What Are You Currently Playing? 6.65: Neighbor of the Beast

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

DOOM 4 has been high on my priority list for a while, now. I'll probably get around to it after clearing Nier: Automata.

[Spark Of Spirit]

I'm so close to the end of BOTW I can feel it.

... But I still keep wandering off and exploring instead. 

This game is something else.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

So, as someone who's not ultra big into RPGs, one thing that I absolutely love about Nioh is how leveling can be helpful, but never actually requires you to grind if you are a skilled player. Knowing how to evade enemy attacks, effectively time parries into execution combos, and most importantly how to exploit enemy and boss weaknesses goes a long way. I'm currently level 98 and am taking on level 120+ missions without much issue. Additionally, there are plenty of people who cleared the game at under level 50, and right now TS17 has been doing a level 1 run with just fists (only using weapons for certain gimmick sections where it's mandatory) and has already cleared most of the game that way. My point being that this puts the grind-heavy nature of most other RPGs to shame, and is just a flat-out testament to good game design.

Of course it's only fair to mention that this logic applies to Souls games as well, which is why this sub-genre of RPGs is right up my alley.

[Foggle]

E-K, you might want to lay off Nier Automata for a bit. Apparently the most recent patch has broken some key aspects of the game. How does shit like this even happen...

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

You know the funny thing? It installed automatically while I was playing Nioh tonight. I didn't even get a message asking me if I wanted to install it or not. I thought that was mandatory. Anyways, I'll try and find a way to uninstall it later.

[Foggle]

I'm not sure if there's a way to disable automatic updates, but it's a pain. I'm sure they'll release another patch before too long fixing everything, at least. Platinum and SE are pretty good about that sort of thing.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

I played some more Nier: Automata today. I didn't notice any problems from my end, but maybe I just haven't come across any yet.

I'm up to the mission in the Forest Zone in 2B's campaign. While I'm still relatively early on in my playthrough, especially considering that I have two other campaigns to go through to reach the main endings, I do feel like I should be able to unlock some of those locked chests/doors by now. Am I supposed to learn how to hack later or did I just miss that feature along the way?

Some other thoughts I have on the game:

-This may have one of my favorite soundtracks from any piece of media ever.

-I do love the general feel of combat, but feel that the people likening it to Bayonetta or Devil May Cry are being rather misleading. It does a great job of mixing hack n' slash gameplay elements with shoot-em-up mechanics, and that in itself is a winning combination, but it's melee combat on its own is a lot simpler than games of those nature. I don't mean that as a criticism, as clearly it's not meant to be those games. I just get a tad nitpicky whenever I hear others bring up that comparison without understanding the level of nuance or complexity that separates the combat systems of those other games to this one.

-I'm not typically a fan of existential crisis character-driven stories, especially ones with a more tell don't show approach and too much obvious symbolism, but something about Nier's offbeat presentation, mixed in with its unique sense of humor and general weirdness makes the story a lot more palettable and enjoyable than I would normally find it.

-The art design is great on its own, and the graphics are quite pretty, but the intricate and specific use of color are the real star hear. I genuinely wish that more games would take note of how to properly utilize color filtering. Nier intentionally limits the amount of colors that it displays on screen at any given time, but it does so with the intention of creating scenery with stark contrasts in its aesthetics compared to the backgrounds. Thus the limited colors that are there really pop. It goes to show that simply adding lots of color for the sake of it doesn't automatically make a game look good, whereas the opposite extreme of filtering out too much color can look really ugly if handled in a lazy manner, unlike how this game meaningfully utilizes it in its scenery.

Overall, I'm really enjoying this game so far. Admittedly I'm still spending more time with Nioh because that may just be my favorite game of this decade, but it says a lot that this is the only other game that I have right now that can hold my attention outside of my current obsession.

[Foggle]

I think the bad patch affects text in the hacking mini-game and menus, but not everyone experiences these issues, so if your menus are fine, you should be in the clear for now. It also makes some of the environmental collision detection worse for some reason, and renders one of the shops unusable (it's not an important one, though).

You get the ability to hack those chests in playthrough 2 (which is very necessary, as is playthrough 3, as they both continue/expand on the story and gameplay). There are a few hackable doors, but one of them is opened as part of a side quest and three are locked forever for some reason... they're either there to troll players or will be used to access DLC eventually.

