I don’t know if I’m allowed to do this here. I haven’t seen a post like this and honestly it’s kind of stupid that I did this.

For about fifteen years, I’ve been a big Metal Gear fan. The series hooked my imagination young, but for all its flaws, my appreciation for it only grows as I do. Every replay so far has yielded new neurons, as I get older and learn more about the world. Superficially the games are spy thrillers, but that sells short the overt philosophy, real-world geopolitics, political commentary, and anime bullshit. And the references, dear God the references. Be warned, if you haven’t played them this post will make no sense.

The franchise’s superstar creator, Hideo Kojima, is perhaps the biggest cinephile to never even try to work in the film industry, for reasons nobody has adequately explained to me. MGS is, in part, a tribute to all his favorite shit; I haven’t seen another creator, in any medium, whose influences are more numerous or well-documented. MGS takes a hodgepodge of Western cinema and literature, mixes into this pop culture gumbo, and filters it through the mind of one Japanese lunatic. The result is a work so overflowing with reference and homage that it’s hard to keep track of it all.

[EDIT: It occurs to me that maybe I should say more about the games themselves, genre-wise. Metal Gear Solid sets the stage with overt 80's Hollywood cliches and mecha anime, but weaves in some philosophizing on free will, genetics, anti-nuke politics. Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty is... hard to pin down, but for now let's call is a conspiratorial cyberpunk thriller and postmodern deconstruction of its predecessor. Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater is a Cold War tragicomedy and James Bond spoof.]

A year ago I made this shitpost, which took a surprising amount of research. It sparked an idea – “What if I watched all of Kojima’s inspirations while replaying the series?” Knowing the games so well, this could make me appreciate them even further, or at least give me and my dad more to talk about. The problem is knowing when to stop. There’s the obvious ones (Rambo, Bond), but why stop at movies? Some novels might aid my understanding, especially for MGSV. What about nonfiction sources? The scope grew irresponsibly as I continued to follow my nose. 

Since then, I’ve made my way through about 20 films, 12 books, and only 3 MGS games (I got burnt out on this for a while, shocker). I went beyond direct influences and sought out anything that would help me understand the games better and looked interesting. This is not comprehensive. I just want to share the things that have interested me the most so far.

If there’s a foundational text for MGS1, it’s Carpenter’s Escape from New York (1981). Legendary soldier Snake Plisskin is pulled from retirement by an untrustworthy colonel to covertly neutralize a terrorist threat. He’s injected with nanomachines, sent in underequipped, captured. He realizes he’s been manipulated for political purposes. He even has an eyepatch! God, I was pointing at the screen the whole time like the DiCaprio meme. But it’s also a very entertaining, surprisingly moody film. Almost proto-cyberpunk, which pairs it nicely with Akira.

The finale of the spectacular 1988 film is incomprehensible without reading the manga, so I did that too (it’s great). Akira is far more action and vibes than dialogue, but like MGS, it’s concerned with atomic destruction and authoritarianism. Also, a diagonally-descending platform elevator that’s suspiciously familiar. As an intro to cyberpunk, this led me to Blade Runner and Ghost in the Shell, and more familiarity with the genre helped me make sense of MGS2 in particular (virtual reality, AI, artificial blood, etc).

I think people generally overestimate how much James Bond is in MGS, but Snake Eater is the clear exception as a direct spoof. Maybe a more thorough 007 dive is in my future, but for now I settled on watching GoldenEye. It’s alright. There’s a mildly interesting thread that interrogates whether Bond is too old-fashioned for this new post-Cold War world, but I’m not sure it goes anywhere. I had a lot more fun rewatching Austin Powers, which lampshades or lampoons many of the same tropes.

How does MGS compare to classic spy thrillers? Perhaps unnecessarily, I read your dad’s favorite book, The Hunt for Red October, which was…fine. Tom Clancy definitely shared Kojima’s fetish for technical military jargon, which can be tiresome. And the Reagan-era patriotism frequently undercuts the tension; every US agent and technician routinely schools their Russian counterparts. I respect that MGS is okay with letting America look bad.

Speaking of which, nobody told me that Rambo wasn’t always stupid. I went into First Blood expecting macho tough guy bullshit, and instead I get a tearjerking performance from fucking Stallone, of all people. Destroyed and discarded by his country, Rambo returns from war with a thousand-yard stare and a tragic inability to leave the battlefield behind (extremely MGS-coded). My understanding is that every sequel is, unfortunately, macho tough guy bullshit. But anti-war media morphing into vapid propaganda because it accidentally made war look too cool? Believe it or not, also MGS-coded. This is where Big Boss gets a lot of his DNA.

I knew Kojima practically invented the stealth genre in 1987, but I didn’t know how much of the literal mechanics of video game stealth also came from movies. The Great Escape (1963) is one of the biggest inspirations for the series’ gameplay and scenario writing: POW camps, escaping through tunnels, motorcycle chases (think MGS3 in particular). And from The Guns of Navarone (1961), infiltrating an impregnable fortress and destroying the high-tech weaponry inside. I thought they were both pretty fun. During the latter, I had a sudden feeling of transcendence across time and space, watching Gregory Peck throw an object from behind cover to distract a nearsighted guard.

Sometimes my curiosity led me to things I later realized aren’t very relevant, even if I liked them. Googling “movies about genetics” led me to Gattaca (1997), a eugenics dystopia that I vaguely remember from 9th grade biology (it’s good). Some thematic resonance with MGS1 there. All the President’s Men (1976) was gripping (Hoffman and Redford really acted their pussies off), but I probably didn’t need to go that far just to understand the name Deepthroat. And I read Paul Auster’s New York Trilogy, a postmodern headscratcher, simply because MGS2’s Peter Stillman gets his name from it. No, it didn’t teach me much about MGS2, but I think The Truman Show did. You see how I burnt out on this in a few months?

I read a few non-fiction books on things like the Manhattan Project and genetics, but this is already too long, so I’ll spare you the details. But I have to share this gem of a quote from Mark E. Lester, the director of 1985's Commando:

>“There was a weird thing that came out in this book an African boy wrote. It was disturbing–it said the kids in this African country were watching Commando before they went out to battle. I felt bad when I read that. I mean, it’s a movie, but they were showing it to these kids to psych them up.”

