty Dog took things WAY TOO FAR. It was in the first 3 hours that Naughty Dog did the UNTHINKABLE IN A DISAPPOINTINGLY BAD WAY. I won't say what, but I was left feeling shocked, mortified, and simply insulted by such a blatantly BAD narrative decision that spits in the eyes of fans of the original TLOU and adds insult to injury in EVERY WAY POSSIBLE. It was after this moment that I simply lost the will to continue playing TLOU2, but I somehow managed - even though I deeply regretted every moment of it. I can't talk about Joel (hint, hint), but I can talk about Ellie, and in all honesty I don't like how her character has changed since the first game. At the end of TLOU (and even at the beginning of TLOU2) Ellie is still relatively bright, despite her experiences. Right off the bat at the start of TLOU2, Ellie is UNLIKEABLE in every way - even going as far as to distance herself and not talk to Joel, not to mention being downright depressing. After THAT moment she just gets worse to the point where I didn't even recognise her at all. Another issue is how TLOU2 ham-fistedly integrated political and social statements about LGBTQ aspects into it's narrative - so much so that I felt I was playing less of a videogame and more of a manifesto (to clarify I completely respect all LGBTQ rights and ideals). My point is is that the game could've integrated these aspects better and with more subtlety - instead the game chose to jump on the band wagon of woke culture by making these narrative elements OBVIOUS, even to the detriment of an already appalling story. Another major negative is how the writers (Neil Druckmann and Halley Gross) handled the themes of 'hate' and 'grief'. Ellie is so hateful, even to the point where she doesn't think about the consequences of actions - a fact that Abby, the game's secondary protagonist and primary antagonist, is also guilty of. Throughout the story, things happen that SHOULDN'T happen. In actuality TLOU2's story is SO hateful, it turns the whole game into a TOXIC EXPERIENCE (do not mistake this with emotional catharsis). I don't know where it all went so wrong (I actually think I just quoted one of the characters from the game), but Druckmann's nihilism got the better of him - (Halley) Gross' mentioning of the fact that she tapped into her personal experiences with PTSD while writing the story didn't help matters much either. In terms of gameplay, TLOU2 moves things forward slightly. Yes, I'll praise the graphics and the animations, but all of that doesn't matter when the main story driving everything forward is so toxic and unlikeable (it actually makes playing the game a chore to see how horribly the plot moves forward). In actuality, TLOU2's gameplay feels more like an obligation instead of something lovingly and professionally crafted (unlike Naughty Dog's previous efforts). Gunplay feels sluggish, imprecise, and simply, not very fun, turning most firefights into frustrating ordeals. I remember aiming at a thug who was barely 5 metres from me and even with the reticule trained squarely and accurately on his head, I still managed to miss him somehow(!). Another nuisance is that Ellie can be stunned or easily knocked over which just further compounds my issues with TLOU2. I don't know how TLOU2 won GOTY 2020 last year. It simply is a BAD GAME and a HORRIBLE SEQUEL that does things that no-one asked for. The only comparison I can think of is the recent Star Wars trilogy.

