PaulChuckHalf

Game is exceptionally difficult for no discernible reason. I thought there was something wrong with me until I went back and played the original trilogy: those games were a walk in the park compared to this.

A disappointingly disjointed experience: narratively and gameplay wise. After the very strong showing in Wolfenstein: The New Order, this second outing does not seem to be sure what it wants to be. On the one hand the game wants to look at our protagonist in more depth and touch on real-world issues. On the other, it is happy to do that by turning our cast into either caricatures, stereotypes or turning them into one-note jokes. All characterisation is sandblasted away to tell the story the writers wanted to tell. In the background to this runs the theme of systematic oppression: by parents, by governments, by peoples and how unchecked conviction can lead to brutality. This is a fair insight and better done in TNO, even making the protagonist absolutely helpless on occasion to really hit this home. TNC constantly shows this oppression: the radioactive remains of Manhattan; paranoid American citizens trying to learn German before the boot lands on them; the absolute superiority of the **** industrial complex that surrounds them. But then the game suggests that Americans are too 'comfortable' and do not want to resist, which seems insulting to the characters in this universe, as well as all real-world people living in totalitarian regimes today. What is being shown does not correlate with what is told and the universe, once so solid, starts to feel disjointed as you feel agendas at play. Probably the only character that feels consistent and real is the primary antagonist. This is only because the game does not feel the need to expose her too much to the audience. Gameplay wise, TNC is not sure what it wants to do. Unlike TNO, there is no consistent arc of difficulty or tension with occasional breaks in the combat. The protagonist starts at half health and is restricted to a wheelchair, the game explaining that this is due to the results of the first game. BJ is not just broken physically but also mentally. it is a bold move however, while you eventually get to walk again, this handicap of limited health lasts for nearly half the game, making a very punishing experience. This can lead to very cautious gameplay as you progress through corridors and in some arena battles (the courtroom one being the most infamous) you are best served by sitting in a corner. After playing with this handicap for far too long, you receive full health via science-fantasy. What is the payoff for the game and for BJ? None - you just have full health again. Any character or gameplay arc is just ****, leaving me to wonder why this was introduced in the first place. To pad out the run-time, TNC makes the cardinal sin of having you replay levels to further progress the story. As the story halts for an arbitrary reason, the game expects you to play its 'Ubercommando' levels where you replay sections of past levels to take out an officer-enemy on the map. Sometimes you are completing the level backwards, but the content is, essentially, the same. Clearly this mode was made for after-game content but, as the running time was short, it was decided to staple these missions to the main campaign. While I have finished TNO multiple times, I could not finish TNC once.

After a very cliched and contrived plot opening, we open into a linear but very well-crafted sequence. 'Ah hah', I thought, 'we just had to get through all that awful voice acting and non-sensical plot to get to the real game!' We open into a free-roam area and the quality jumps off a cliff. Even by 2017 standards, the game looks absolutely awful. As your POV sits so close behind the protagonist, it is difficult to see enemies approaching from anywhere except your front, making deaths feel cheap. Wide open areas evaporate any tension as you can see threats from miles away. Dialogue between characters moves from cut-scenes into in-game conversation checklists. The premise also does not help: the fact that we know that this is a simulation erodes all fear. Sebastian and I know none of this is real, that this is a program going spooky, as that is what the genre demands. The only question left hanging is why and honestly, I could not find myself wishing to know why.