Turns out Raiden’s “image training” is real after all.

If I haven’t scared you off by now, you may have surmised that this stopped being about the games a while ago. At least, not fully. I just found an excuse to learn about a lot of things I already thought were interesting. Hell, this helped me get back into reading as an adult, and now I’m doing it all the time. Playing through the games again was almost a footnote, fun as they are.

I needed a long break, but eventually I’ll continue with MGS4, Peace Walker, and MGSV. There’s some obvious ones I’ll have to hit (Mad Max, Moby-Dick), and it might be good to research for all the Che Guevara stuff in PW. Suggestions are very much welcome, but please, please don’t tell me I forgot something, because I probably didn’t.

[Spoiler free review]

Over the last few months, I took the plunge into SMT 3. I have played thousands of games over my life, and I can confidentially say I have never experienced anything quite like this title. For context, this review is based on my completion of the True Demon Ending, which took just under 65 hours.

It’s an amazing game - a timeless masterpiece that stands head to head with the other renown classics of JRPGs. It’s brutal in difficulty, but not unfairly so. The story is morally ambiguous, and forces you to draw your own conclusions on what is just. The setting is captivating, but at the same time horrifying with it's usage of liminal horror and occult themes. The cel-shaded artstyle is slick and aged like wine. Perhaps most importantly, the gameplay is some of the most satisfying turn based combat I have ever experienced. If that wasn’t glowing enough, SMT 3 even has Dante in it, for some reason. Some extra cool points for that inclusion.

Story

In the first 20 minutes of the game, the world ends and a blonde kid forcefully implants a demonic parasite in your body, transforming you into something less than demon but more than human (Demi-Fiend).

Unlike most JRPG stories, the world already ended; your goal is to more or less navigate through the new apocalyptic Tokyo and.. survive. Most of the dialogue is in philosophical bits-and-pieces from spirits you meet around the world (pretty much everyone but five humans perish in the world-ending event). While the story isn't the main focus, the bits given are loaded -- leaving you a lot to think about long after the game's conclusion. In general, it's a refreshing twist on a genre with such strong tropes and cliches.

Gameplay

SMT 3 largely shines in gameplay more than anything else. This game was the godfather of the 'press-turn' system; a mechanic that greatly rewards you for exploiting enemy weaknesses (and punishes you for lack of doing so). It still feels fantastic to this day. Combat is fast and fun. I was also blown away by the sheer amount of bosses in this game - if you are aiming to best them all, Google suggests there are over 50 in the game alone!

The core gameplay loop here is understanding boss strategies and weaknesses, and retrofitting your team composition to handle whatever comes your way. This is made quite doable with demonic fusion - a way to fuse two demons together to create something new entirely. It's easy to reacquire your old demons, so the game is flexible in encouraging experimentation. Once you get the loop down, it's hard to resist.

The difficulty spikes I felt were highly enjoyable. As mentioned online, the second I hit Matador it became clear what SMT 3 had in store for me. You definitely need to be an individual who enjoys challenge to get mileage out of this game.

For dungeon design and world design: in general, there are a mix of good and mediocre dungeons. I really enjoyed the Diet Building, that was awesome. The Labyrinth of Amala was pretty cool, but I needed to cite a guide for the fourth Kalpa. I think the only design I felt was genuinely frustrating was the final dungeon crawl, which felt like a slog with many random teleports, high demon encounter rate, etc. I would gently encourage folks interested in the game to keep a guide handy just in case.

Art

I also want to point out that this game looks awesome for a 2003 title. The cel-shaded artstyle looks like it could've been created today. Seriously, great art direction and a lot of great set-pieces to accommodate this.

Music

The soundtrack is pretty awesome as well. It fits the liminal horror vibe of the game with ease and has some great tracks (Labyrinth of Amala fight track is fantastic).

Critiques

Especially near endgame, the demon encounter rate is unreal. You can't walk three steps without engaging in a fight, and half of the demons will just spam Mamudoon. Felt a little tedious to me. Additionally, the endgame is loaded with super cool demons you are able to unlock; by the time you are able to utilize them the game is over. The optional puzzle-boy minigame desperately needed save state abilities.

Conclusion

Overall, this is an unmissable JRPG. I am glad I played it. I would put this as the same tier as Final Fantasy X in terms of overall quality, which is a pretty high bar in my mind. I would recommend this to anyone who enjoys a challenge and finds the art or setting somewhat interesting.

Edit: One last thing, there are some great QoL mods for the PC version that I would encourage. They do not detract from the difficulty or experience.

• The mini-map QoL enhancement saves you from spamming the map key every five seconds.
• Hex-editing so the game renders at 4K is a huge game changer.

Recently I picked up a Switch 2, my first Nintendo console since the Wii. I actually didn't really get the console with the intention of playing lots of Nintendo exclusives, but with the amount of praise that this game receives online, I felt like I had to check it out. Breath of the Wild is my first Zelda game, and I had pretty high expectations for it going into my playthrough. I think for the most part it managed to meet those expectations, and I have a lot of good things to say about the game. For reference, I played the Switch 2 edition of the game.

I think one of the games biggest strengths is actually the structure of the main quest. Once you get to the point where you're objective is to free the divine beasts, you kind of have to find and complete shrines so that you can increase your stats. A lot of my exploration didn't happen because a quest or NPC told me to go somewhere, it happened because I was running to a tower or shrine, and then stumbled across something else that looked cool. I get that some people won't like this, but really felt like the game gave me the opportunity to explore, while at the same time feeling like I was making progress on the main quest. I really liked this aspect, and although I'm sure it exists, it's not something that I've seen in other open world games before.

Initially I found the combat to be kind of challenging in the game. The character movements felt really good, but I think that especially with the amount of health and weapon options that are available early in the game, encounters with enemies could be quite punishing. As the game progressed however, I found the combat to be quite rewarding and fun.

I'm not typically someone who will do a ton of side quests, and I didn't do a ton in Breath of the Wild. For me, I don't really feel like this detracted from my experience, but let me know if you think I missed out. I put more energy into looking for and completing the shrines, and had a lot of fun with the puzzle mechanics involved there.

