No Man's Sky

--- Spoiler Warning ---


In a limitless universe there's no such things as an ending.

This afternoon, not a few hours ago, I reached the centre of the Euclid Galaxy in No Man's Sky. It took over 200,000 light years, 446 systems, 97 planets and more antimatter than I care to mention. Upon so doing, I entered an unmissable cut-scene. Instead of moving forwards like with all previous system jumps, space fell backwards and I with it, making brief glimpses at systems shooting away from me. Some of them must have been ones I have visited and named during my journey. I travelled further and further back until there were no stars to see and darkness reigned; until the featureless void before me split down the middle in a horizon of white light. This flared past the limits of my vision, rendering me senseless, until I awoke upon a new planet in much the same way I had at the very beginning of my journey. My ship was in dire need of repair, I had new ground below and a new sky above. I stood on a rolling hill at the sunset-lit valley before me, another planet close by hanging in the sky behind the evening clouds. A few moments later I would converse with Atlas and, this time, accept the guidance of its path. My adventure is far, far from over.

Before these humbling events and while working to this goal I began to hear rumours, due to my liking of Screenjunkies' Honest Trailers and a comment from my brother in law, thus leading to my research into several critique websites. It came to my attention that the mainstream opinion of No Man's Sky is the ending is anticlimactic, disappointing or simply downright rubbish. 
If I may speak honestly myself, I find this opinion to be anticlimactic, disappointing and downright rubbish.

In this writer's opinion, these critics have missed the point of No Man's Sky. It, unlike any other game in existence, is overwhelming in size and scope. It allows the naming and designation of new worlds and species of animals, never before seen but since immortalised by my hand. There is a finite number of planets to explore but at 18 quintillion our own galaxy will come to end before we can walk on all of them. It is a game like none other seen before it.
It is a perfect, realistic representation of what would happen were humans ever inclined to move on from our world; they would have an endless universe surrounding them, a chance to explore and categorise it all by their own choices, and most importantly they never, ever finish. 

People have critiqued the game for having no story line, my counterpoint to which is: "So?" Space exploration, adventurism at is purest, even life itself, doesn't have a plot or story unless you create one. We are our masters of equilibrium and disruptions to it, but have gotten used to playing part to somebody else's. We are too used to titles being so rich in narrative, we rebel when games allow us to "self serve" and use that underestimated and often forgotten human power known as imagination. I for one congratulate HelloGames for the invitation into their world and a glimpse into 'procedurally generating' technologies which I hope to usher in a new age of big, beautiful and infinite video games.

(And, on a personal note, I would always prefer no story to a poor one.)

This is not a review of the game itself; this is a review of the reviews. To anyone disheartened or 'let down' by reaching the centre, I ask what you were really expecting? Some lush and heaven-like utopia? A peek behind the red pulse known as Atlas? Perhaps an answer to that baffling and infuriating question simply known as "Why?"
As a race we are destined to never know these things but spend our lives yearning to find out. No Man's Sky portrayed that beautifully and poignantly. Yes, there were hardships. Yes, there was frustration. Yet I continued on through the cosmos, determined and in search of truth, in so similar a way that we all do in "real life." I didn't find it today. I'll still be looking tomorrow.

I expected what lay at the centre of the galaxy, before watching online videos and reading reviews, because what else could it have possibly been? The underlying truth to all things is never easily within our grasp, and crossing one galaxy is not nearly enough to achieve it.

And when your task is to seek the centre of all creation, you must not be surprised if you end up right back where you started.

The Evil Within

The Evil Within
Developers: Tango Gameworks
Director: Shinji Mikami - developer of Resident Evil games and regarded as a king of gaming horror
Publishers: Bethesda Softworks
Known as in Japan: Psycho Break
Platform I played it on: PlayStation 4

“What do you fear, little one?”

Dr Jonathan Crane, meet Elizabeth DeWitt. Heart-pounding tension across multiple dimensions. That’s The Evil Within in a nutshell. If you can keep your sanity and bravery in check for long enough, across the ever shifting planes of twisted realities, you might just be able to understand the storyline and plot. No doubt you’ll die trying.