After 30 hours with The Surge, I had had enough of being given the run-around with all of it's 'harder-than-Dark Souls' nonsense. I came to The Surge 2 with hopes that Deck 13 had corrected these issues and balanced other aspects of the original game. In short: They hadn't. I got just over 3 hours into The Surge 2 when I thought "You know what? I've had enough of this nonsense". It's not that I can't handle playing difficult games, it's simply a case that I can't be bothered wasting my time playing a game that's difficult for the sake of being difficult. When I play videogames, I play them for fun - not because I feel the need to prove something, to myself or to others. I'm not averse to playing videogames that test my skills and reactions, but I draw the line when they overstep the bounds of what is reasonable and accessible. The Surge 2 is undoubtedly a better game than the original. In my limited time with it, I noticed the improvements Deck 13 had made. The combat is smoother, the environmental variety of Jericho City is superior to the drab locales of the CREO factory featured in the original game, and every time you level up your Rig, you get skill points to spend on improving your Health, Stamina and Energy. While I've just noted the positives, I can't say that I'd classify The Surge 2 as 'fun'. The damage scaling in the game is just ridiculously bad - most common enemies will hand you your hide in seconds. This seriously hurt my progression through the game because I was simply tired of constantly being on edge every time I went into combat against the numerous denizens of Jericho City. On top of that, most enemies have an ace up their sleeve that will seriously undermine you in some way - this is more an unfair tactic than it is a 'challenge' to overcome. Story-wise, The Surge 2 is simply more sci-fi stuff mixed with weird, messed up Dark Souls type nonsense that we've all come to expect from the genre over the years. In summation, The Surge 2 is an improvement over it's predecessor in some ways, but in many ways it features more of the same problems that deeply affected my time with the first game. In the 3 hours that I spent with The Surge 2, I couldn't help thinking of all the other better, more fun games in my personal games library that I could be playing instead of yet another gruellingly difficult Souls-like game that is deliberately designed to annoy me, frustrate me, and make me want to rage-quit. I think there needs to be a discussion about game design philosophy and about game developers competing in a particular genre - that making a game harder or more difficult doesn't necessarily make it 'better' than other games. I honestly hope that game developers reach this realisation sooner than later, so they can avoid saturating the industry with games that only a small, select group of people will gravitate towards. Because at the end of the day, games are created purely for escapism - from stress and the vast multitude of life's problems.

Shadow Warrior looks and feels like an inferior version of the recent Wolfenstein and Doom reboot games, but considering the fact that it predates these aforementioned revivals of Id Software classics, you could almost say that Shadow Warrior did the old school FPS reboot shtick first. I'm not saying that Shadow Warrior is a bad game per se, but it really feels dated in a lot of areas. For one thing the graphics are an eye-sore. I know this is a PS4 game, but I get the feeling that it was originally intended to be released on PS3, but the developers decided to move it up a console generation. To be honest, the graphical level of detail in Shadow Warrior reminded me a lot of The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion - and that was released on PS3 all the way back in 2006. On the combat side of things, Shadow Warrior feels like a mixed bag. There are skills and upgrades to acquire, but some of these don't work as well as they should. For example, some of the sword abilities require you to use the movement analogue stick to trigger specific attack or defensive combos, but because there assigned to the movement analogue stick, the game sometimes misreads whether you're simply trying to move or begin a sword combo. Thankfully, the PS4 version has an alternate way of triggering these combos by utilising the touchpad. However, Shadow Warriors combat issues don't end there. Swinging the sword can feel floaty and imprecise at times. While you can carry all of your weapons like most old school FPS games, the guns don't sound or feel very powerful to use. At certain points during the campaign, I would empty ammo clip after ammo clip into swarms of enemies. This felt vastly unsatisfying as there wasn't much weapon feedback or recoil and most enemies didn't react or respond to getting hit. Another thing that compounds the issues with combat are the design of enemy types which either feel dated or contradictory to the flow of combat. Large enemies are just simply damage sponges who drain your ammo supplies, whereas the mage enemy class can summon more enemies and erect a shield that damages you if you touch it. Whenever one of the mages showed up, the frenetic, fast paced style combat always grinded to a halt. Furthermore, my biggest problem with combat is that the game will unload wave after wave of enemies who will overwhelm you at certain points which can be more frustrating than fun. As for ****...Shadow Warrior is just...just the worst. The voice acting is adequate (barely sometimes) and the dialogue can be occasionally witty and humorous. But for the most apart don't expect too much from Shadow Warrior in the narrative department. Shadow Warrior is more of a step back into the past than it is a step toward the future. Some bad design decisions severely hinder the experience and your mileage with it will depend mostly on your tolerance of these issues.