I don't really have any big criticisms of this game. The weapon durability thing was annoying, although honestly I eventually reached a point where I was finding enough good weapons that I didn't really mind it anymore. Probably my biggest gripe was there not being a good way to keep track of recipes/elixirs. I get that experimentation is part of the point here, but I got tired of just having to guess how many hearts the food I cooked would restore.

In conclusion, I liked Breath of the Wild a lot, and I think it deserves the praise it gets. I'm not sure it completely blew me away, but it's definitely one of the better open world action/adventure games that I've played, and I think that it's going to age well for me. I'd definitely recommend it to anyone who owns a switch, and it made me interested in playing some other Legend of Zelda games in the future.

For some context I recently decided to play all the main non-RPG AC games in order of release. I played the first four on release and all the newer ones since origins also on release so for me games in the middle like Unity are me playing them for the first time.

Hard game for me to rank as I for me this game has clearly the best gameplay and the worst story so far. Best gameplay of the pre-RPG ones, top 3 locations, impressive NPC density while all great are still not big enough improvements for me to rank this higher above the other pre-RPG games as those have a significantly better story. The RPG ones have better gameplay, modern graphics, more polish so I would rank this in the series only above Mirage.

I still enjoyed this game a lot, just did not love it like the games I ranked higher.

To start with the positives this game is one of the biggest leaps in the series on what it tries at a technical level. Graphics are very improved (still pretty dated) compared to Rogue (insane these two games released same date) and the NPC density is some of the best in gaming. And not only just raw density of NPCs, but variety in their looks and actions. What they did is obviously just shuffle various possible combinations of npc clothes and actions, but the illusion works almost all the time. Most of the npcs will be just walking down the streets or rioting near a landmark, but they will be varied and all around them will be small groups doing different things. A guy carrying a looted stone cross, two people carrying an injured friend, a man leaving his house accosted by beggars, somebody sweeping in front of his shop or fixing a barrel. Some of these are pretty rare and I saw them once every few hours and only rarely I just saw something that slightly broke immersion like three people (out of very many on the screen) with exact same clothing or three people fixing their table in a row on the side of the street.

For me this was the first time I would say this series has decevent combat because this is the first time it has any difficulty at all. So far all the protagonists were absolutely unbeatable in combat and you were in danger only if you attempted things you were obviously not supposed to and even then you could win. Here with enemies having levels with increased hp, damage and better moves/defences at higher level gearing up Arno is important and the world is a bit dangerous. This is obviously not a hard game and anything is solvable by just charging through the front gate, but you do need to gear up first and have consumables and pay attention slightly compared to previous entries.

Level design is also often very nice with missions being mini-sandbox levels with multiple ways to approach the target and some scripted ways to gain an advantage. Also I liked the design of the world and how while many buildings could be explored to find a chest it often took some effort to find the entrance and then navigate through the houses.

Stealth is a bit mediocre by you not having that many tools for it and guards reacting often too fast, but I still thought it was enjoyable. Often you could use stealth to do quite a bit and then when you get discovered you could often just kill the guards nearby to go back to stealth. And even if everyone gets alerted it still felt immersive to get discovered mid way through and then having to fight.

The city itself is also very impressive. Very detailed, varied from poor to rich parts, obviously impressive recreations of real life locations, dense and felt very organic like a real city with unique buildings, often lacking symmetry etc.

Parkouring despite being very important in AC games is not something I usually think too much about as I always find it very similar to other entries and it is always good however this one is obviously different and my favourite one when it works. Arno can clmb mostly everything and he does tricks to look cooler while doing it. He also cant climb absolutely everything like in the rpg series which finds a very good balance. Being able to climb absolutely everywhere is a bit unrealistic so sometimes having obstacles or lack of purchase is fun however them being fairly rare and not needing obviously marked things like the Ezio games sometimes did removes some frustrating parts. How far Arno can jump and what he can climb is very unrealistic, but feels like something out of a cinematic when it works.

The setting is also very good. Top 3 for me. When I started the game I was not really looking forward to the setting however a dense urban zone with political turmoil is obviously just perfect for an AC game. Finally I enjoyed how they did not split the sides into obviously evil and bad ones and it is a bit messy.

A small positive I would like to point out is that the economy is actually a bit interesting and even if you rush the most obvious path to get passive income and loot all the chests you will still need cash until near the very end.

Moving on to the elements I did not like I will start with the biggest one and that is the story. Out of the eleven AC games I played this is tied with Mirage for the worst one. It is not outright terrible and I was a bit interested in it while playing it, but it is just very forgettable. That is mostly because Arno and all of the Assassins are dull. Only three Arnos allies I can name are not Assassins and two have smaller roles. And the plot is less related to the revolution than I would like. Only interesting part is them actually killing of a big character and Arno being expelled from the Assassins, but that part is resolved off screen. When replaying the Ezio games 20 years later I could still remember a lot of the story while I finished this game two days ago and I had to refresh some of my memory with some recaps to write this. It is just so forgettable.

I know I am often in the minority on this take, but I really enjoy the modern day story in AC games and I think this is actually the worst one by a decent margin. It is so irrelevant, but not entirely gone either and present just enough to be annoying while having no substance. And that is especially jarring after Rogue which connects to everything else and while nothing too major happens at least it is intriguing. It even mentions events that would be connected to Valhalla. Also here is finally where the series loses all its slightly "edgy" conspiracy stuff. 2 had a lot of this in the glyph puzzles and they basically imply every conspiracy has some truth to it and so many people are Assassins and Templars. They even have live footage of an elephant about to be executed by "Templar" Edison. BF and Rogue had a tiny trace of it with some niche (maybe?) stuff like Akashik Reader or Voynich Maniscrupt mentions, but there is nothing like that here (unless you count Nostradamus which I dont). The changing of severs is just annoying while it is sometimes visually fun with some WW2 scenes.

The map is crazy overstuffed even for an AC game. It has like a few hundred chests and other pretty lame collectables. The only fun side content are the murder mysteries which to be fair are surprisingly good. Enjoyed those a lot.

Not a fan there is also some regression in various systems. Why did we lose repairing the city, freeing the forts, managing Assassins or crafting?