Booker? Booker DeWitt, is that you?

It begins, as every horror story should, in the rain. Detective Sebastian Casteanos – not Spanish but sure sounds like it – is looking into a series of brutal murders occurring in Crimson City’s mental hospital. Good start. Five, certainly not ten, minutes into the game and you’re met by the main antagonising antagonist. You won’t know his name for some time, you’ll only think he looks like a zombie in Assassin’s Creed clothing. But this zombie is fast. Sebastian watches on the CCTV as Enzio-Zombie kills four policemen in quick succession, looks up at the camera and is suddenly behind him. Then let the horror begin.

By Enzio-Zombie’s power, you are cordially invited into his own personal nightmare. Across fifteen in-game chapters, you will come to know his rage, his fear, his passion, his back stories and his absolutely INFURIATING one-hit move of killing you simply by touch. It’s quite a thing to see, resembling an ultimate-fail high-five. His arm goes up and your legs come off. Everything fades to black, my apologies, red. Because you're in his barb-wired-brain, he rules everything and changes everything. A hospital can turn into an asylum, a church can turn into an underground labyrinth and, for some reason, two crushing walls of giant mannequin heads can end at a cornfield. I don’t know. I’m not mad.

Okay, that mad.



Ruvik. Or as I christened him, 'Stitches'

Fortunately, Enzio-Zombie – from now referred to by his real name Ruvik – doesn’t appear all the time. He leaves the job of killing you horrifically to his inner-demon-minions, known as the Haunted. I can’t fully tell what they are to Ruvik. A cutscene at the start of the game suggests they’re just your usual average Joes and Josephines that have been clawed into Ruvik’s world of sheer dominating thought. The general concept of The Evil Within involves combining the minds of others into one collective mind. As you'd expect, it doesn't quite work out. People don't like to share thoughts and memories, it's understandable that they want to fight back when it feels their brain has fallen into a needle pit. Like all horror genres, the main character is somehow excluded. Something about Sebastian keeps him sane, keeps him away from the glowing eyes, horrendous skin conditions and that general “I wonder how your intestines taste” sort of look. His job is to survive and escape them, or simply kill them. And not just kill them, slaughter them and burn them with his dwindling supply of matches or else they get. Right. Back. Up. Or they lie in waiting for you to walk over them and suddenly you’re without a left shin.

You can also use headshots or explosives to do the job. Tricky to get up when your head and feet are occupying the exact same space.

That’s just the little monsters, the used-to-be-normals. In Ruvik-land, there’s a whole load more nightmares. I’m unsure on names, so I personally fought “the girl from The Ring crossed with Dead Space aliens”, the “Fishermen”, the “Mutant Wolf” (two varieties), “Safehead” and “fuck-fuck-fuck-fuck-fuck-GET IT AWAY FROM ME!” The latter actually adapted as a name for most in-game enemies. Especially the invisible ones.

You read that correctly. Invisible. For about 90% of the time. They're quite generous, they do become visible just when they're inches from grabbing you. So keep an eye out for moving bottles and doors, or else you'll end up with a lot of tentacles very suddenly in your face.

But all the hell-bent horrors, all the masked, armoured, armed, fat, full of nails, debris, glass and furiously angry, are what contribute so well to the in-game tension. Never in my life have I gripped a PlayStation controller so tightly in such an everlasting state of terror. It's always there, gently chewing on the undersides of my brain and letting your spine go ever so slightly colder. A few chapters in and experience made, your own manic preconceptions are so well integrated that even walking around is scary. You start to mistrust things like...corridors, doorways, floors, the ceiling, basically everything you'd think would be a constant. There's a sneak mode and trust me, you'll use it. The slightest noise, a twitch in shadows and *thwpp*, knees bent, crouched and progressing at a speed that although doesn't get you there fast, it might just get you there alive.

