Space Engineers

There's nothing wrong with loving space, so I'm going to follow up my post on Shattered Horizon with another on a game which I expected would be similar, Space Engineers. The game is still under development by Keen Software House, but is available for early access through Steam for the hefty sum of $19.99. Now, generally, such a price on something that isn't done yet would deter me, but after thoroughly enjoying the concept I found in Shattered Horizon, I was eager for a more satisfying game with the same "lost in space" feel to it. So, before doing any of the appropriate research, I bought Space Engineers. To say that I regret buying it and that the only good thing I'll be getting out of the game is this blog post might be too harsh so early on, but at the moment I'm a bit sensitive about getting someone's hopes up before they're utterly dashed.

And now that I've set your expectations as low as I can, let me expound on the good aspects of Space Engineers. It has multiplayer. You can swap between first- and third-person camera views. You can build things and then look at them. So, now that that is done...

The game manages to be reminiscent of Minecraft, Robocraft, Shattered Horizon, and Kerbal Space Program all at the same time. It refers to itself as a sandbox game about engineering, construction and maintenance, yet it is, in essence, merely game about blocks (at this stage in development). If you've played Minecraft in creative mode then you've played Space Engineers, except that this game is in space which apparently means you inevitably float away from whatever you are working on (Oh, and don't bump into things or those will float away, too!).

I do think there is a market for games like this one, but I am sure that I am not a part of that demographic. Minecraft is quite popular among some groups and to fans of that game I'd recommend taking a look at Space Engineers, but if you're like me then those games lose your interest astonishingly fast. Don't get me wrong, I like to build things, I used to play with Legos for hours, I found construction to be the best part of Robocraft, but this game feels aimless. The trouble is that I don't enjoy the building process. For one thing, it's infuriating just trying to stand still as you can never quite get your inertia back to zero. True, you can stand on a platform while you work for some stability, but then you move like an over-encumbered dragonborn. I understand that these things are part of a realistic space simulation, but Space Engineers is a block-building game (at the moment) that is only made more frustrating and less fun for all the realism in it. I'm supposed to be frolicking through my imagination, not struggling to get close (but not too close!) to the slab of bricks I built to take me back to the space station.

Still, Space Engineers isn't a game without hope, it's just a game that they shouldn't be selling yet. I'm hopeful for the engineering and maintenance aspects which I have yet to see added to the game, and I do believe there are gamers out there who would enjoy this game as it is more than I do. If Space Engineers can find that audience it stands a chance of entertaining some folks, but it would also be wise to avoid a more massive market unless the game has a good deal more to offer in regards to narrative and variety than is currently available.

Shattered Horizon

"Shattered Horizon" is a first-person zero-gravity space shooter by a Finnish software development company called Futuremark Studios. As a leading producer of computer benchmark software, one might expect that Futuremark's "Shattered Horizon" is a game designed for cutting-edge PCs but it seems that they've elected a safer, simpler approach to their game design.

Gameplay: The first hurdle the player faces in Shattered Horizon is the control scheme.  The game's tutorial consists of four images explaining the keybindings, the HUD, and the game modes, which altogether does little to prepare the player for the experience. It takes a game, maybe two, to adjust to the spinning and rotating which make this game special. Unfortunately, that is typically about as long as you'll be playing this game unless the number of players online picks up dramatically. Single player is simply a match versus bots and, since I have never seen another player playing online, the multiplayer mode is virtually identical. This might be related to the fact that there is no clear means of creating a multiplayer lobby. Beyond this, the game itself includes just five generic classes ranging from shotgunner to sniper.

The zero-gravity element, however, adds flavor to all of this blandness. Once you've learned to land, roll, lift-off, and boost the maps become playgrounds of skill and strategy. The first time I encountered an upside-down AI bot firing away I was convinced that the concept of this game was its strength. Not only is the zero-gravity element exciting and refreshing to a genre that is beyond stale at this point, it invites a gamer to imagine how awesome first-person zero-gravity games could be. The experience of this game is one that does not entirely serve the game because the best parts have nothing to do with the objectives. There is an undeniable joy and an immutable sense of freedom in jetpacking around structures in space which overshadows the combat-centric game modes. The fundamental flaw in Shattered Horizon is that winning the game asks the player to ignore the most enjoyable part of the game's experience--the atmosphere.

"There is an undeniable joy and an immutable sense of freedom in jetpacking around structures in space which overshadows the combat-centric game modes."