Glad to hear you're liking the game so much! Sounds like you'd also enjoy the original, probably. I really should pick up Nioh soon, myself.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

From a gameplay standpoint I think that my only real criticism of Nier: Automata (at least so far) is that the hit detection can be rather wonky. Clearly Platinum was aware of this which is why the i-frames on the dodge animation are extremely lenient, and it's not too big of a deal to get hit when you shouldn't have on Normal, but I do see why certain gamers like TS17 and others were complaining about playing the game on harder difficulty settings since everything pretty much one-shots you on Very Hard regardless of how high your level is, and most bosses are attack sponges unless you are high level and regularly utilize attack up buffs. Keep in mind that these are people who regularly do no damage runs of combat-oriented games, and essentially did the same for this game, but various deaths just ended up feeling unfair due to poor hit detection. Since this isn't one of those games that I really see myself playing on harder difficulties if only because I'm more than content with playing it until I unlock all of the main endings, it's not a bother for me, but I do think that it was worth mentioning since it is something that I've seen come up with higher-level players and veteran fans of Platinum Games.

Anyways, I just finished the mission with the castle in the Forest Zone. I do love this game's use of perspective changes, and how this level was a tribute to old-school 2D-style action platforming games, though melee combat always tends to feel a tad awkward in these sections, which is why I play them more like a Contra-style shoot-em-up.

I'm also liking how the combat dynamic between weapons changes depending on which weapons you have equipped. Rather than just switching between weapons on the fly, the weapon set that you have active will vary the combos that you can chain between any two different weapons depending on which combination you have between spears, small swords, and large swords. It's an interesting little system that's fun to experiment around with.

One thing that I've been wondering, though, is if there's any way to upgrade your plug-in-chip slot space. I've seen other gamers with more space on YouTube, even when playing as 2B, so I know that it shouldn't just be restricted to other playthroughs, but as of now I have no way of upgrading the space available to me, so I've had to make do with unequipping a few nonessential HUD and text-based chips (I clearly don't need one for fishing since it's pretty obvious which spots I can fish in, and I can just pause the game to see if I can save or not) in order to make room for just two extra ones in one of my sets.

I should mention that one thing that I really like about this game is that it really knows how to re-use assets the right way. What I mean is that while familiar enemies and bosses will come up a lot, and while you will be playing through the same areas as different characters, the games seems to do a really good job of having different encounters ready for you on subsequent visits to the same locations. Nioh sort of does the same thing with its sub-missions, though it's a bit different because that game completely remixes the level design while still utilizing the same assets of the main-mission levels that you fought in. And while I love that, there is something really endearing about going back to the exact same area that you were in but seeing what crazy new things the game can throw at you in that environment.

By the way, Foggle, have you seen the Skill Up review (on YouTube) for this game? It does quite a great job of analyzing what makes it work so well and goes into a lot of depth as to why it's one of the most important games to come out in a long time, even if most people don't realize it. It says a lot when the reviewer himself admits that he's not a fan of either hack n' slash or shoot-em-up games, but finds that Nier: Automata works for him in its combination of those elements.

Easy Allies (the best/only good game journalists in existence today) also did a really good review of this game (and Nioh, for that matter). While I have seen plenty of reviewers praise the shit out of these games, only these reviewers seem to be able to completely comprehend, and more importantly convey in words, why Nier: Automata works so well both mechanically and as an overall narrative. And Easy Allies also gave Nioh the same treatment to my delight, being the only professional reviewers to actually tackle why the game's mechanics are so brilliant on a more nuanced level than just other reviewers saying that "it has deep combat so it's good." Yes, it does have that, but so do a number of other games. What still allows Nioh to stand out on its own, though, is how it offers such a wide myriad of options to more skill-based players as well as less adept players who aren't particularly great with complex combos or timing. It has a way for everyone to progress. It just requires you to think through situations and be observant. Nobody else mentioned that besides EA, being among the few journalists who actually understand video game mechanics and how to explain them to people in an easy way to understand.

Anwyays, I mean to play Breath of the Wild at some point before the year ends if I can manage to save up for a Nintendo Switch, and I'm sure I'll love it, so counting that along with Nioh and Nier: Automata, I think that I can already say for certain what the three best games of not just this year, but this console generation (so far), and arguably even this decade are for me....well, unless Devil May Cry 5 comes out....and then again Team Ninja did say that Nioh was their gateway into the next Ninja Gaiden game, and considering how they managed to completely touch back with their roots and craft one of the most masterful action games of all time with Nioh, I'd say that all of a sudden my hope and desire for a great new Ninja Gaiden game is higher than it has been in ages. So, there's still a lot of room left for great games in this console generation and decade. However, Nier: Automata and Nioh (and presumably Breath of the Wild) will remain in high regard for me regardless.