Fortunately, the tension calms (to a point) for the storyline transitions and save points. Leading on from the mentioned shifting realities, behind every cracked mirror is 'The Asylum' which, like it or not, is your save haven. It allows you to exchange green gel collected in game for upgrades, as well as the bitchiest receptionist you'll ever run into. Feel free to make quips every time she asks "whatever is the matter?" (She even asks 'A careful one, aren't you?' if you visit in quick succession) You just fought two mutant dogs that outweigh Cereberus, you don't need that kind blasé crap from anyone. Also enjoy how your save haven starts to turn on you over the course of progression. The Asylum you start in is never The Asylum you leave. It certainly taught me one thing: always listen out for Claire de la Lune. It plays softly behind every splintered cracked mirror and each eerie, yet somewhat soothing, note basically translates as "get in! We've got some down time!" 

You'll also get a chance for a breather with the narrative based cut scenes. Sure, scary stuff can still happen but at least you know there's bugger all you can do to stop it. You'll make the run for your life - the only thing you have left - and then walk calmly into another room to chat with your fellow detectives (who funnily enough drop in and out as frequently as Infinite's Lutece twins), Ruvik's old partner, or Leslie. (For spoiler reasons, you can find out for yourself exactly what Leslie is. All I'll say is, have fun chasing him!) 
It's something that threw me, or made me laugh, every single time. Sebastian will crawl his way out of multiple nightmares, literally claw away from demons and ass-tightening boss battles, and never ever act like it. There's a couple of "what?" or "oh shit" (rather more justified), but for the most part Sebastian plays the calmest horror genre protagonist I've ever seen/played.

(With the exception of Jack from BioShock. But Atlas never said 'Would you kindly speak?' so what're you gonna do?")

I guess it can only be a good thing, we've all seen horror films and games where 80% of the dialogue is screaming and hated it. But I'd have liked a little something, just a smidge more emotion. Especially when he saw the final boss - play it and see.

The Keeper. Agreeable looking chap, isn't he?

At least the weapons show emotion, even if the ammunition is less than limited. There's a pistol, for desperate measures, a shotgun, for head-explodey measures, a sniper, ditto, and the Agony Crossbow. With a name like that, you know it means business. Its ammo is derived from scrounging for tool kits or disarming bombs. They supply you with gear pieces, to create ammo. There's a good eight variations of bolts, but I can guarantee the one you'll return to the most is the Explosive head. Clears a crowd, shortens a boss battle - though if the times comes when you've unloaded three into The Keeper's side and he's still standing, you will swear. Believe me. There's also a basic spear, fun for head shots, and an incendiary bolt. The latter costs a lot of gear pieces, but spouts three plumes of flame for a short time. Loosely translated, get one into the middle of a crowd and brother, you're laughing. Your enemies sure won't be.

As I've mentioned it, be sure to scrounge. Scrounge, scrounge, scrounge like a thief. Not just from an advantage point of view, you will need to. The ammo you require is hidden in cabinets, in forgotten old rooms. Pick up axes, kill with torches, ALWAYS MAKE SURE YOU'VE GOT MEDICINE. etc etc etc.

And while I have this chance? Sebastian, baby...you can't sprint for shit.

Anyway! Now that I've survived it, after 15hrs 25mins and 38secs, and a grand total of 34 deaths, I have this chance to reflect on what it is easily the scariest game I've ever played. And one thought that's been playing on me all throughout: is it scary? Or is it just hard? Does the tension of avoiding enemies actually translate as a desire to miss them and survive? Because every time you die horribly, yes it's not a sight you want to see, but what else does it mean? I means you have to do it all over again. There's a scene around the middle chapters when Ruvik is chasing you, all with his one-hit-kill move. I failed a few times, exploding into death and such. Each attempt following was tense, sure, but was I tense because of the demonic assassin teleporting (yes, teleporting) after me, or simply tense because I couldn't be bothered with a second attempt?

I'm not sure myself. Certainly parts of the game disturbed me and that isn't linked to anger or frustration. I had to perform three different brain experiments on subjects that were still alive. I sure as hell wasn't furious. In fact I was rather British in apologising every time the needle hit memory sections rather than emotions.

But I can say quite definitely that I enjoyed playing The Evil Within, and if that makes me worthy of being admitted into Crimson City's mental hospital well...just loan me a shotgun first. It's been quite a while since I've played something so immersive, so mesmerizingly and hauntingly addictive and, something that's missing from a lot of modern games, so challenging.