Visual Effects / Art Style: Shattered Horizon relies on the atmosphere it creates to deserve your playing time. To this end, it is important that the game's visuals serve both as interesting spectacles and entertaining battlegrounds. Satellites, shipping containers, and asteroids create an environment which is desolate, eerie and captivating. The cold silence of the final frontier can be felt best when the player deactivates their HUD (purportedly to make them harder to detect for enemy sensors) leaving them in the soundless vacuum of space. The environments themselves are highly satisfying and provide an engaging backdrop to the task at hand, but the backgrounds beyond are less adept at maintaining the ambiance as they tend to be mere star maps. As for the visual effects specifically, the HUD is hard to read and the maps are entirely static. It would be nice to have a chance to blow up a few things or start a fire here and there in order to make the environments a more engrossing place in which to play. As it is, the map textures are pleasing, but the game lacks a deeper attention to details.

"As it is, the map textures are pleasing, but the game lacks a deeper attention to details."

Sound Effects / Music: The most powerful sound in space is silence. The darkness is vast and bleak and the game should capitalize on the opportunity to make the player feel lonely. While deactivating the HUD and drifting near your team's spawnpoint demonstrates that Shattered Horizon is capable of this, the objectives and endless respawns of AI bots counter this effect a great deal. Given the space-faring concept of this game, it is subject to the principle of 'less is more',  and yet it seems the developers did not keep this well enough in mind. It's nice that deactivating the HUD gives the player that deep-space feeling, but the game's design makes this an unreasonable strategy. Between the gunfire and audio messages a great deal of the ambient satisfaction is lost, and that's a real shame in a game which has demonstrated that it is capable of it.

"Between the gunfire and audio messages a great deal of the ambient satisfaction is lost, and that's a real shame in a game which has demonstrated that it is capable of it."

Story and Narrative: I wish there was more to say here. The simple fact is that the majority of the story that Shattered Horizon provides comes in blurbs tucked away in loading screens. While long loads makes for ample time to peruse these tidbits, they do little more than explain the motives for each teams presence. The teams themselves aren't any different, so the games have nothing beyond a simple "red vs. blue" setup. I mentioned above that the game invites the player to imagine ways that the game's concept could be employed elsewhere, as in an FPS-RPG à la Mass Effect. In short, it feels like there is a lot of potential here that's being squandered by a tired game model.

Entertainment Value: There are a few things worth experiencing in Shattered Horizons. For one, there is the atmosphere that a zero-gravity first-person game creates. For another, there is the joy of exploring the space-scape, dodging behind asteroids and peeking over solar panels. And yet for all the promise held in the game's concept, the execution leaves much to be desired. They started with a great idea and they made that first idea work, but then they followed a formula for everything else. Couple that with empty multiplayer lobbies and you've got a dud on your hands. A pretty dud, mind you, but a waste of $9.99 all the same. If this were a F2P game, I'd say download it and experience the atmosphere, but instead you're better off waiting for a better developer to pick up the idea and do something worthwhile with it.

"...you're better off waiting for a bigger developer to pick up the idea and do something worthwhile with it."

Lastly, I've got a couple 3-day passes for the game. Leave a comment if you're interested!

New Post Format II

After some thought, I'd like to make a few tweaks to the way I focus my reviews. In some ways these changes take a new angle on the same essential ideas, while in other instances it will lead me to talk about games in more specific ways that I might have in the past. So, let's talk specifics:

Gameplay: Still my first category but no longer one I would consider "most important", Gameplay is where I'd like to discuss the way a player plays the game. This means the control schemes, the duration of play sessions, and how these things effect the "feel" of the experience. I intend to make this category shorter and more specific.

Visual Effects/Art Style: An adaptation of the "Graphics" category, Visual Effects and Art Style will still be about the visual experience of the game, but will include more specific discussions on the aesthetic qualities of particular facets of a game. I will focus on moving away from relative comparisons and into my thoughts on what the visual component adds to the game.

Sound Effects/Music: In my previous posts, I have found a tendency to emphasize the necessity of effective in-game sounds. I hope that bringing greater specificity to this review category will bring new insights into good game design and a better guide to how a game creates atmosphere.

Story and Narrative: To my chagrin, many of the games I pick up lack well-developed stories. This is a serious problem among free-to-play games (which I review most frequently) that typically sets them apart from bigger, triple-A titles, but rather than using this category to grind that axe, I hope to focus more on constructive criticisms pertaining to how a game's narrative could be further developed.

Entertainment Value: An adaptation of the "Value" category which also borrows from what was cut from the  old "Gameplay" category, Entertainment Value is where I'll discuss a game's value-for-dollar as well as the impact of the experience. Games cost time, money, and attention in order to provide an entertaining experience.

Previously, in the "Value" category, I had intended to discuss the artistic contribution a game made to the whole industry, but the nature of much of what I am able to review makes this largely unnecessary. I don't mean to say that F2P games don't contribute to the art of video games, but I have seldom found it to be a highly relevant factor to recommending a game. If a game has artistic merit, then I would expect that merit to make a contribution to the way a game entertains the player and it will still be considered in the "Entertainment Value" category.

