 |
|
May 21st, 2025 at 11:13:31 - Monster Hunter: World (PC) |
Next up is a retirement (ooh, ahh!). I bounced right off of Monster Hunter: World. Never played a Monster Hunter game before and am surprised that I don't like it. But after playing a while, at least I understand why. My expectations were a bit different than the reality. I know that the name of the game is what you do, but I assumed there would be more narrative or more traditional, tight, RPG or action RPG elements. But I would characterize the game as a massive grind. I know that this is how it is described (kill monsters to get materials to improve equipment to kill bigger monsters to get more materials to improve equipment, etc.), but I just thought there would be something else to it. And I'm sure that the hunts get more exciting, but I also know that the game is long, and I don't feel like grinding my way there to begin enjoying it after 50 hours or whatever.
Some things that made me bounce off include:
1. A gazillion items to pick up. What is all this stuff? If you walk around in the field, you are prompted every 2 feet to harvest an herb or mine some ore or something.
2. Inventory management. Inventory was full very quickly, which prompted me to sit there trying to learn what all the stuff does. Short answer: crafting.
3. I usually don't enjoy crafting a lot of stuff in games, so this was not good for me.
4. Annoying cat puns.
5. The map is so busy, and the first area was super confusing to navigate.
6. Boring story and characters.
7. "Tracking" monsters was a matter of clicking on enough footprints to "level up" your knowledge of it or something. Then, you follow some glowing flies around until you see it. This did not make me feel clever, like I was hunting. I was following a green path of fireflies the whole time and pressing B when prompted to "study tracks."
8. The UI is really cluttered and could be improved in so many ways.
9. You have to play online (though you can set your game to 1 player). I didn't know there was such an online multiplayer focus.
In the end, Monster Hunter: World feels like a single-player(ish) MMORPG. My days of World of Warcraft are far, far behind me, and this brought back all the memories of years of grinding in that game. I can't do it! And now I know that Monster Hunter isn't for me!
add a comment  - read this GameLog  |
|
May 21st, 2025 at 10:48:42 - Quantum Conundrum (XBONE) |
Been playing this with Patrick for most of the semester and we finally beat it last night. It's a mixed bag, but overall positive. It absolutely rides the coattails of Portal, and we read that it was directed by the lead designer on Portal, so no surprise at the similarities. I'll get the negative things out of the way first:
1. It tries to be funny, but it falls mostly flat. The funniest things were Ike (this little imp creature that makes silly faces at you) and the way that the paintings change when you use the abilities (often funny and surprising!). What was supposed to carry the game's humor--the narrator/uncle--didn't. He delivered his lines just fine, but they didn't land. Given that you play as a child, he can't be as sarcastic as GlaDOS in Portal. Given the more family-friendly aesthetic, the jokes were sillier. Given that he and the child actually don't seem to have much of a relationship, nor is it developed throughout the game, there's little relational history and context to draw from. And he usually only pipes up in between puzzles to make brief comments that don't add much.
2. The level of precision required for the first-person platforming was rough. Many puzzles require excellent timing and precision for jumping, throwing and catching objects, and so on, and the game just didn't handle that well. The movement controls are oddly both too tight and too floaty at the same time (I'm sure I'm mischaracterizing this in my description, but this is what it felt like). We OFTEN fell off flying objects, jumped too far or not far enough, missed catching things because of the camera, and so on. Actually, it was irritating for the first half of the game, and it became funny to us as the levels became more complicated. Like last night, Patrick tried for 15 minutes to execute the moves on a puzzle before handing it to me to finish. It would take 1 minute to figure out what you need to do and 14 minutes to accomplish the task. I felt bad watching Patrick sometimes because he's not great at precision controls, so he would fail and fail and fail, hand me the controller, and I'd do on the first try what he'd tried 20 times (though I certainly failed my fair share of times because of the controls!).
3. The ending was uninspired and happened quickly. I'm not entirely sure why what happened happened and I don't care. It obviously set up a sequel that never came.