Maybe that's my Evil Within. Always a desire to play again.

I'll admit that since buying my PS4 I've yet to find a game that has truly justified my purchase. My fingers are crossed for Arkham Knight. For now, The Evil Within gave it a damn good go.

See the trailer here, you know you want to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxlo67zhOWc

Catching Fire

Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Donald Sutherland, Phillip Seymour Hoffman

Duration: 2hrs 26mins

Director: Francis Lawrence

The franchise-universe of a dystopian future, massive oppression and Battle Royale homages returns for part two. The second of Suzanne Collinn's The Hunger Games trilogy has hit the big screen. So how does it compare?

Just when you thought it was "safe" to go back in the arena...

The Hunger Games ended with Katniss and Peeta's "love-fuelled" screw-you to the Capitol, by the two of them surviving the Games (just). From their actions, ideas of a rebellion start to sift through the air of the districts, and Katniss is the first beacon of hope seen in a very long time.

Thus, President Snow and new Game-Maker Plutarch Heavensbee (what a name) set to work on destroying Katniss' image of hope, and failing that, Katniss herself. Their plan starts with Katniss and Peeta's Victory Tour, trying to make Katniss one with the Capitol. Seduce her with enough parties, glamour and interviews, and soon enough the Districts will lose affection.

But Katniss is hardly one to forget her roots, and back home, she continues to stand up to stormtrooper-esque Peace-Keepers and other Capitol representatives. So Team Snow/Heavensbee come up with a darker plan.

Every twenty-five years, the Games get a little "Quarter Quell" special treatment. For the 75th annual Hunger Games, previous victors are to be the competitors. "Wait, isn't Katniss the only female victor in District 12....oh." What better way to destroy a catalyst for rebellion, and still make it seem like an accident? So will Katniss survive her second bout in the arena? You'll have to find out for yourself...unless you've read the books, of course.

On that note, the first Hunger Games finished up with an outstandingly faithful book-to-film adaptation. Catching Fire happily continues this legacy; points to new director Francis Lawrence, successor to Gary Ross. Catching Fire is quite a busy book; one half devoted to destroying Katniss' image, and the second half, her, in the Games. It isn't an equal half-and-half, the arena gets the slightly bigger slice. The film is much of the same, although the 'slicing' is a bit more equal.

This is fine for the first half, the film covered everything necessary in a little, easy to digest package. The second half, however, seemed to shorten time within the arena. Now this actually worked quite well for fast-paced, exciting action scenes; they're just not very spaced out. Twice, a load of competitors die in less than two minutes. To split Catching Fire into two films - as they're doing for part three - would have been absurd, but it could have done with being just a tiny bit longer. Just for some breathing room. Although the Games don't tend to work that way!

Hot couple. No?

Still, fast-paced or not, Jennifer Lawrence still had plenty of time to give another great performance. She's got Katniss covered well; the tough girl with occasional soft spots. She'll slowly have to work 'leading a rebellion' into her character which may perhaps be a challenge for her, but that shall become important later on. For now, she's doing very well with her 'victimised' methods.

Josh Hutcherson, Peeta, was up to his usual standard of 'Good, if sometimes a bit wooden'. He can do a good Peeta, but every few lines or so his emotions seem to falter, and he has an incredibly vacant gaze for times like these. There's something in his eyes as well; he seems like a worthy opponent for a staring contest. But in any case, Hutcherson gave another commemorative performance, none-the-less.

Donald Sutherland, President Snow, is sublime. With only small parts in Hunger Games, it was easy to forget him. In Catching Fire, he plays the power-mad, rebellion-fearing part brilliantly. A very early scene consists of Snow visiting Katniss to warn her of the seriousness of her actions, and to keep within Capitol guidelines on her Victory Tour. Sutherlund's intimidating demeanour makes that scene so delectably tense you may just forget to breathe.

And Phillip Seymour Hoffman spoke for the entire film like he's got syrup in his mouth. Not a lot of syrup, but enunciation's never been his strongest suit. You may notice it the most when he talks quietly. But anyway, another strong performance.