Finally and this drawback is pretty significant the game is pretty poor on a technical level. As many of these pre-rpg games this has a lot of bugs, crashes and it is required to tinker with the settings to get it running (at locked 60) a bit too much. The bugs are often pretty bad and require a restart. Getting shot while climbing has like a 10% chance to get you stuck in a falling animation forever, just fighting will stop working a couple of times per hour and need a restart, the parkouring will often glitch wildly.

Lost Sphear is a 'retro'-style jrpg released in 2017, by Tokyo RPG Factory, which was a subset of Square Enix and has since been (unfortunately, in my opinion) absorbed into the company. I played it on the Nintendo Switch 2 in 2026. TL;DR is below the post.

Given that the last game I played was Harvestella, I guess my current drive is to play chill, low-key, AA JRPGs. If anyone has any more recommendations, I'm all ears.

Plot Overview:

The story concerns a world where people and places, even kingdoms, become 'lost'. This means they turn white and shimmering, as though they were made of mist, and cannot interact with the outside world. In order for them to become real again, they must be restored with 'memories' that have since been turned into monsters. Our hero, Kanata, is an orphan who has the ability to kill monsters, collect their memories, and restore things and people that have been lost.

Combat:

Combat is where this game shines.

The basic combat is a standard ATB system, which lends to its retro feel, but its assorted bells and whistles make it stand out.

I won't delve into its intricacies, because this post would be too long if i did. But if you're into ATB systems or just interesting combat systems in general, especially turn-based, I recommend it. It has active abilities, passive abilities, and abilities that proc on active abilities and can be permanently stacked onto them, so as you get more powerful your basic abilities have more and more customized effects. Advancing your abilities is much more important than leveling.

What's more, a few hours into the game you receive >!mech suits!< that have their own suite of abilities and increased states. They have a limited pool of '>!mech!< points,' so they don't last very long, so you have to strategize and use them wisely while exploring a dungeon and contending with its end boss.

Grinding, Gear Progression, and the In-Game Economy:

I would never mention this if it weren't fucked.

To be brief: items require upgrade materials to upgrade. Upgrade materials are too expensive. This necessitates grinding. The combat system is not made to make grinding fun or quick.

There's more to it, but the simple truth is that I spent a full day grinding when I shouldn't have had to, on top of hours spend grinding before that. I wish this entire game had been implemented without the need for upgrade materials. Nothing would have changed except the need to grind.

Visuals:

The visuals overall reminded me pleasantly of Bravely Default and Alliance Alive. Chibi characters and a gentle, low-color-saturation water-color aesthetic. Character designs are unique and fit their personalities. The environmental design deserves special recognition.

Music:

The music was great. Can't think of a single weak theme. As I mentioned above, the dungeon design was great, and each theme worked well with its dungeon. According to IMDB, the composer, Tomoki Miyoshi, hasn't worked since 2022. What a shame. Hopefully he finds a new project soon.

Story and characters:

I'm big on story and characters. It's the number one thing I look for in RPGs.

This game satisfied me. The story was familiar: start as an orphan in a small village and work your way up to working with major world forces to defeat the big bad. Explore exotic locations, get swept up in world events, and pick up companions along the way.

We start with three characters: a generic main character, an annoying best friend whose job it was to overreact to everything, and a female character whose only role is react to the annoying character by getting annoyed. Thankfully, this dynamic ended quickly, and a variety of new characters were introduced to the party as the story progressed. Our main three also receive appropriate time and character development. Save maybe the female character, but her practicality and stability made her one of my favorites over time. She never left my party.

I found myself getting very fond of each character as they were introduced, and even a bit emotional when one of them >!appeared to be dying. I actually wish they'd followed through and killed that character; the game would have had more teeth if it did!<. Regardless, each of them contributed to every story point via dialogue, and when the game ended I felt invested in what would happen to them.

There is an >!end game!<. I wouldn't call it extensive but it centers around an interesting mystery and helps us wrap up a few loose ends. I appreciated its inclusion.

Conclusion:

Apparently the next game Tokyo RPG Factory made after this was an action RPG and a huge dud. That makes me sad. I wish they'd stuck with the ATB system, or just pure turn-based, and turned out another retro JRPG. There is something compelling about this game. I was looking forward to play more. As it is, I may play 'I Am Setsuna,' its predecessor. I hope the members of TRPGF are enjoying their careers and can take pride in what they've made.

---

TL;DR

Play this game if you like: Chill retro JRPGs with solid characters, music, art, and story, and you don't mind spacing out and grinding fights that are too slow to be easily ground.

Thank you for reading.

My memories of TimeSplitters go back to Gamecube, on which I played the second game first. I was a big Goldeneye fan, and I knew it was developed by the same developers, so I erroneously assumed it was a Rare game. It’s kind of a shooter that isn’t made anymore. A thinking man’s FPS where you are supposed to think about actual objectives than watching some minicutscenes and blasting the enemies. That game got too tough that I never beat it, so I’m thinking about replaying it for the later. I did wonder what the first game was like, and for a while, I assumed it was more or less the same as 2.

I played TimeSplitters 1 recently with the mouse and keyboard set-up, and I have complex feelings about it. The game that reminded me most of was Monolith’s Contract Jack. Perfect Dark has been frequently compared to No One Lives Forever in the same year for being a female superspy FPS and having very similar mission design. Contract Jack was a spin-off of No One Lives Forever 2. That game was essentially a glorified expansion that strips down the narrative, complex mission design, level design, atmosphere, but only featured “shooting”. It’s an amateurish-level production that it almost feels like a mod at times. Time Splitters 1 feels like that to TimeSplitters 2.

The core Goldeneye developers left Rare during the production of Perfect Dark and created their own studio, Free Radical Design (which became part of Crytek later). This resulted in Perfect Dark turning into a development hell, where the project was generally helmed by the newbies. Free Radical Design was in the midst of a development hell as they tried to make Second Sight, but got rejected, and the team had to scramble together a Goldeneye successor within the small budget and little time, resulting in TimeSplitters. And it shows. There is no narrative, no objective but “take this thing and go to this circle”, no cohesive vision. It appears they just inserted “Time” into the title because they created a bunch of different themed maps, but had to make a connection by slapping a time travel concept. It feels like a TimeSplitters 2 user map.