Strong art and presentation fail to cover for the abysmal combat and confused narrative. SHF is a game that wants to talk about strong themes and if the warning message on starting the game doesn’t make those themes crystal clear, the in-game journal and obvious telegraphing at the very outset will let you know. Instead of discussing these themes however, the game prefers to obfuscate what exactly is occurring or burying them with an obscene amount of combat. Previous Silent Hill games have dealt with this in nuanced ways with more finesse. Instead SHF chunks up its narrative with very jarring transitions between the ‘real world’ and the ‘dark altar’ world. While SH2 does this with its rusty ‘other world’, it keeps the same pace and game design throughout, signalling that this is the same character in a more dangerous environment. SHf ‘other world’, instead, seems to bring the story to a screaming halt every hour for heavy combat heavy segments in decidedly mundane environments. This frustration becomes more pronounced when it becomes clear that it is actually competing with the real world narratively and not just mechanically. Plot points set up firmly in Act 1 are dropped entirely by Act 2, leaving you waiting for their resolution that seems to be forgotten. As it leans more into fantastical elements, the contrast only expands. In the end, neither storyline ends satisfactorily, the after credits suggesting that the entire events are drive by a game play mechanic that has not been flagged barring a couple of notes. Does not using the mechanic provide a different ending? No, but you can try in your new game+ or even new game++ as these are mandatory to see the other endings. Besides very minor differences, these play throughs are exactly the same. What do these endings provide? More obfuscation as to whether these events are due to our character, their mind or something else entirely. This would be pardoned in a single telling of the story. On repetition, it feels the game is being deceitful for no other reason than to make you replay the game, rather than leaving it to interpretation. The combat is the other element the drags down the experience. Combat lacks impact and is repetitive. A stamina, parry, dodge and ‘focus’ system has drawn comments that this feels more like a cheaper Dark Souls clone than Silent Hill and in the more aggravating moments, this definitely feels true. Frustrating pauses between character actions, sluggish responsiveness and a ruthlessly short stamina bar fight you at every turn. These compounds by the sheer amount of enemies that game throws at you, sometimes even locking your progress until ‘arenas’ are cleared of large groups. The lack of enemy variety, and how some act as pure damage sponges, further tarnish the experience. I could go further: into the frustrating inventory system; the bi-polar difficulty settings; the non-interactive environments; the ‘hit-stop’ combat pauses; and others. Then most damning complaint however is that it is not scary. Any atmosphere is drained by the constant trips to the ‘dark altar’ and repetitive slog of combat. There are no real scares, or even a sense of dread besides the thought that I had to play this game more than once. I’ve heard rumours that this was not originally a Silent Hill title, that it was bought and the name added afterwards. I would not be surprised. Everything the game does is very deliberate, there is no feeling of anything being rushed or improvised. It’s just a shame that it created something so disappointing.

Not much of the formula for the action has changed with Far Cry 6. FC5 may have brought interesting and controversial topics to the fore and done nothing with them but FC6 does even less. Anton feels like a paper cut out villain: a fascist Castro with no bite. Compared with the rabid narcissism of Min; the anarchistic brutality of Vaas and the unnerving psychoticism of Seed; the script keeps Anton at arms length from the player. His lieutenants are equally one dimensional and while the same could be said about the Seeds, FC5 presented them in an interesting manner and gave insight as to why they were as they were. The best I can say about the lieutenants of Anton are that they are **** and not much more. I am through a third of the game and there is no personal connection to Anton with the main character and no personal stakes involved beyond 'Anton bad - kill everything red'. Far Cry 3 - 5 conveyed everything through the eyes of the player character, forcing the developers to add a personal element to everything they saw and did. Sometimes it got contrived (how many times did the deputy get kidnapped in 5, for example) but threats and danger felt real. 6 does everything through third person cutscenes which is jarring from previous titles and feels cheap as Dani is undeveloped as a character. Any ethical dilemmas surrounding the production and sale of 'Viviro', a miracle wonder drug that can cure cancer, is completely side stepped, as is also why a regime with seemingly endless resources has to resort to unprotected slave labour in its lethal production (notes in the game say that slave labour is necessary to keep production going rather than just a useful means of removing dissidents). Gameplay wise much of the map feels empty and pointless. Esperanza, the largest city in a Far Cry game, seems empty and destitute of life. There are entire 'off limits' areas in the main campaign with no guards or missions involved, making you feel like you have gone somewhere the game did not expect you to go or that it was broken. There also appears to be a lot less wildlife than previously. Hunting certain game seems resigned to set areas and as a result the crazy randomness of previous Far Cry games seems lost. The game so far is also incredibly easy, even on 'gamer mode' to the point where I have gone in guns blazing, just to have a sense of challenge. The game is set up for co-op play (and encourages it), however I fail to see what joy it would bring as the missions are blazingly easy and straightforward. Resource gathering for settlement improvements was fun at first but this is quickly becoming a chore and acts as a brake on the pace of the game as you ferret out every piece of metal and rubbish. Money is difficult to come by however if you sniff out every cache as you go, you will quickly receive most of the weapons that are available in stores. So in-game currency is split into resources (weapon modifications and settlement upgrades - desirable) and pesos (buying weapons - unnecessary). There are now two systems where one would have worked just fine. On a positive note the variety of weapons and modifications have been expanded on and there is a wide variety of customization with not just the look of your weapons but their feel and abilities. The most critical modification for any weapon is whether you have soft-tipped rounds or armour-piercing rounds. Weapons with soft-tipped rounds are useless against armoured enemies and as a result you MUST have at least one weapon with AP rounds 'attached', forcing you into a certain playstyle. The inventory menu is also a mess. I am a third through the game and looking further into the main story, I do not see anything really enticing me to play the rest of the game. Nothing develops with Anton's son, or Viviro or Anton himself and so I have to wonder why these elements were even included in the first place besides just feeling like placeholders for a setting where you shoot people. Far Cry 6 feels like a regression from previous titles in terms of environment, writing and action.