[Mustang]

Started Persona 5.

Not nearly as addicting as people made it out to be. I popped it in and while time managed to fly, I could've stopped at any moment. That said, the way the game is presented is awesome. From what I've played so far my gripe is I'm still on the first "dungeon" and my goodness this is going on forever, and this was what made me stop playing JRPGs to begin with. To make matters worst, trying to keep up with SP is bothersome. I've used up what little items I've had to replenish SP, but can't get my hands on anymore items so when my party SP is down I have to leave entirely and go back the next day. I don't particularly care for that type of management. Then again, I suppose I'm not used to this either. Luckily the presentation is top notch. Even though I'm going through battle after battle, I'm not getting bored or fatigued (yet), and hopefully I won't because I can certainly see myself sinking a lot of time into this game.

[Foggle]

By the way, Foggle, have you seen the Skill Up review (on YouTube) for this game? It does quite a great job of analyzing what makes it work so well and goes into a lot of depth as to why it's one of the most important games to come out in a long time, even if most people don't realize it. It says a lot when the reviewer himself admits that he's not a fan of either hack n' slash or shoot-em-up games, but finds that Nier: Automata works for him in its combination of those elements.

Easy Allies (the best/only good game journalists in existence today) also did a really good review of this game (and Nioh, for that matter). While I have seen plenty of reviewers praise the shit out of these games, only these reviewers seem to be able to completely comprehend, and more importantly convey in words, why Nier: Automata works so well both mechanically and as an overall narrative. And Easy Allies also gave Nioh the same treatment to my delight, being the only professional reviewers to actually tackle why the game's mechanics are so brilliant on a more nuanced level than just other reviewers saying that "it has deep combat so it's good." Yes, it does have that, but so do a number of other games. What still allows Nioh to stand out on its own, though, is how it offers such a wide myriad of options to more skill-based players as well as less adept players who aren't particularly great with complex combos or timing. It has a way for everyone to progress. It just requires you to think through situations and be observant. Nobody else mentioned that besides EA, being among the few journalists who actually understand video game mechanics and how to explain them to people in an easy way to understand.

I haven't seen either of those reviews but I'll be sure to check them out! I love Yoko Taro and his games so much that I get a bizarre sense of pleasure out of seeing praise for them, especially intelligent praise. I've heard great things about Easy Allies in the past, but I don't pay much attention to gaming journalists or YouTubers much at the moment, so I haven't really looked into them yet. Sounds like they make some quality content.

Started Persona 5.

Not nearly as addicting as people made it out to be. I popped it in and while time managed to fly, I could've stopped at any moment. That said, the way the game is presented is awesome. From what I've played so far my gripe is I'm still on the first "dungeon" and my goodness this is going on forever, and this was what made me stop playing JRPGs to begin with. To make matters worst, trying to keep up with SP is bothersome. I've used up what little items I've had to replenish SP, but can't get my hands on anymore items so when my party SP is down I have to leave entirely and go back the next day. I don't particularly care for that type of management. Then again, I suppose I'm not used to this either. Luckily the presentation is top notch. Even though I'm going through battle after battle, I'm not getting bored or fatigued (yet), and hopefully I won't because I can certainly see myself sinking a lot of time into this game.

Yeah, uh, I haven't really been able to get into the game yet myself, and I've been waiting for it since 2008. I mean, I should love it, since it's got an excellent sense of style, great art design, and funky music, plus I'm a huge fan of Persona 2, 3, Catherine, and SMT in general, but... it just isn't grabbing me. I'm not sure if it's the extremely long prologue, poor localization, awful movement controls, or a general lack of patience for turn-based JRPGs at the moment, but it isn't making me care.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