At the same time, I appreciate the arcade purity of the game, which no longer exists in the industry but the indie scene. It’s a game you can beat in an hour. It’s simple, but you are supposed to replay the missions on the varying difficulties for the multiplayer unlocks. It’s hard to think a game like this even being published on the AAA scene anymore, good or bad.

For a while, I didn’t mind it because the core gameplay was fun. I don’t know exactly what ticks, but the gunplay in Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, and TimeSplitters just feels great. It’s hard to describe. It’s smooth and addicting. Just shooting a machinegun feels good. It’s something that the other console FPS in the era couldn’t capture. Just compare it to the Bond games like Agent Under Fire and Medal of Honor, and although those games had more advanced elements, the raw blasting sensation of TimeSplitters is unmatched. The presentation, despite being clearly low-budget, is great. It’s nothing comparable to the sequel or even Goldeneye, but the stylized aesthetics still hold up, creating that the PS2 vibe that no longer exists. It goes a long way to have a great soundtrack complementing the different themed levels.

So, whatever. It’s a good shooter. Goldeneye without the mission design, and if the gunplay is good, it should be good. Right? I thought that way for the first two levels… then the cracks begin to show fast. This game is insanely difficult. I played it on Normal, and even with the mouse, I eventually had to crank it down to Easy because this game just straight-up bullshits the player. The more I play, the more I realize how much the core combat system is flawed.

In Goldeneye and Perfect Dark, the enemy reaction time is quite generous. If they find the player, they shout something like “I found her!”, alerting their presence to the player, and position to fire for a second, giving the player a choice of whether to be offensive (shoot first) or defensive (take cover). They are also stationary when they attack, sort of like a tank. When you shoot them, they get stunned for a few seconds, unable to fire. Their attack is clearly telegraphed and easily avoidable if the player is mobile enough. It’s supposed to encourage the player to build a constant momentum and move around.

TimeSplitters 1 doesn’t do this. The enemies 1) instantly fire with a few frames of “raising weapons”, 2) move while firing, 3) stay silent when detecting the player, 4) sometimes get stunned when hit, or sometimes just ignore the hit and fire at the player, 5) are long-ranged with high accuracy, so they do not charge at the player, 6) ambush the player, whether they suddenly come out of cover or pop out in thin air through teleportation.

In addition, the player has no invincibility frames. What happens is that I cleared the room incredibly carefully, then some guy suddenly spawns and jumps off from the high floor and blasts me with a machinegun, cutting down my entire bar of health in one second. It’s absurdly cheap, and the only way you can even some encounters is for the player to memorize the levels through trial and error, rather than testing the player’s skills.

Combine that with the limited health pick-ups, the game often becomes a frustrating mess. The combat isn’t fundamentally balanced enough. It results in the player doing pattern memorization and knowing which enemey is in what position. Like, I don’t see how anyone can even beat this game on Hard with the controller unless they memorize literal frame-by-frame patterns. Goldeneye already solved this issue on N64, only for TimeSplitters to backroll all that elegant game design to make the combat a mess. My guess for why they designed the combat like this is because either they didn’t have enough time to test it, or they intentionally made it punishing to compenstate the short playtime. At least, I don’t remember TimeSplitters 2 being this bad, so they surely fixed it.

The animations also feature the similar problem as Goldeneye and Perfect Dark, but worse, where the enemy death animations are too muted. The deaths are not exaggerated enough. They touch their arms, then three seconds later, collapse. It results in the player wasting their ammo on the already dead enemies because their deaths are unclear. Sometimes, the stun and death animations are so indistinguishable that oftentimes I was killed by enemies that I thought I had already killed.

Despite the diverse themes, the actual enemy designs are exclusively two humanoid types: shooters or melee chargers. That’s it. No matter where it takes place, it’s the same. Even the weapon design is disappointing, with the weapon roles overlapping and repetitive. For example, there is a space level where you fire laser guns at the aliens. You then actually play it, you realize all the alien enemies are identical to the human enemies, and all the laser guns are identical to the normal guns. Compare it to Perfect Dark, where despite having dozens of weapons, each weapon serves a unique purpose with the weapon role and the secondary firing.

If you play it on Easy, it is at least tolerable, so all those design flaws aren’t as bothersome. It’s a unpolished shooter that’s fun on the primitive level, but not something the speedrunners would replay it over and over because it fundamentally lacks depth compared to Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. I enjoyed it enough, but I recommend just skipping it to the second game.

I gave Wasteland 3 the time of day because it's a Western RPG I could comfortably play on the gamepad and it was dead cheap in a sale. I may have all manner of hardcore role-playing games under my belt, but these days I really don't care to try a game that has so many buttons I have to consider pressing the J key at some point.

While Wasteland 3 has continuity with the prior games, it has no ask of the player to know of them in detail. Five years after getting wrecked in a war against killer robots, the Desert Rangers of a post-apocalyptic Arizona are in dire need of resources. The Patriarch who runs Colorado with an iron fist offers them an olive branch in exchange for rounding up his three rebellious children. In the meantime a Desert Ranger called Angela Deth has her own agenda that may conflict with your mission...

You create a squad of two to four custom-made rangers plus two to four companions of your choice to make a party of six. While combat is a necessity there are numerous branching paths to make in quests, and diplomacy isn't treated like an old sock full of toothpaste as in Bethesda's take on the Fallout series.

Combat is XCOM-lite and very easy to understand. You take cover from gunfire, avoid grouping together so half your squad doesn't get merked by a single grenade, blow up explosive red barrels near enemies, and consider which combat-archetype is best for the given foe. Permadeath and friendly-fire are optional difficulty-settings, so most players don't have to overthink every scenario. Outside of battle comes exploration and it's very straight-forward. Skill-checks are abundant and follow New Vegas rules. Your skill level either meets the threshold for success or it doesn't, and there are no dice-rolls involved. You can pick up all the loot in a map without issue as your inventory capacity is unlimited. After battle you can sweep up all enemy drops with the press of a button. As is CRPG tradition you have a button which highlights all NPCs and objects you can interact with. All together this is a massive departure from Wasteland 2 where it took ages to get anything done, and at a 60% success rate at that because Fuck You.