I really wanted to like The Surge. While I'm not a pro at playing FromSoftwares' roster of 'Pleasure-Through-Pain' titles, I do like them. So when I heard about Deck 13's second attempt at doing a Souls-like, I thought "Why not give it a try?" The opening moments in The Surge are by far the strongest in the game: You get an insight into the plight of Warren, a cripple seeking employment with CREO and the means to walk again. What happens in the moments after Warren joins CREO is a horrific example of placing too much faith in technology to solve your problems. It's a brilliant, but brutal set up for the start of The Surge. The one big problem with The Surge's narrative is that it closely follows the Dark Souls textbook on how to tell stories and convey essential plot beats. In this regard, the story is vastly obscured and I had a vague idea of what was happening and where I needed to go next. It's a deep shame because I was curious about the backstory for The Surge's world and some of the dialogue writing was very well done. On the combat front, The Surge's combat system is a near perfect 10 out of 10. Executing weapon combos feels satisfying and blitzing enemies who once blitzed you just feels fantastic. Where The Surge distinguishes itself is how you fight enemies and how you acquire new weapons, armour and resources. While in combat, you can target specific areas or limbs of most enemies to either deal more damage (against unarmoured limbs) or generate more Energy (by dealing less damage, but striking the enemy more often). In the heat of battle you can freely and quickly change the specific limb that you're targeting to interrupt enemy attacks or generate more Energy when needed. Once your Energy meter is filled enough, you can do a finisher on an enemy's body part to gain new armour schematics and weapons. To get more resources to upgrade your armour and weapons, you simply must target the corresponding limbs from which the armour piece/weapon came from. In this regard, The Surge introduces a new concept to not only Souls-likes, but games in general. Unfortunately this is where my praise for The Surge ends. What I REALLY DON'T LIKE about The Surge is just how unnecessarily difficult it can be at times. In the early hours, I expected the usual fare of learning from my mistakes and through trial-and-error until I improved. At this point of the game, I didn't mind the difficulty curve, especially in the game's first two sections. However, the further I got, the more I didn't like how Deck 13 implemented certain difficulty spikes that felt outrageously unfair, as if someone had suddenly turned the dial up from 4 to 11. These difficulty spikes manifest themselves in the form of certain enemy types, most notably the scorpion-like quadrupeds who can cleave your health by 70% simply by leaping at you from a distance of 30 to 40 metres (and who are also heavily armoured, meaning that you're attacks do diddly squat against them) and the other enemies who can kill you in one or two shots. What's even more frustrating is that these levels of damage dealt against you completely ignore your health and armour stats. In the second half of the game, things go from manageable to just downright punishing. Security troops possess an EMP dart that stun locks you and their equipped weapons deal massive damage - when you're doing your best and you get ganged up on by three or more security troops, you simply don't stand a chance. Then there are the boss fights. Boss fights in The Surge can truly push you to the brink of your composure. The problem is that the boss fights are poorly designed given the fact that The Surge relies on close quarters combat. The bigger bosses are a fitting example of how their design contradicts the game's combat - they require you to get in close at exactly the right time, but at the same time you run the risk of getting absolutely destroyed in a split second. When I say "This isn't fair" I mean it's a level of unfairness that makes Dark Souls' level of difficulty look reasonable by comparison. In the end, I can't recommend The Surge. It's a thing that ticks me off immensely because I actually love the game's combat system. To be honest, I'm sick and tired of up and coming developers simply cashing in on FromSoftwares' successful gameplay formula by dressing their game up in a 'different' skin. What annoys me even more is that they then go and try to compete with FromSoftware by making their game MORE DIFFICULT than Dark Souls. This often tarnishes the overall enjoyment level of their game and is more of a detrimental trait than an admirable one. It's a real shame for Deck 13 because they could have crafted a great game that pays homage to it's inspirations whilst being more fun due to its greater degree of accessibility. Instead they tried to walk the path of being 'Darker than Dark Souls' and ended up walking the plank to failure and unlikability.

Bloodborne is a fantastic example of how to do a spiritual successor of a series of hardcore games for hardcore gamers. Instead of simply rehashing the formula for the Demon/Dark Souls series, Bloodborne takes the basic core components and aesthetic, and repurposes them for a brand new 'Dark' Victorian setting and entirely new gameplay elements to 'Get Good' at. Much like the Souls series, Bloodborne basks in the rich moonlight of it's darkly cryptic (and somewhat obscure) narrative and labyrinthian design of its horrific world. Where Bloodborne truly distinguishes itself is it's combat - while the basic fundaments mimic Dark Souls superfluous combat design, Bloodborne demands a more aggressive approach to most encounters. In Bloodborne you will find no shields (well, actually you'll find just one), meaning that the only defence is a good offence. Instead of timidly entering a room or stepping into the fray with shield raised, you must rely on your speed and wits to win battles. Replacing the absent shield is your trusty firearm, a weapon that is intended to stun enemies instead of significantly damaging them. Furthermore, Bloodborne rewards risky and aggressive tactics - when taking damage from an enemy attack you have a limited window of opportunity to retaliate and regain your lost health with retaliatory strikes. While I can't say that I've finished Bloodborne, I can say that it is a masterpiece - a dark and disturbing masterpiece that will live on in the minds, hearts, and 'Souls' of hardcore fans. To the completers of this game, I salute you. To the uninitiated, I bid to you to try, but also be warned for this is not your usual mainstream game. As always - Praise the Sun.