Easy Allies is actually the same core team that made up Game Trailers before they were bought out by IGN and the site was shut down. Before that point, GT was literally the only big gaming site that was worth its salt. I have read articles and watched videos about why modern game journalism is the way that it is, but basically the commercialization of this industry and general density of new releases each year compared to the 80's and 90's caused the model of game reviews to become incredibly skewed to the point that it's at today. Since all of the major sites have deadlines to get reviews out by the time of the game's official release, or even before it, reviewers are forced to binge entire games within the span of a single week, or sometimes even less, which is not a way that a lot of regular people actually play games. Thus, reviewers don't typically replay games, and whenever it comes to deep and complex games that are meant to experiment around with and be replayed over and over to truly appreciate the value of their systems, they tend to have to come up with a review within a shorter amount of time than is allowed for that sort of play-style. So that's where you have shallow games like Uncharted, Batman Arkham, or God of War get heaps of praise by critics since those games succeed at crafting an engaging and exciting experience....for a single playthrough. Spending more time with them really does reveal how hollow they are past a surface level, though. Meanwhile certain other games may not get the attention to detail needed in order to truly ascertain their worth. God Hand and the original Nier are perfect examples of games that, while maybe not perfect by any stretch, were far better than what a lot of reviewers were willing to give them credit for since they just rushed through single playthroughs, got frustrated with combat or other mechanics, and didn't really understand how the games were meant to be played or what they were trying to accomplish through their gameplay or narratives, and thus you'd get middling to bad reviews that showed little to know understanding of the material being analyzed.

That said, GT was almost always the exception to the rule. Clearly their staff were big fans of a lot of the classics, both renowned and obscure, and in particular I love how you could tell that they actually understood how mechanics in character action games worked. In their reviews for almost any Platinum game, a company that they were clearly huge fans of even back then, they were among the only few who seemed to have clearly replayed the games on harder difficulty settings and could actually explain how some of the more advanced mechanics work. That's why you didn't get reviews for Vanquish or Metal Gear Rising coming from them that labeled the game as short, standard, or uninspired as a shooter or hack n' slash game, respectively, since they had been the few to truly praise the depth and nuance that those games had to offer, and didn't harp on either of them for having non-pretentious stories that made some casuals think that they were experiencing smart and sophisticated stories. I also love how they didn't cave into peer pressure either. When all of the big gaming sites and publications were shitting all over RE6, there was a general impression that you absolutely had to hate it otherwise you had no credibility. But they were the only big gaming publication who seemed to give it a fair enough shake, and whether you agreed with their assessment or not it was refreshing to see them actually review its gameplay mechanics and assess how well they worked or didn't work in terms of what the game design was trying to accomplish with its gameplay. Essentially, they reviewed video games as video games, not as glorified interactive movies or bad-ass simulators that catered to the lowest common denominator.

So, needless to say, I'm glad to see that they stuck together and returned as Easy Allies, and I'm glad to see them give the same quality of reviews to the games that they choose to tackle, most of which are the kinds that seem to suit my taste in the first place. As I said, these are the only game journalists that I actually bother to listen to.

[Foggle]

Oh, I loved Game Trailers! That guy they used for all the video reviews had such an iconic voice. I remember their review of RE6 being pretty accurate. The game has absolutely heinous level design and quick-time events, but the core mechanics are shockingly complex and great. It's definitely fun for one full playthrough, especially in co-op.

Personally, I think Arkham Asylum holds up for multiple playthroughs. The pacing & writing are really good and the gameplay switches up enough to not get stale, at least IMO. I could never see myself playing City again and have no interest in Origins or Knight, though. I tried returning to God of War when the HD Collection came out and couldn't get into it at all. I found the gameplay very boring and Kratos has got to be the least likable video game protagonist in history. I played GoW3 a couple years later and thought it was even worse. Every battle & set-piece lasts too damn long with the mashiest gameplay ever and Kratos' edginess is ratcheted up to sickening levels. A thoroughly unpleasant game. Vanquish is just like... damn. I mean, it's got problems, but the core gameplay is heaven on earth. It could be two hours long and I'd still love it to pieces & play it over and over. Reviewers not giving that one a fair shake is downright criminal.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

They were also among the few big review sites to praise The Evil Within rather than harp on it for not being as scary as people expected. Once again, they reviewed it as a game first.

Asylum was a good game. It was short and to the point, and that's why it worked. Personally, I played it on Normal and then replayed it once on Hard, and I didn't quite feel that the second playthrough had anything new to offer, but I'd overall give the game credit for knowing just how long to be, and not overstaying its welcome. It had tight level design with more cramped spaces that were fun to navigate, and it didn't deviate too much from what it did best.

City, on the other hand, took the bigger is better approach, putting you in a wide open area with lots of collectibles and a lot more fights. Consequently, the level design was considerably more lazy and boring, the collectibles felt obnoxious, the side-missions were disappointingly underdeveloped, and the gameplay felt painfully shallow when forced to repeat it so much against more content than the game's mechanics really called for. In that regard it has the reverse problem as a game like Devil May Cry 4, but the result being that at least DMC4 enticed me to play through it multiple times to discover all of the facets of Dante's combat system; as well as Nero's, which is comparatively more shallow but still with more nuance to it than most people initially realize. Arkham City already had me bored of it by the halfway point, personally.