The game world is fairly contained for the genre. I never finished Wasteland 2, but I'd say Wasteland 3 is half the length. Here you've got 50 quests, 39 distinct maps, and a 25+ hour runtime. I'd estimate there are 80 mandatory fights if you take the completionist route, and trash mobs are only found in the 5 main areas. Most of the 18 side areas on the overworld only have a single quest, fight, or weird Easter egg attached. Thankfully you can skip the random encounters on the overworld entirely if you remember to level your Survival skill. While the developers clearly intended on a larger experience given the level of cut-content, I think it's best that the game maintains a tight pace.

Character-progression mercifully shows 32 years of refinement. I remember playing the original Baldur's Gate a decade after release and all I could say is, "What is this crap? Thac0 my ass." Too often the Western RPGs of old were burdened with jank that muddled the experience and discouraged many builds. Entire classes, races, and skills could be busted or broken to ever consider using or going without. I loved Diablo II like the next guy, but what was the point of the Energy stat? In Wasteland 2 you could make two characters, either a guy who excels using assault rifles, or a guy who might as well have put 10 levels into the Suck Ass skill. I think Suck Ass was an actual skill in that game because there were 30 of them to choose from, too many of which did the same thing. It gets pedantic when a game has a Surgeon skill and a Field Medic skill that should have been combined.

Wasteland 3 cuts the crap and is streamlined sensibly with no attribute being left in the cold. You've got 22 skills; 6 combat and 16 utility. Every character in your squad should pick 1 combat skill and 2 utility skills to level. On normal difficulty I got by comfortably without the crafting ones. Intelligence is not a god stat here. Skill points gained per level is the same across the board and pumping Intelligence only grants an extra point in addition to raising your critical hit damage. Raising Intelligence and Strength upon levelling is retroactive, unlike the shit old days. If you're not feeling your current build, you can recruit a new ranger or respec an existing one for a nominal fee.

I'm a little confused at the presence of perk points. If a character hits level 24 by the endgame then they will have 11 of the things, but you can only buy perks in 3 or so skills you specialise in. They might as well have given you the perks automatically since there isn't a ton of choice in the matter.

I beat Wasteland 3 with a squad of diverse talents. The melee characters could run across the map in a single turn so they could punch a guy in the face. The sniper lacked action points because they only needed one bullet to decide matters. The gunner managed crowd control with a shotgun while the submachine-gun soldier was an absolute beast. In a reversal of Wasteland 2, I'd say the assault rifles are the only underpowered class of weapon.

Some quests will trip you up. There are four timed ones that will cancel if you complete too many other quests in the meantime. I suggest not talking to the fat guy who runs the Bizarre in a hurry unless you want to get mobbed by the Spanish Clown army. The biggest hurdle that nobody will ever accomplish without a guide is>!the third ending. This demands absolute respect across the board and two quests have to completed in a specific way. One guy is bugged when he says a peaceful transition is impossible, but I got the ending anyway. Props if you get it, no shame in using a walkthrough.!<On an unrelated some of the collectable achievements are a massive pain in the arse, as too often you can miss a unique item if you don't use the right skill-check at the right time. You can fail three of these achievements in the first map alone.

I'm not on board with the game's sense of humour. It doesn't get irritating like The Outer Worlds but I find Wasteland 3 too zany in the margins in a tired way. Wow! You meet Santa Claus, who runs his elves like slaves to make hard drugs! A honey badger is the strongest animal companion in the game! A cannibal clan make Bob Newhart references! And so on and so forth. Like a Pete Davidson stand-up special, I'm not sure if I'm supposed to laugh at any point. Mercifully the main arc of the game is fairly straight, apart the the son of the Patriarch who acts like the poor man's Joker.

I can't speak for the DLC because by all accounts it shit the sheets like a footballer the morning after kebab night. The phrases bandied around in reviews I've seen are "enemies respawning in the middle of a fight", "enemies level-scale to get tougher than your party", and "bugged up the arse". No shame in me not venturing there when I have otherwise enjoyed my time in Colorado.

Wasteland 3 is solid. It's not weak, nor is it spectacular. It's by far the best game InExile have ever made. Their first successor to Wasteland was underwhelming because it was too bland and outdated. Their successor to Planescape: Torment made nowhere near the impact it wanted, and Disco Elysium took the crown anyway. Can you believe there was a time when the involvement of Patrick Rothfuss was a selling-point? But Wasteland 3 is a success and a good time. You are given a high degree in agency in how you approach your problems and enough leeway to change your mind. It's not too long nor too big, and has half a mind to think out the ramifications of the main story where some crowd like Bethesda would never bother. It's a 4-star experience that may be overlooked, but never doubted or dismissed. Also you drive an APC in this game and can run over people with it in a fight, making blood angels in the Colorado snow.

After having a great time with FTL a couple years ago, I finally got around to trying Into the Breach, which is made by the same developers.

Into the Breach is a roguelike puzzle/strategy game built around tactical, turn-based combat - you control three mechs and must protect civilian structures by killing or otherwise incapacitating the enemy (the Vek).

The "macro" gameplay consists of choosing one of four islands, each with a randomized set of enemies that can appear there. On each island you have to complete four missions + a boss mission before progressing. Once you've completed at least two islands, you can move onto the final island and beat the game.

What I Liked

• The core gameplay loop is extremely satisfying and fun - there is a massive amount of strategy behind every action. You have basically perfect information every turn - you can see what the enemy is going to do, in what order, and where new units will spawn (although you don't know which ones, which can actually make a significant difference). So you have tons of options - from killing Vek, moving them around, forcing them to attack each other, using environmental effects, and the list goes on.
• The game has a lot of variety. There are 12 squads you can unlock, each of which plays vastly differently from the others. Some focus more on killing, others on movement, while some try to stall out the game, etc... Combined with the Advanced Edition Content, which also adds new enemies, missions, and gear, each run feels fairly unique.
• Into the Breach is incredibly challenging - early on I spent quite a while thinking through every turn, and constantly finding new ways to get the most out of each move. I loved the learning process, especially discovering new tricks for each squad.