With the overall success and appeal of Dark Souls, subsequent flattery through imitation was inevitable. Lords of the Fallen is the manifestation of said flattery and imitation, though it has one trait that distinguishes it from FromSoftwares' modern classic - it's not as difficult as the game that inspired it. This, however, is a double edged sword that works for and against LOTF, sometimes equally and at other times more so against it. Starting with LOTF's narrative, you take the role of Harkyn, a criminal with an amalgam of sins tattooed across his face. Harkyn has been freed from prison to fight the Rhogar - demonic warriors from another realm who are attacking a monastery and threaten to invade the rest of the world (or something - that bit is a little vague and not really properly explained). Character-wise, Harkyn isn't very interesting or charismatic, and the rest of the cast fare no better. The story isn't only forgettable, but also strangely absent, as there are no strong defining moments at any point throughout the roughly 12 to 15 hour playthrough - you simply go through corridor after corridor looking for the next boss to defeat to advance the plot. Combat and overall movement ranges between acceptable and sluggish, feeling unrefined when compared to Dark Souls. As much as I relished the easier difficulty, I noticed some issues with LOTF - early on the difficulty scaling of some enemies felt unbalanced. The Commander boss fight in particular felt badly designed. On the subject of boss fights, LOTF's boss fights range from underwhelming to just simply unfair at times because of certain unique attacks they possess, but also because of Harkyn's speed and reliance on melee combat. Wearing a full set of heavy armour makes Harkyn's dodge rolls insultingly glacial, a thing which frustrated me greatly. Some design elements make great additions to the Souls formula. For one thing, you can bank accumulated experience points to generate Skill Points or Magic Points and resting at a 'bonfire' crystal DOESN'T respawn defeated enemies - only when Harkyn is defeated do enemies respawn. In terms of art style and aesthetic, LOTF feels like a combination of Dark Souls, Dragon Age, Darksiders and Diablo. Lords of the Fallen should have been an obvious win-win - a Dark Souls game for beginners. The result is a game that tries new things to be more accessible and forgiving, but at the same time feels lesser because of it. Ultimately, Lords of the Fallen can't escape the 'Dark' (Souls) shadow of its inspirations.

While Demon Souls was the first to establish the core formula for the Souls series, Dark Souls was the follow-up that not only perfected, but solidified the series identity and appeal. This is THE ORIGINAL GAME that spawned a new genre of games: the Souls-like genre. This is a genre defined by gameplay systems that are immensely difficult, soul-crushingly frustrating and punishing in every possible way - AND people love this sort of thing because "modern videogames are just too soft, easy and forgiving". While that previous sentence may seem sarcastic, I actually really appreciate what Dark Souls is and what it does - even if it sometimes brings me to my wits end and makes me question why I'm wasting my time trying to fun by playing something that was designed with the deliberate intention of being downright difficult and just plain UNFAIR. Beyond it's obvious difficult gameplay, Dark Souls has fantastic combat and world design - both structurally and narratively. In this regard, the game is peerless. The overall vibe and aesthetic is brilliantly oppressive and (you guessed it) dark. This makes Dark Souls feel like a survival horror game instead of a dark fantasy RPG. The only pitfalls of this fantastic genre establishing game is, of course, the gruelling difficulty. While not as difficult as its sequels and spiritual successors (and other games that pay homage to it), the original Soul-crusher is still mightily challenging, sometimes to its own detriment. There are moments in this game where it feels like FromSoftware implemented certain elements just to frustrate gamers with things that require more luck than skill OR unparalleled amounts of patience. Nevertheless, this is (somehow) revered as a modern classic and the ones who persevere through this experience with great skill receive nearly equal amounts of reverence. Alas, I am not one of them because I not only think that videogames should be played for fun, but also because I'd prefer not to waste my time, and potentially risk my mental wellbeing, by trying to play something that is deliberately designed to frustrate me. Here's to you, Dark Souls - the darkest rose with the largest thorns.