Vanquish is the closest equivalent that the TPS genre has to a deep, technical combat system in the same vein as what Devil May Cry or Bayonetta have as hack n' slash games. This was a game with a unique combat system that encouraged you to keep moving and creatively use your bullet-time (such as throwing a grenade, slowing down time, and shooting it to detonate it in front of an enemy's face). The problem is that most critics didn't play it like a crazy stylish action game. They played it like Gears of War, which it clearly wasn't. Since the game didn't hold your hand, a lot of people didn't experiment with its mechanics and thus never got a feel for how it was actually intended to be played.

As for God of War, I played about halfway through the remaster for GoW3, and how this game got so much praise is beyond me. Like I said, I have no problems with people enjoying these games as fun button-mashers and not taking the story or Kratos as a character too seriously. It's not my cup of tea, but it's also mostly inoffensive as far as I'm concerned. The problem I have is when pretentious critics like Adam Sessler (among others, but I've always had a bit of a bone to pick with that guy in particular) hail it as "the best in the genre" while fully admitting that it did nothing to evolve its gameplay as a series since the first game, while also lambasting games like Devil May Cry for having "hair-brained" stories (despite clearly being written as the most intentionally tongue-cheek pieces of media in the genre) and criticizing its combat system because he "could never get a good style ranking" in them (paraphrasing here, but he legit claimed this when badmouthing the series). This is also, mind you, the guy who claimed that Capcom was racially insensitive for having predominantly African enemies in Resident Evil 5, despite it clearly being a part of that game's story that an outbreak happened in Africa and this being made by a Japanese studio that I'm just going to take a wild guess probably isn't made up of very many white supremacists....also fuck Spanish people, by that logic, since he never complained about Resident Evil 4's race problem....but, you know, that was a legitimate concern on his part wasn't just some cheap ploy on his part to cater to the ever-growing PC/SJW crowd.

Sorry to go off on a tangent there, but I only mentioned Adam Sessler because I consider him to be the shining example and perfect representation of everything wrong with "professional" game reviewers at their absolute worst. But, yeah, God of War, the pinnacle of high-budget mediocrity in the medium. I do have some respect for the series' creator, though, as he seems to be rather chill and un-pompous about the success of this series, and has even gone on record admitting that the DMC series has a better combat system than any GOW game, so at least he's not clueless as to what his games really are, and I'm personally fine with that.

That said, while we're on the subject, I'm actually kind of happy to see the new God of War game get so much backlash, especially from a portion of its own fan-base. It gives me some faith in the gaming community when people can see how much they are being pathetically pandered to in a way that doesn't even suit the franchise that the game belongs to in the first place. TGBS made a great video about it: https://youtu.be/tY6vIDCK7iQ

[Foggle]

They were also among the few big review sites to praise The Evil Within rather than harp on it for not being as scary as people expected. Once again, they reviewed it as a game first.

Excellent. I will still defend that game on my deathbed. It's got some glaring flaws, but it's one of the most intense, memorable, and unique games I've played. A lot of people criticized TEW for having similar gameplay to The Last of Us, but having played both almost back to back, Evil Within at worst took those mechanics and made them far deeper and more fun. While I found TLOU frustrating and at times plodding on Normal difficulty, TEW's Survival mode was an exceptional test of skill that rarely annoyed me despite my 100+ deaths. Definition of a flawed masterpiece in my book.

City, on the other hand, took the bigger is better approach, putting you in a wide open area with lots of collectibles and a lot more fights. Consequently, the level design was considerably more lazy and boring, the collectibles felt obnoxious, the side-missions were disappointingly underdeveloped, and the gameplay felt painfully shallow when forced to repeat it so much against more content than the game's mechanics really called for. In that regard it has the reverse problem as a game like Devil May Cry 4, but the result being that at least DMC4 enticed me to play through it multiple times to discover all of the facets of Dante's combat system; as well as Nero's, which is comparatively more shallow but still with more nuance to it than most people initially realize. Arkham City already had me bored of it by the halfway point, personally.

Yeah, I really struggled to get through AC. I basically just ignored all the side quests after a certain point because they were so bland. The level design and writing were a huge step down from Asylum and I think the main story is actually shorter than AA.