What Was Average

• Each Mech has a Pilot, who gains EXP and unlocks certain skills. You're allowed to carry over a Pilot from one run ("timeline") to the next. It's a great feature to have...but it also encourages you to use the same Pilot repeatedly instead of trying out others. IMO the Pilot abilities are fairly imbalanced too - there are a couple that are just so much better than the rest that, once you get them, you basically never want to swap Pilots.
• Into the Breach allows you to choose whether to complete 2, 3, or all 4 of the main islands before tackling the final island. While the flexibility is great at first glance and lets you control the length of your run, enemy difficulty will scale appropriately. The main issue was that, at least on Hard difficulty, it rarely felt worthwhile to attempt the 3rd or 4th island because it was difficult to get strong enough to outpace the natural enemy scaling.
• I thought the final island suffered from a similar flaw to FTL: a huge difficulty spike compared to the rest of the content. While I still enjoyed the challenge, I would have liked for the difficulty to be slightly more balanced.

What I Didn't Like

• My biggest gripe with Into the Breach was how much it emphasized achievements over simply winning. Every new squad unlock requires "coins", which are 1:1 mapped to the in-game and Steam achievements. However, there's no actual reward for winning. Obviously, as a roguelike, you could argue that winning a run *is* the reward, but winning a run and only getting one of the three squad achievements sometimes felt worse than unlocking all three and losing.

Final Thoughts

I played most of Into the Breach on Hard with Advanced Edition turned on (minus the first few runs to get acclimated) and beat the game with all of the squads. I did one Unfair run with my favorite squad (Mist Eaters) and beat it. At that point, I felt like I'd experienced most of what the game had to offer, so I called it quits. I had no real motivation/desire to play most squads again or grind achievements.

I played ~55 hours total and had a blast overall, and would definitely recommend Into the Breach to anyone who enjoyed FTL and/or likes tactical puzzle/strategy games.

Overall Rating: 8 / 10 (Great)

I started the series with 5 Royal this year, then after a month break beat 3 Reload, and after another months break got around to 4 Golden. I decided to not wait for another remake if story is the same, plus due to circumstances I'm stuck with a mediocre laptop for a while.

Gameplay here is about the same as 3r and 55, but the dungeon controls on keyboard are pretty janky. The lack of mouse controls is very annoying, plus I swear there were times when I hit shadow but it didn't register. I tried playing on Very Hard, but the exp penalty was too harsh so I toned it down to Hard. After that the game was mostly easy, with Game and Heaven bosses being slight nuisances.

The plot here suffers from not going anywhere for a long time. It's not until the last companion shows up that the team actually starts investigating, so for a long time the story takes a backseat. 3 had a similar issue where story didn't progress during 12 shadows arc. Now I actually think 5 lowkey had the best story because it was the most consistent and progression was clearer, themes be damned. I already knew who main culprit of 4 was from Death Battle, so I can't judge how well executed that twist was.

As far as characters go, I have to agree with the meme. I liked the cast because they felt more like teenagers than SEES of Phantoms a lot of the time. They acted dumb, were mean to each other, and joked around like actual teenagers would. I got most of IT social links to max rank, except Naoto and Kanji. My date was Rise because she was cute and thirsty, but I wonder if her thirst looks weird when dating other girls.

Of all the non main character links, Moon was my favorite. She went from an annoying bitch to a nice person, kind of like Gournment King. I regret not upgrading >!Adachi's social link, maybe then I would have liked him better as a villain!<. I barely didn't have enought time to get athletes from 9 to 10, and with Mr Fox I didn't know how to fish at all.

Currently I am larping as a Persona protagonist, that is, living far away from home and getting used to the new environment. I think this experience makes me appreciate these games more. Maybe I'll return to 4G and get remaining achievements on NG+, or actually try P1 and P2. Now if you excuse me, I need to go and upgrade my knowledge stat.

I recently finished Far Cry 5 and it was my first time playing a Far Cry game in the series. The game delivered some refreshing choices in open world games, and surprisingly paired those choices with an unexpected amount of comedic charm. However, the game is heavily weighed down by repetitive gameplay loops and forced narrative interruptions. The game threw a bunch of spaghetti at the wall and some of it stuck. The rest, fell straight to the floor.

​My absolute biggest praise for Far Cry 5 is how Ubisoft finally killed the dreaded "climb a tower to reveal the map" formula they relied so heavily on from Assassin's Creed. Instead, you discover points of interest naturally: reading road signs, checking trail maps, picking up brochures, or talking to locals. It makes exploration feel completely organic, realistic, and unforced. You feel like a traveler exploring rural Montana rather than being tested on your platforming skills.

​Hope County is gorgeous. The dense forests, rolling rivers, and rural valleys look stunning and feel like a real place. At times, the scenery feels photo realistic and could compete with Red Dead Redemption 2. Complementing this visual harmony is an incredible audio production. The licensed radio tracks is expansive and fits the world well. The original soundtrack, especially the ambient tracks and the cult hymns, are outstanding. The hymns feel both peaceful and oddly terrifying due how much they show off the cult's power and influence. I applaud the amount of effort that was spent on just the OST alone.

​The writing for side characters is far better than it gets credit for. Hurk Drubman Sr. and Sharky Boshaw are absolute highlights, offering a perfect mix of crude humor and surprisingly deadpan, high-brow comedy. For example, a low hanging fruit for a joke is the shop named Dylan's Master Bait Shop. But Hurk Drubman's campaign voicemials found on landline phones are filled with high brow humor, such as saying if elected, he'll ensure no Canadians steal high paying jobs meant for Americans and naming professional hockey player as the job he is referring to.

What truly impressed me is how far Ubisoft went with unique dialogue.​The companion interactions when you pair characters up, ike Hurk Jr and Sharky, feature tons of unique dialogue, banter-filled lines. There's 9 compaions, although three are animals. But still, the fact they went out of their way to record so much conversations between 6 different characters interacting with each other, and giving them all unique personalities and dynamics depending on who they are talking to, is truly amazing and not talked about enough. Same with the news updates on the radio. How they change dynamically, offering subtle foreshadowing in the broader narrative context as you progress through the story. You can sense and hear the despair and tension in them as the game progresses. It's just such impressive level of detail and effort for something that isn't needed for the main game or completion, because you can play the entire game without hearing most of these conversations or news updates.