Despite it's competence, I find Battlefield V to be a dull FPS game, mostly because most of the game's content is geared towards multiplayer. There are only three story missions that are all approximately 2 hours in length (giving you about 6 hours of campaign), but two of these rely heavily on stealth, which is something the Battlefield franchise is NOT about. Battlefield V may be a very good looking game, but the WW2 setting is a tired and overly well-worn veteran FPS premise.

I WAS excited when I heard about Wolfenstein: Youngblood - the operative word being 'was'. Then, after nearly 24 hours of game time, I sat back, shook my head and said to myself: "What went wrong?" The overall setup for Youngblood was interesting - the 19 year old twin daughters of good ol' BJB (who were born near the end of Wolfenstein II: TNC) go on a mission to find their father. Except neither of them has experienced true combat and must come to terms with the realities of violence. Unfortunately, after the opening hours, the writing takes a downward turn in terms of story, dialogue and character development. What's even worse is the overall length of the actual campaign - there are only SIX main story missions - a prologue, four middle chapters, and the finale. This is THE SHORTEST CAMPAIGN I'VE EVER PLAYED - it's even shorter than Rage 2. Besides the prologue and the finale, nothing of substance happens in the middle part of the game - you simply infiltrate four high security fortresses, shoot OR stealth ALOT of bad guys, complete some objectives, fight a boss, AND THAT'S IT. On top of this, the plot developments are extremely disappointing and the final boss fight is infuriatingly frustrating. What further compounds these issues are the game's RPG gameplay mechanics. For one thing, Youngblood DID NOT need to be a co-op shooter. The shared lives system is archaic and just simply THE WORST - if you or your partner kick the bucket three times, you have to replay your current mission FROM THE START. Also, the game has no checkpoints, so if you quit during the middle of a mission, you have to (you guessed it!) replay the mission FROM THE START. Even if you play in offline mode, you still face these issues. Then if you factor in the game's version of being an RPG shooter, you're in for another world of pain. While earning XP and collecting money and collectibles is fun, Youngblood's nature as a role-playing game transforms Wolfenstein's combat from fast and brutal to just simply brutal - as in, you will find it painfully brutal. The adaptive levelling system turns most (if not all) enemies into bullet sponges and some into one-shot wonders who will destroy you in a single hit, turning most firefights into frustrating gauntlets that would rival the games made by FromSoftware. AHA! But wait! There's more! What makes this even worse is that enemies have two different types of armour that correspond to the two different ammo types in the game - meaning that if you want to deal sufficient damage to the enemies in your path, you have to swap weapons frequently if there are more than one type of enemy. If you use the wrong ammo type against the opposite type of armour, the damage you deal will be NEGLIGIBLE, subsequently evolving enemies into even greater bullet sponges. And this will happen ALOT, especially when you run out of ammo for the weapon that you NEED and especially when considering the fact that the game's arsenal favours one particular ammo type over the other which simply makes things downright unfair. Beyond the gunplay that the recent Wolfenstein games effectively patented (which Youngblood somehow managed to hamstring) Youngblood's offerings are dull and bland - side missions are basic fetch or kill quests and the world is uninteresting to explore (which makes doing the side missions difficult because many of them require you to re-tread previously explored areas). There are skill-points and weapon upgrades to acquire, but they do little to alleviate the game's previously mentioned issues. What really ruined Youngblood for me was the WORST glitch I've ever encountered in a videogame. I had almost completed everything in the game and I was near the end of the last side mission. All I needed to do was to fast travel back to base and speak with the quest-giver. When I tried to leave the enemy base, my screen went black. This happened every time - regardless of which exit I chose to use. In my attempt to remedy this, I rebooted the game. It didn't work - I was effectively trapped in that zone, permanently unable to leave. After everything I had endured with Youngblood, the game wouldn't let me finish it. Wolfenstein: Youngblood is a dismal game that risks the reputation of the franchise by needlessly experimenting with elements that are simply counterintuitive to a gameplay formula that relies on speed and brevity. The end result is a game that doesn't work, isn't fun and is a blatant cash-grab because it reuses the assets from Wolfenstein II: TNC.