Then finally, the visuals of Francis Lawrence are just as glorious as Gary Ross'. The Victory Tour takes us through a multitude of decaying districts, particularly around the higher numbered. Districts 11 and 12 look strikingly similar though; coincidental, on-purpose or lazy backdrops. Take your pick.

Was Effie 'born this way'?

This does perfectly contrast to the awesome spectacle of Panem's Capitol. Its vast cityscape, almost reminiscent of Star Wars' Coruscant and populated by followers of Lady Gaga's fashion sense - especially Katniss and Peeta's friend Effie Trinket. The Victory Tour party scenes were particularly vibrant, incredible and just a bit bizarre when Effie walks in and squeals "Ooh, curtains!"

Then, the visuals that this author particular awaited, those of the Quarter Quell arena. It was, in essence, another forest - but a forest locked within a force field. Graphics for both were phenomenal, helped along by the director's use of IMAX cameras. And just wait until the extra-spectacular special effect at the end...

It is also worth nothing that Francis Lawrence had different views on the use of shaky-cam. It hasn't completely disappeared, but there is a massive improvement. Lawrence did a great job with Catching Fire, it felt like less of an indie film and more of a blockbuster, which is well deserved, given the franchise's huge popularity now.

Overall, it's definitely a recommendation for those who enjoyed the books and previous film alike. And it's only been out for a week. It's still all there, waiting for you.

For further enticement, here's the theatrical trailer for you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAzGXqJSDJ8

The L(e)ast Of Us

(Author Note: It's a review, there shall be some SPOILERS)

I constantly find that trying something new, when you already have opinions and reviews about it in your head, can dramatically change the way you perceive and, possibly, enjoy it.

I obtained and played Naughty Dog's The Last of Us on PS3, because I had heard and read that it was, potentially, the 'Best Game Ever'. There's nothing new there, it's natural to try something because of good reviews.
But if you try something with good reviews, its reviews aren't usually as dramatic and huge as 'Best Ever'. You'll read a book or see a film because you heard good things about it; but because it's apparently the 'Best Ever'? That's a whole different kettle of shish kebabs.

As a result, I started playing The Last of Us and went into it, looking for reasons why it had earned its title; instead of purely playing it and living it as any other game.
I found good things, I found new things, and I found why people may think it's the best game ever.

But I do not agree.

I'll explain why later. Start on the positives and keep a hold on the tension.

So, Step One: Game Synopsis. I always like making this short and vague; saves me some work and might interest readers enough to give it a go.
(And, in this case, see if you agree with me or the world. When I put it like that, I'm not too confident, but like I said, we'll get to that bit.)
The Last Of Us: An Unfortunate Father's Tale.
After a bit of relationship-establishment, the game starts with father Joel, his daughter Sarah and Joel's brother Tommy, fleeing their home city after a brain infection hits.
This little sequence ends when Tommy and Joel plus Sarah are separated. The father-daughter-combo get cut off by soldiers dealing with the situation, and Sarah is shot.

As Spoilers and Plot Points go, it's a pretty dark one. Books, films and games mostly avoid the idea of child-death. The Last Of Us blasts that one out of the way less than twenty minutes in.

Anyway, this easily sets up Joel as this damaged, brooding character who does what needs to be done to survive as the world changes for the worst around him.
Out there, the world is separated into the infected, the survivors, the military, the Fireflies (AKA the rebellion) and the Hunters (AKA the murderously desperate).
All of these are met and dealt with in their own way, when Joel is given the task of escorting a young girl - see where this is going? - to a safe zone because she's survived being bitten and shows a potential for a cure. This little Humanity Beacon is named Ellie; and Ellie is obviously there to put the whole Joel-Lost-His-Daughter shebang to the test.

Yes, they develop an attachment.
Yes, there's tension and heartbreak.
No, there's no twist like she's actually Sarah and back from the dead. This isn't a B-movie.