Far Cry 5 suffers from an over reliance on constant action. Unless you completely clear a region, you cannot walk 50 feet or pause to take in the scenery without a cult pickup truck, an armed plane, or a pack of wild animals attacking you. The constant gunfights and explosions break the peaceful immersion the environmental designers worked so hard to create. The story asks you to accept a massive narrative leap: that an armed cult managed to completely cut off an entire U.S. county from the outside world and operate with total impunity, without immediate state or federal military intervention. That the cult managed to rise to that much power but also keep supply lines to the outside world for supplies open with nobody outside asking quesitons. The premise breaks down the second you think about it realistically.

Gameplay gets repetitive quickly. Much like Mafia III, progress boils down to making as much noise as possible to attract the attention of whoever controls the region. You do this by blowing up or stealing cult property, freeing hostages, and taking out outposts until you fill a meter to summon the region's boss.

​Worst of all is the hunter mechanic. No matter what you are doing, whether you're mid air, fishing in a remote stream, or stealthing an outpost, once you hit a resistance threshold, the game sends unevadable hunters who shoot you with a dart andnforcibly kidnap you. When you wake up, you are dragged into a long, unskippable cutscene where the region’s antagonist monologues at length to convince you to stop. It destroys player agency and ruins the flow of the open world.

​I’m genuinely torn on how Far Cry 5 handles its ending. I appreciate that the game didn't opt for a clean, Hollywood "justice and freedom prevail" happy ending. Real life is messy, and bad actors don't always get caught or face consequences. Sometimes the bad guys win in real life. But after spending dozens of hours liberating outposts, saving civilians, and taking back Hope County, the outcome leaves you feeling like every piece of effort you put into the game was completely meaningless and for nothing.

TLDR: ​Far Cry 5 is a game of massive highs and tedious lows. Far Cry 5 had a lot of ideas and executed some of them brilliantly while others should have never been attempted. The open world scenery, exploration mechanics, soundtrack, and subtle comedic writing show a developer who put a tremendous amount of effort into the little things and details. Unfortunately, those strengths are repeatedly undermined by a hard to swallow narrative, multiple endings that will leave most players feeling unsatisfied, and repetitive gameplay. Far Cry 5 is worth playing, especially if you enjoy ambient exploration and causing chaos, but be prepared for narrative frustration.

#This Review May Contain Spoilers

#Yakuza: Like a Dragon

Status - Completed, many side quests done.

Time played: 70+ hours

Difficulty - N/A

Set-up - AMD 5800X3D, AMD 9070XT, 32gb DDR4 3600, 2tb SN850 | Played at 4K with all settings up, locked to 60 for a very smooth experience

---

Mini-Review Thoughts

Like a Dragon is the first installment in the Yakuza series to shake up the combat system. Traditionally, Yakuza is a one-man-party, real-time action brawler, that focuses on utilizing different fighting styles to beat your opponent. It’s not too dissimilar from a stylish action game with how I played the series. With the 7th installment, Like a Dragon, combat is now a turn-based RPG that focuses on party synergy, and a plethora of whacky “jobs” that act as the class system in a more traditional RPG.

The radical change in combat could be seen as a step-down from Yakuza 0 for long-time fans. Yakuza 0’s combat is engaging and I found myself locked-in. On the opposite end of the spectrum, the combat in Like a Dragon can be incredibly hands off, to the point that there’s an auto-battle option. My wife couldn’t grasp the concept of that, and asked, “Why would you not want to play the game if you’re playing the game?” Fair point.

What Like a Dragon lacks in combat engagement, it makes up for in creativity and fluidity. There are a plethora of jobs that the player can, and should, explore. Leveling up jobs provides permanent character stat upgrades, and new combat abilities that may be accessed by other jobs. Jobs such as devil rocker, hostess, clerk, or breaker, provide a plethora of unique attacks that keeps the combat entertaining for a while. I have never seen a clerk use a staple gun to attack an enemy, but it was a hell of a great attack in mid-game, as was the breaker doing a handstand and giving the enemy a few kicks from this position.

Tonally, the Yakuza games are over-the-top and wide in range of emotions. At its heart there is a story that takes itself seriously, which involves murder, child abandonment, and a money counterfeiting scheme, but it takes a hard turn on many side quests. The side quests may involve feeding incredibly spicy kimchi to an elderly woman to give her the pep to run across a road, or it may involve fighting a giant roomba, oftentimes providing needed levity. You may cry when going on a date with a young girl whose life you saved years ago, you may laugh when trying to help a mascot fight off bootleg copies, and you may be unsure of how to feel about Mr. Masochist.

Minigames are a big draw to these games and Like a Dragon has plenty. The minigame highlights for me are business management, batting cages, kart racing, and black jack. There's a lot to do here if you want to live within the environment for a while, and the city is a wonderful backdrop.

Performance is great on my system with a rock solid 60fps at 4k max settings. I have two gripes though, my first gripe is that the grass pop-in when running through the park is terrible, and my second gripe is that the high-production cutscenes drop the framerate to 30fps, and it looked juddery on my TV. I also have a major bone to pick about the cutscenes, mainly the question of why is RGG afraid of allowing players to save before length cutscenes? The ending sequence takes about 90 minutes and once you initiate it you will have no chance to save before rolling credits and finish the cutscenes. I can’t think of a good reason for this, especially when there’s plenty of opportunities to do so, perhaps in-between the 2 end-boss battles?

I hate to say that I don't really remember the music, but I don't. I would have recalled more of the music if I enjoyed the karaoke minigame, but the button chart didn’t seem like it lined up with the music rhythmically, so I didn’t play it much. The Japanese voice acting is top-notch, but I cannot say the same for the English cast. I tried it out for 10 minutes and went back to Japanese. I don't know if it was that I was just so used to the Japanese voice actors by that point or if the English actors did not fit the game well, but I think Japanese is the way to go for this.

Conclusion

Like a Dragon is a great game with incredible highlights that I would recommend for fans of the series, fans of turn-based RPG, and fans of unique games. My gripes with the game are the unengaging combat, and at times the disregard for the time of the player, but they don’t completely mar the experience.

8.25/10