Wolfenstein II: TNC is a true, brilliant example of a sequel done right. The overall plot and dialogue writing are top notch and the performances are Hollywood calibre. The gameplay is improved and varied, with the awesome addition of dual wielding any two weapons of your choice. The only downside is the damage-scaling on the normal difficulty setting - you will get shredded in literal seconds. This forced me to select the easiest difficulty setting so that way I could enjoy game in terms of story and gameplay (because I believe that videogames should be fun to play by balancing entertainment value whilst also testing your 'skill' level). Nevertheless, I can't wait to see how the next sequel (Wolfenstein III) wraps everything up.

Remastered and brought together into one cohesive package, the Mass Effect Legendary Edition is the definitive way to experience Bioware's masterfully crafted sci-fi trilogy on modern consoles. While this 'legendary' remastering of the original ME trilogy is regarded by many as a return to form for Bioware, it's another classic example of a studio looking to regain it's former reputation by revisiting (and cashing in on) its past glories (which still hold up even by today's standards). As much as I am a huge Mass Effect fan, I can only hope that Bioware's next game is BRAND NEW in every sense of the word.

I enjoyed Rage, but felt that it could be improved and expanded upon in it's sequel, I was totally excited when Bethesda announced Rage 2 in 2018. For me, the gameplay that was shown looked like a combination of Fallout 4's colourful art style mixed with Doom 2016's fast, frenetic combat with a hint of futuristic Mad Max 2015 thrown in for good measure. It Was Awesome I simply could not wait for this game to get a release date because it was everything that I wanted from a sequel to Rage and more. E3 only served to increase my hype for Rage 2, but something about the gameplay demo didn't sit right with me. Fast forward to May 2019 and I was baffled by review scores for Rage 2. It was only when I started playing the game that I understood what was wrong. Despite all of the clever pre-release marketing that cannily broke the fourth wall and possessed a Deadpool-esque style of humour that hinted at a smart self-aware game, Rage 2 was actually disappointingly dumb by comparison. For me, the game's potential as a great sequel ended with the opening cinematic/monologue. After this point, the game's narrative became a parody of itself. The prologue I experienced was cringe inducing, woefully written, and just horribly cliched - your home base gets destroyed, the main villain personally shows up to join the 'party' (and somehow doesn't get killed then and there), your mentor gets killed personally by the main villain, and every other Ranger gets killed in the attack, leaving just you as the 'Last Ranger' who is the only one who can save the day. It doesn't get any better after this. The main plot of Rage 2 involves seeking out 3 prominent figureheads to help you enact Project Dagger - an operation that will defeat the Authority - but that's about it. Despite it's 8 to 10 hour campaign length, Rage 2's main plotline is actually disappointingly very short. In total there are only 8 missions that make up the main story, but the campaign's overall length is padded out by the need to complete various open world activities to level up each figurehead's resistance meter and unlock that figurehead's next mission - somewhat similar to Just Cause 4. This is really a waste of storytelling potential because the world building and various factions present in Rage 2 could have provided excellent material and awesome story moments to help flesh out the main story and the player's interactions with these factions. It's also a huge waste of the brilliant concept and art design that went into developing Rage 2's world. Another shocking disappointment is the COMPLETE LACK OF SIDE MISSIONS. I find this immensely frustrating because Rage 1 had A LOT of side missions which is why their absence in Rage 2 is highly questionable. There are perpetual bounties, but they amount to very little besides killing generic enemies and receiving piddly amounts of points and cash. In terms of world design, Rage 2 is a massively missed opportunity - the world is more open and explorable than the original, but it is completely empty and devoid of life besides the many side activity markers that dot the map. And speaking of side activities, I quickly became uninterested in Rage 2's side activities because of how repetitive they were - as a personal message to the developers, this is a really, really big problem when these side activities make up nearly 90% of the content in your game. Beyond this, Rage 2 lacks any form of decent story content. I'd talk about the combat, but really that part of the game speaks for itself - weighty weapons that pack a hefty punch, plus a few unique toys that make Rage 2 almost redeemable. Take for example the gun that shoots darts that let you literally play around with the physics of enemies and objects, maybe making them collide or do other hilarious things. Or the gun that shoots bullets that ignite when you snap your fingers. These are just two examples of how Rage 2's combat sets itself apart from the competition, but it isn't without its problems. I experienced an annoying glitch where the revolver's bullets wouldn't ignite and another glitch where one of my weapons wouldn't do any damage at all Design-wise, I found some significant flaws in Rage 2. Just before you leave, there are a whole bunch of NPC's all grieving in the wake of the attack, at the centre of which is Lily, the main character's best friend. After getting in the Phoenix ranger vehicle and driving a hundred metres away, I made a quick U-turn and headed back to the home base. I was startled to find that all the NPC's had disappeared and Lily was left awkwardly standing by herself in the same position. It didn't matter how many times I fast travelled to the home base, Lily would still be there doing the same thing. This speaks volumes of the design shortcuts taken in Rage 2. It shocks me to think that it took 5 years to make Rage 2 and yet the original remains the better game. I can only hope they do better with Rage 3