There's your little snippet of this walking Game Award.
So why exactly is it so highly acclaimed?
Well, it's got fantastic graphics, great voice acting, strong (as possible) realism, immersive-ness and capacity for addictiveness. For a good game is like a good book; you just can't leave it alone for long.
(That does also describe a strong itch, among other things, but never mind.)

In all the technical criteria (visuals and audio etc.) of Gaming 101, The Last Of Us has pretty much covered all bases and passed every class.

But you might overlook all these things, like most similar situations. Who watches a film and looks behind the actors to look at the CGI? It's not the technical stuff we're after, it's the plot and character-relations within.
As you will easily imagine, the huge main point of The Last Of Us is the emotional turmoil. Joel's history colliding with Ellie's rebellious-teenager-nature does lead to many arguments between the two and even more stirring scenes for the player to watch and, for some, weep over.
So it's not just a zombie-survival game; it's the emotive journey of two conflicting characters.

And THAT is why I disagree with The Last Of Us being the potential 'Best Game Ever'.
A zombie game, avoiding gore but more concerning the development of entirely different characters = where have we seen that before?
Oh yeah.
EVERYWHERE.
Shaun of the Dead, Dawn of the Dead, Resident Evil, ZombieLand, Left 4 Dead, 28 Days Later, 28 Weeks Later, Call of Duty Zombies (at a push, I'll grant you), Dead Island, The Evil Dead - the list is pretty extraordinary; just type in 'Zombie Films' and 'Zombie Games' into Google and you'll see.

The Last Of Us has a central idea, plotline, setting and character-relation-system that has been seen too many times before. It is nothing new, it's just another zombie-survival game to throw on a rather ridiculously big pile.
If you think I'm over-reacting, add in another zombie expert and you've basically got a 28 Days Later game. In honesty, I enjoyed 28 Days more as well.

TANGENT
All this actually brings me onto a secondary point. This shall be a post-within-a-post. But I'd like to discuss the views of the game-review-industry; particularly the ones concerned with giving The Last Of Us the 'Best Game' potential.
I feel like the actual best games are rather neglected or ignored by games like The Last Of Us, the ones all about zombies, or guns, or killing, or war. (The endless line of Call of Duties, for instance)
It feels like no-one gives two monkey balls about plot anymore, and they really should.
Video Games have developed SO MUCH since they started out a few decades ago, and as time has passed and technology has improved, the physical stuff that made up the games itself improved dramatically.
It's all come a long way from massive pixels and 2D platformers. But new games do seem to be reaching a limit for how advanced they can look and sound. Technology can really only get them so far, awards-wise, and eventually, all games will look as equally high-tech.

So as we approach that day of Visual-Equality, games now only have plotlines to really stand out and differ from the rest. But modern games and reviewers seem to be ignoring this.
Today, it's all STILL war, revenge, survival, racing or some awful mix of everything.
Take GTA for example. It's been years since the bird's-eye-view-cam; and have the storylines changed from all the misdeeds and revenge?
NO!
TANGENT SOMEWHAT FINISHED

So now I return to The Last Of Us, and that little tangent explains why I disagree that it could be the 'Best Game Ever'. It's got all the technical bases covered and done, but plotline and basic originality is nowhere to be found.
And at this developed stage of video game history, that is no longer a feature you can just ignore.

*

 

So, what is my 'Best Game Ever'?

Those that know me will probably think I'm about to say BioShock Infinite.

(Which, as I read recently on another blog, is known as "BioShock Infinite, the best game ever oh wait The Last Of Us is out.")

Now, granted, I do dearly love BioShock Infinite, as well as the other two, and they all come close to the 'Best Game Ever' mark in my head.

 

But my 'Best Game Ever' award goes to LittleBigPlanet.

That game led me to get a PS3 which effectively started my career as a 'Hardcore Gamer'.

Its creativity and capacity to create has inspired many stories I have written in the past, as well as making my favourite ever personal character creation.

And it is like no other game, ever.

 

Sorry Infinite. But you didn't make me a gamer. LittleBigPlanet did.

And as for you, The Last Of Us?

You are just another, glorified zombie game. I eagerly await the next big game event which steals your title.

 

Peace out!