The next post I have planned is about a game called Shattered Horizons. I will be giving this scheme its first run there, and also plan to include a gameplay video. Look forward to it!

ESO Launch and First Impressions

The Elder Scrolls Online officially launched on April 4th, but I've been playing since March 31st with 5-day early access. My initial impressions were positive: I saw a great many players roaming Tamriel with their pre-order bonus vanity pets and Imperial Horse mounts. Last minute changes to the starting zones were frustrating to some story-centric players, but as someone who participated in several beta tests I found the opportunity to skip ahead of much of what I had already experienced to be a pleasant surprise. All in all the launch for both the 5-day and the 3-day early access went very smoothly.

With the true launch of the game on April 4th, some new problems came up. While the game itself is far from bug-free, the bigger troubles came from policies and systems external to the game. With the end of the early access periods and the beginning of subscription-based play-time, players were required to use their 30-day pass (included with the game) as a sort of registration key before they were prompted to select a subscription plan. The failure or inability to do either of these things meant being locked out of the game. This frustrated players who wanted to use their 30 days before deciding whether to subscribe for longer, but more egregiously those who had not received their codes were left helpless. In response to this, a grace period for submitting the code was extended through part of Sunday.The problem was that deliveries aren't made on Sundays, so some players were unable to play the game until their codes were delivered on Monday. This is what happened to me and, as someone who paid for the Physical Imperial Edition (the expensive one), it was disappointing to not be treated as a valued customer.

But when I think about judging a game's launch, what is happening in the game is far more important. If I'm delayed a few hours for some server downtime or a day for a delivery to be made, I would still be more frustrated by the game itself not working for me. In that respect, bugs are still popping up in spite of the lengthy beta testing phase and relogging to fix small glitches is disruptive to the experience. If the Elder Scrolls universe was not one which I loved, I would feel more inclined to recommend it to MMO players. As it is now, I would say the game better serves Elder Scrolls fans as the atmosphere is true to the game's predecessors and knowledge of the world-lore adds depth in the world which is otherwise easily skipped over. It might be more effective if ESO served as a bridge for MMO players into the Elder Scrolls universe enabling the Elder Scrolls fandom to grow, but the opposite is true and I see ESO bringing Elder Scrolls fans towards the bewildering landscape that is MMO gaming in this Free-to-Play, Pay-to-Win era.

Speaking as an Elder Scrolls fan, what I want most from ESO is for it to bring on an expansion of the franchise, not just internally through the game's lore, but externally as well as the fandom grows and more people take notice and take an interest in the game.

To that end, I'm already finding amazing things. For example, ShoddyCast, a YouTube channel, has been publishing an Elder Scrolls Lore Series:



And there are a lot more things coming from ESO, like these gamplay walkthroughs from YouTube channel IFreeMZ:



In my opinion, though, one of the best things coming from ESO are these trailers from Bethesda Softworks themselves:


Overall, ESO's launch certainly hasn't been perfect, but they have avoided some of the bigger pitfalls that other games have fallen victim to (like entirely halting digital sales of the game, FFXIV). The game itself is satisfying to Elder Scrolls fans like myself, and as long as we keep talking about it the game's popularity is sure to grow. The game needs to continue to grow as well, in patching up its bugs and glitches and in providing players more and more story to delve into. We are adventurers, after all, and we're going to need a steady supply of mysterious dungeons, caves, and keeps to hold our interest.

Smite's Official Release!

Today, Smite is officially out of its beta testing phase! This game is one which I have posted about multiple times in the past, and a game which I play almost every day. Most of the changes the game has seen over the last few months have brought it closer to a League of Legends clone, and yet, while that's not typically a compliment, I believe it has helped guide this game. Even their new cinematic teaser (below) is reminiscent of LoL's trailers in style and mood.

Recent changes to the item store in particular have made this game feel even more like League of Legends. LoL's popularity has been growing and the realm of e-sports has been growing around it, so hitching their wagon to LoL's train isn't a bad strategy. Still, it is becoming more difficult to describe Smite in its own terms. If the abilities become known by their LoL counterpart, and gods which should feel unique become amalgamations of LoL's champions (who are themselves amalgamations of DotA characters), then it becomes difficult to bring new players into the game--something I dearly hope for.

They're newest addition to their roster of gods, Ullr, doesn't add much to the game creatively. While I'm interested to explore his strengths and weaknesses, I would hope that future god releases include characters with a little more imagination in their abilities. It does compensate, somewhat, that his skin, "Strider", makes reference to  J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings", but I would prefer that the skin itself was more than just a change of color. The other skin they added recently, Dark Lord Sun Wukong, is clearly "inspired" by Star Wars, and if they're willing to run the risk of copyright infringement, why not an Assassin's Creed "inspired" skin for Ullr?