That's it! Those are the negatives. The positive, though, is the puzzles. They are great, consistently fun and challenging. You're in your uncle's crazy science mansion, and there are four ways that you manipulate objects to solve puzzles by swapping to different "dimensions." First, you can make objects "heavy." Second, you can make objects "fluffy." Third, you can slow time. Fourth, you can reverse gravity. Only one dimension can be active at a time, but by choosing sequences of dimensions, you do some cool things. For example, one common object is a big safe. You normally can't pick up a safe (or other large objects), but activate the fluffy dimension and it becomes light as a feather. This way, you can move safes around to toss them through windows (throw and change to "heavy" before it hits the glass), depress buttons (place them them change to "heavy"), or fly through the air using a combination of dimensions. For example, carry the safe with fluffy, throw it and quickly slow time, jump on top of the safe you just threw, use reverse gravity to travel upward, and (voila!) you've used a safe to get to a ledge above you.
Puzzles utilize various combinations of dimensions, and often you have to find these little capsules to trigger the dimensions in the first place. So task 1 will be acquiring the capsules for dimensions in a puzzle area, then you can start solving the harder puzzles in an area. It is totally linear though, so it's not like you'll be trying puzzles you can't complete. Unlike something like The Witness, you're always at a puzzle you can solve. So if you can't figure it out, then it's you. Like Portal, there are various obstacles and death traps, including deadly pools of "science juice" (like acid), lasers, robots that push you off ledges, and so on.
I do recall getting bored and sleepy earlier on, but to be fair, we were always playing Quantum Conundrum at night after work, and I have learned that puzzle games are a genre not best suited to play while exhausted at night. Nevertheless, it held our attention, and by at least halfway through, we were thoroughly enjoying the puzzling. So, the short version is: Portal is better by far, but Quantum Conundrum scratches the itch.
add a comment - read this GameLog |
|
May 18th, 2025 at 10:48:06 - Heaven's Vault (PC) |
Excellent narrative adventure/mystery game. You play as an archaeologist and basically-a-PhD-student named Aliya who gets sent by her professor / university head / potential Empress (my, don't we believe university administrators have a lot of power!) to find out what happened to a roboticist colleague who may have uncovered some troubling truths about the history of the Nebula. You have a robot companion named Six (so named because you've gotten all your previous numerically named robots destroyed, which is understandably alarming to Six) and a ship. The gist of the gameplay is that you "sail" between moons from site to site (some ancient, some modern), exploring them, finding artifacts, translating ancient inscribed text, as you piece together the long and complicated history of the rise and fall of the Nebula’s various ages and empires. Your choices have implications for the Nebula’s future and everyone's survival.
The obvious comparisons here are to 80 Days (a previous non-linear narrative game from these devs) and Chants of Sennaar (which also involves deciphering ancient languages). The difference between this and Chants of Sennaar (and Tunic, now that I think about it) is that you don't have to correctly figure out the language. Like, it's helpful to understand the story, but you can progress fine by making total guesses at what symbols mean. This makes Heaven’s Vault an easy game, whereas Chants of Sennaar and Tunic were quite challenging. That’s fine because of the constant feeling of discovery, which motivated me to keep going. I loved finding new artifacts in the dirt, trying to puzzle out inscriptions, the satisfaction of confirming correct translations, discovering new moons and ancient sites, and going deeper into the history of this game world.
The constant sense of discovery counterbalanced what may otherwise have felt like a slower game. There is no “run” button; you slowly walk everywhere. There is a lot of dialogue, especially optional context-specific dialogue (e.g., you can press “Q” or “R” when prompted to ask a question or reply outside of any formal scene, which supplies extra personality to Aliya and Six and supplies deeper insight into what’s going on). The “sailing” involves slowly watching your ship move along a path, with you occasionally having to check the map and guide it left or right and having to press the right mouse button for a burst of speed. The sailing is meant to be relaxing and contemplative. It’s pretty sailing through the Nebula, but that was absolutely my least favorite part of the game. The distances between moons can be large, and the sailing speed is slow. You can occasionally “rest” and have Six take over for you, but I found that sometimes Six would annoyingly divert me from my path, and Aliya would wake farther away from her destination than when she went to sleep. Minor gripes in the grand scheme of things.