As for God of War, I played about halfway through the remaster for GoW3, and how this game got so much praise is beyond me. Like I said, I have no problems with people enjoying these games as fun button-mashers and not taking the story or Kratos as a character too seriously. It's not my cup of tea, but it's also mostly inoffensive as far as I'm concerned. The problem I have is when pretentious critics like Adam Sessler (among others, but I've always had a bit of a bone to pick with that guy in particular) hail it as "the best in the genre" while fully admitting that it did nothing to evolve its gameplay as a series since the first game, while also lambasting games like Devil May Cry for having "hair-brained" stories (despite clearly being written as the most intentionally tongue-cheek pieces of media in the genre) and criticizing its combat system because he "could never get a good style ranking" in them (paraphrasing here, but he legit claimed this when badmouthing the series).

The most annoying thing about this is that I would easily take Devil May Cry's stories over God of War's any day. Dante, even at his most boring (DMC2) and immature (DMC4) is still miles more charismatic than Kratos. He's a lovable character with a great design and that alone makes him fun to play. Same with Vergil, Trish, Lady, Nero, even Lucia - they're all fantastic.

This is also, mind you, the guy who claimed that Capcom was racially insensitive for having predominantly African enemies in Resident Evil 5, despite it clearly being a part of that game's story that an outbreak happened in Africa and this being made by a Japanese studio that I'm just going to take a wild guess probably isn't made up of very many white supremacists....also fuck Spanish people, by that logic, since he never complained about Resident Evil 4's race problem....but, you know, that was a legitimate concern on his part wasn't just some cheap ploy on his part to cater to the ever-growing PC/SJW crowd.

Really the only racially-insensitive part of RE5 is that bit in the swamp where the dudes are running around with grass skirts throwing spears, and I doubt the Capcom developers understood why that imagery could be considered offensive. (Which doesn't make it okay, but it does make it understandable. It's not particularly malicious anyway.) The rest of the game is literally just RE4 in Africa. Eyebrow-raising at most. I don't remember anyone who actually knew anything about the games buying into that controversy back then, but it sure was successful clickbait.

Sorry to go off on a tangent there, but I only mentioned Adam Sessler because I consider him to be the shining example and perfect representation of everything wrong with "professional" game reviewers at their absolute worst. But, yeah, God of War, the pinnacle of high-budget mediocrity in the medium. I do have some respect for the series' creator, though, as he seems to be rather chill and un-pompous about the success of this series, and has even gone on record admitting that the DMC series has a better combat system than any GOW game, so at least he's not clueless as to what his games really are, and I'm personally fine with that.

David Jaffe is an interesting guy. He really gives no fucks and most of his games are at least interesting if not great. Unfortunately I find Drawn To Death's art style repugnant, but I respect the unique look they're going for.

That said, while we're on the subject, I'm actually kind of happy to see the new God of War game get so much backlash, especially from a portion of its own fan-base. It gives me some faith in the gaming community when people can see how much they are being pathetically pandered to in a way that doesn't even suit the franchise that the game belongs to in the first place. TGBS made a great video about it: https://youtu.be/tY6vIDCK7iQ

I remember seeing the footage for that at E3 and being utterly bewildered. It bares almost no resemblance to God of War as we know it, so they might as well have just made it a new IP.

Gaming Brit also recently uploaded a feature-length video about the Ratchet & Clank remake vs. the original. A lot of people might find it rather nitpicky, but his criticisms of the story, overall style, and current trajectory of the series are spot on. Aside from the lazy reusing of PS3-era weapons yet again, I highly disagree with him about the gameplay being underwhelming and too easy, as I find it to be around the same level of difficulty on Hard mode as the PS2 game, and I think it has some of the most satisfying shooting in any TPS, but his other points really echo my own thoughts on it.

The PS2 games were just brilliant from a narrative perspective - the stories were never overbearing and the cutscenes were usually quite short, but the humor frequently landed and it was jam-packed with sociopolitical satire. Also, even though Ratchet is way too much of an asshole in the original game, he's the only video game mascot character I can think of who actually has an arc, and his developing friendship with Clank was great. Plus, the scene with Clank's mom still gets me a bit teary even to this day. The PS4 game doesn't have any of that, and it's probably due to being a movie tie-in, but geez. Ratchet and Clank barely have any dialogue with each other at all, the story is way more generic and loses all of its satirical elements, there's no real character or relationship development... I mean, I know it's a series of kids' games and I probably care way too much about this, but Up Your Arsenal and A Crack In Time genuinely have some of my favorite video game writing, and the fucked up capitalist dystopia that captivated me as a kid is all but gone now. To say nothing of how much better the classic OSTs were.