Now, before Hi-Rez has a chance to make major changes to their game again, I would like to share a quick gameplay video I recorded a few days ago. This match was over after only about 10 minutes, but most matches are between 15 and 25. The gametype is Assault (ARAM) and I play as Ra, a relatively basic god and one of the several available to new players for free. More than anything, though, my goal here was to give you some idea of what this game is like and, at the very least, this video can accomplish that.

If you haven't heard of Smite before or would like to give the game a try, check out it's page here

The Feel of the Game: War of the Roses vs. Chivalry: Medieval Warfare

Last night, I got to thinking about how "feeling" makes a game into what it is moreso than the mere facts of its description. To illustrate this, I present the examples of War of the Roses and Chivalry: Medieval Warfare. These are two games which look very similar on the outside, but feel quite different to the player playing them. While WotR feels rooted in history, Chivalry is really all about the action.

On it's Steam store page, Chivalry is described as "a fast-paced medieval first-person slasher with a focus on multiplayer battles" and it's most popular user-defined tags are "Medieval", "Multiplayer", "Action", "Melee" and "Gore".

User-defined tags for War of the Roses are very similar: "Action", "Free to Play", "Medieval", and "Multiplayer". But the game's description is less focused on describing the gameplay than it is on the historical aspects: "Battle online with up to 64 players through 7 historically inspired war zones as you experience the conflict between Lancaster & York first hand!"

But trying to describe their differences is inherently difficult. In both games you take on the role of a soldier. In both you choose between a variety of weapons, whether long-ranged or close, heavy or light. And in both games your ultimate goal is to slaughter the other team with superior skill and tactics. Getting more specific, both games ask the player to rely heavily on timing blocks and attacks, both try to inspire the player to see the match as a battle in a much larger war and world, and both use similar control and camera schemes. But the games become different as soon as you actually play them--once you actually feel them.

So, let me show you what I'm talking about.  Below are two videos of me playing each game. In Chivalry, there is a sense that buffoonery and ridiculous ideas have a place. It is more light-hearted than WotR, wherein a serious sense of historical accuracy is made dominant. Both games feature a wider variety of game types and weapons than I can demonstrate here, so my goal is to focus on what it is like to play an average match rather than explore the potential depth of the experiences.

What cannot be imparted through video or words is the way a game responds to the players inputs. This is an important part of the feel of a game, but short of putting the game in your hands it is not something I can show you. How well you are able to control a game makes a significant contribution to how you feel while playing it--are you in control or out of control?

What you are able to see in these videos is how pace and style develop the atmosphere, community, and sensations of these games. While WotR is slow and serious, Chivalry is fast and frenetic, and yet both games are trying to accomplish the same thing--an enjoyable, medieval experience.

In parting, I would be remiss not to mention "War of the Vikings", the next game from Fatshark and spiritual successor to WotR. I had a chance to play the game in its alpha-stage and, while avoiding saying anything specific, the game does a better job of accomplishing what it sets out to do. It has more in common with Chivalry in ways that don't make it unlike WotR and I feel that it will represent a step forward.

Twitch, eSports, and Orion: Dino Horde

Twitch.tv, an internet streaming service, isn't the only site on the net for streaming games, but it is quickly becoming the most popular. Through a Twitch account, users can stream live video onto the site for anyone to see. Streams can also be recorded and re-watched later. Similar to the "Let's Play..." style videos on YouTube, Twitch's service is providing a platform for players to connect, communicate, and learn from one another. But beyond this, the service enables gamers to watch their favorite e-sports in much the same way as they watch more traditional sports. In short, gaming livestreams are making e-sports more accessible and that enables them to grow.

Previously, Major League Gaming (www.majorleaguegaming.com) was the place for watching live streams of big-money gaming tournaments. But this limited fans to only popular franchises like Halo, Call of Duty, and Starcraft, while less popular gaming communities were left out. The rise of Twitch and similar services is an opportunity for the gaming industry in many ways, and I'm hopeful for the changes that are coming.

Currently, Twitch is streaming content from League of Legends, Dota 2, Starcraft 2, which are games you could have found elsewhere, but they are also streaming games like Diablo 3, Minecraft, DayZ, Hearthstone, World of Warcraft, and Super Smash Bros. which would have been much harder to find in the past.

In my own experience, streaming to Twitch has been difficult for online games. I wanted to stream some Smite, but the lag I experience while doing so makes the game unplayable. In concession, I went to find another game I could stream and share my thoughts on. So, here it is, in all of its anachronistic glory, Orion: Dino Horde!

Watch live video from zzSandman on TwitchTV