The writing is top-notch. I really enjoyed Aliya and Six; their banter is great, often funny. The art and sound are nice too. This gets two thumbs up from me.
add a comment - read this GameLog |
|
May 7th, 2025 at 23:30:46 - Eliza (PC) |
Eliza is a commentary on Big Tech through the lens of a character, Evelyn, who created a “listening machine,” which became monetized as an AI therapist after she left the game’s tech company three years earlier. She has been rather aimless since leaving, and at the beginning of this game, takes a part-time job as a “proxy.” Proxies are people who mediate between Eliza (the AI therapist) and the clients. Proxies wear smart glasses, which run the Eliza program. Proxies are fed a script from Eliza to read to the client. As the client talks, Eliza analyzes the conversation and spits out prompts for the proxies to read, based on its algorithm. Proxies are only to read the script, never to deviate. The idea is that clients find speaking to an AI too impersonal, and so the proxy provides a façade of real human interaction such that the therapy can be successful.
I’ve been talking with people for weeks about this game because AI always comes up. And I run a Human Services program with a Social Work concentration; half my students want to become social workers or therapists. It’s highly relevant. At the same time, the game is dated. Why? Because this was made in 2019, pre-generative AI. Eliza is algorithmic. It’s scripted. It essentially selects from dialogue options based on how the conversation is going. If the game were made just three years later after ChatGPT dropped, I don’t think that Eliza would require proxies. Most people now cannot tell the difference between speaking to a generative AI chatbot or a human online. Although, even in Eliza, the need for a proxy is questionable. Imagine sitting in front of a person who you know is just reading Eliza’s script. You know you’re really talking to a computer, even if there is a person sitting in front of you saying the words. You would have to delude yourself into thinking that the person made the interaction much different. And, in the game, most of the clients make comments like, “I know you’re just a computer, but…” So, despite the proxy, they are aware that they are talking with Eliza, an AI. Perhaps that’s part of the critique. Tech products promise a lot, but often fail to live up to their promises, despite the people who make the products feel alive.
There are generative AI therapy chatbots today. Even the large commercial chatbots like ChatGPT can be used for this purpose. They are far more sophisticated than Eliza. I don’t think the main point of the game is the therapy chatbot, but the big tech ethics stuff. The chatbot is just an example to generate ethical questions. Do people need human interaction for effective therapy, or does just talking to something human-like help? Can AI chatbots do harm? Is it ethical to use a chatbot to monetize mental health services? What about the proxy: do they become alienated? What are the impacts on proxies when they cannot respond to the client, but must observe the client’s suffering and simply convey an algorithmic prompt? Do proxies have an ethical obligation to help if they can offer better advice than Eliza? What if such deviation from the script gets them fired? The game raises questions about surveillance and privacy (the tech company develops a new service where Eliza can provide more detailed evaluations if the client lets Eliza access their texts and emails), the effects of technology on emotions, the possibility of resistance to technological development, and so on.
The game was thought-provoking for me, not necessarily in its self-contained story, but because I was able to connect it to so much else. The game itself is not terribly captivating. But that may be the point. Evelyn is something of a blank canvas. She has a history, of course, and there are other static characters. But the player gets to decide how Evelyn thinks about the big tech company, about Eliza, about experimental technologies, about ownership and control, about privacy and surveillance, and ultimately about her own purpose and goals. In the end, I had her abandon the tech world and leave the city to go find her father (where I hope she will find some meaning in understanding her family and herself, if not develop a good relationship with them). As one of Evelyn’s last lines of monologue says, “There is no message, no point, no overarching story here.”
add a comment - read this GameLog |