Despite it's flaws, Rage is, for the most part, a fun game. The story might not be the best or the most original, but it simply gives you reason to keep pushing forward and discover Id Software's contribution the post apocalyptic genre. Overall the gameplay really does feel inspired by the likes of Borderlands and Fallout 3 with a hint of a Mad Max aesthetic thrown in for good measure to anchor the post apocalyptic vibe. There are times when Rage feels a little too arcade-like and it's 'open world' is mostly a series of non linear roads or paths that lead to objectives or bad guys to shoot. On a more positive note, Rage sports a decent amount of content, be it main missions, side missions, races and other things worth your time. There's a working economy, crafting, and you can loot people and chests/boxes for ammo or items to sell. Combat is surprisingly enjoyable and the roster of weapons is satisfying to use. What really impressed was how Rage's campaign could shift it's tone from FPS action game to horror game, especially when you first venture into the Dead City. As Id Software's first open world game(?), Rage is a pretty good debut for a new (actually released 9 years ago) franchise. There's a lot of potential for it's elements to be refined and expanded upon in the sequel. Did I mention that John Goodman is in the game?

If there was a game release that could embody the overall vibe of 2020, it would have to be, without a doubt, Cyberpunk 2077. Without question, Cyberpunk 2077 was easily the most anticipated game of this year and despite 8 years of development, several delays, and eleventh hour crunch time, many gamers trusted that these issues would be a small price to pay and that, on the basis of CD Projekt Red's calibre as a game developer, would invariably prove to be worth the wait. Sadly, everyone who waited eagerly for the "next generation of open world games" (to quote the pre-release gameplay trailer) were proven impossibly wrong. For all intents and purposes, Cyberpunk 2077 (on console) is not the game we were promised by CDPR - it is by far the most divisive game launch in recent history. After the overwhelmingly successful launch of The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt (my review for which is seriously overdue), CDPR garnered a significant boost to their reputation and the confidence in their next game release became unshakeable. That is why their decision to launch a buggy, unfinished, unpolished game remains unfathomable and in one sweeping motion, CDPR have effectively eroded not only their reputation, but also the trust they have carefully built from the ground up with their established and potential fanbase. I remember getting the game on launch day, taking it home, then excitedly waiting for approximately half an hour while it loaded. Once it had finished installing, I could not believe that I was about to play something that I had patiently waited for for 2 years(!). The first hammer blow struck when I saw the character model in the pre-game character creator, but I thought that it was a minor hitch - not realising that it was a precursor of things to come. It was when I began exploring the auto-repair workshop (I chose the Nomad lifepath) that I realised that not everything was the way it should be - the graphics were worse than Fallout 4, a game that was released more than 5 years earlier. Not only that, but the technical performance was the worst I had ever experienced in a PS4 game - blurry, muddled textures, significant amounts of assets popping in or slowly appearing, a weird shadowing effect behind fast moving objects - most notably my car, and a long laundry list of other issues that I simply would have never expected from this game considering all the hype. And this was before I reached the city. Once I finished the prologue and reached the fabled Night City, Cyberpunk 2077 sank to new lows. For all the beauty that the promos had shown, my first experiences in Night City were all viewed through an ugly lens, making the game unbearable to look at and almost just as unbearable to play. This of course is a real shame because the funny thing is that Cyberpunk 2077 is actually a great game. Beneath the myriad plethora of issues there is a hint of what CDPR promised. Weirdly enough, I spent nearly 20 hours playing Cyberpunk 2077 and I (genuinely) had a relatively good time. But I cannot deny that the PS4 version of Cyberpunk 2077 is not the best way to experience this brilliant game. Much like 2020, Cyberpunk 2077 was a promise of great things to come, but was unfortunately subverted by circumstances that no-one could have anticipated. It is immeasurably disappointing that Cyberpunk 2077 (a.k.a. Cyberjunk 2077) is regarded as CD Projekt Red's fall from grace instead of being the studio's finest hour. The truth is, I didn't just want this game: I wanted to love this game. Unfortunately in it's current state, it would be very irresponsible of me to recommend this game, even though there's a small part of me that wants to continue playing it. It's that small part of me that can see Cyberpunk 2077's true potential and gives me hope that someday - hopefully soon - I'll be able to play it in all its glory and experience it the way it is meant to be experienced. I still have faith that CD Projekt Red can right this wrong and deliver what they promised. That way they can atone and be forgiven by their fans. To conclude this review, I'll say this: Much like 2021, the next gen console versions for Cyberpunk 2077 can't come soon enough.

I'm not one for remasters, especially after playing the original, but the inclusion of the Left Behind DLC and the impending arrival of The Last of Us Part 2 made me say "One more time". Even with the graphical improvements of the PS4 version, The Last of Us' graphics still hold up pretty well considering this was originally a PS3 game. A testament and a good excuse to revisit a modern day classic.

The Last of Us is a masterpiece in every sense of the word. Never before have I played a game so compelling and emotionally gripping. The narrative is brilliantly paced, constantly going in unexpected directions and keeping you on the edge of your seat, but what shines even more is how the characters are brought to life through the excellently written dialogue and outstanding voice acting. What cements this believability further is the choreography and animation of the moment-to-moment action. I had my doubts about Naughty Dog's ability to transition from the high octane action filled exploits of the Uncharted series to something considerably darker, but Naughty Dog handles everything with a level of depth, nuance and maturity that truly showcases their talents as master storytellers. I experienced the full spectrum of emotions with this game from start to finish and it is a rare achievement for a game to make me fully care about every character in the story and how each of their journeys respectively end. It's also important to note that I rarely play a game twice in quick succession, but I loved this game so much that I made an exception. Truly one of the greatest games of all time.

Mafia: Definitive Edition is very much a time capsule of how games were like in the early 2000's. Despite it's 'improved' graphics and writing, most of it's gameplay elements feel grating at best. Some of the voice acting is good, but most of the accents on display are cringe inducing at best, especially the main protagonist who sounds like a heavy smoker with a sore throat who is in desperate need **** of water. Gun combat feels positively archaic and floaty, with weapon reticules the size of beachballs that make landing a headshot either highly difficult or a skill within itself. Melee combat tries to emulate modern melee systems, but comes across as janky, relying on button mashing instead of precise timing. Even though there is a large 'open' world available, Mafia: DE's campaign spirits you from one mission to the next with no freedom to explore at your own leisure in between objectives. However, the truth is Mafia's city is devoid of any activities to partake in, feeling more like a movie set filled with extras and cardboard cut-out buildings. Story-wise, the game feels obtuse and cliche. Unfortunately I couldn't progress beyond the halfway point of the campaign due to game design issues (the infamous turret section with the armoured truck). By this point, I was tired with the game because of how limiting and arduous everything within it felt. For future reference, games that are remade for the modern era should have a balance of contemporary game systems that seamlessly align with recognisable elements from the original. This way the game feels both fresh and familiar whilst retaining the most important thing of all: Being fun.

Back in 2011 this was the definition of epic. One of the greatest games of all time.