Blogging the experience of gameplayhttp://www.gamelog.cl/gamers/GamerPage.php?idgamer=http://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7894A classic, completed! I never had an SNES or a DS, so I never found my way to Chrono Trigger. It's one of Sasha's favorites, and a classic JRPG, so I found the Steam port and played over the past several months, most of which was concentrated in the past few weeks. I know it's 30 years old and was revolutionary at the time for the multiple endings, time travel, side character-focused side quests, detailed sprite work, and so on. I'm playing in 2025 around the time I'm playing JRPGs like Clair Obscur and Persona 5. Chrono Trigger doesn't hold a candle to those games, but those games wouldn't be possible without decades old games like Chrono Trigger paving the way. So, my playthrough of Chrono Trigger was one of trying to appreciate something classic rather than thinking, "This is going to be a great [by today's standards] game!" Indeed, I was often frustrated or bored, going through the motions of leveling up or grinding, making liberal use of the auto battle option, and following occasional walkthroughs to speed things up. The story and characters were less serious than I thought they would be. I was thinking that this would be more on par with FFVII, but the "silliness level" of this was a middle ground between FFVII (which could be profound) and Earthbound (which was often funny). The characters and story weren't that interesting to me. Chrono could have been a jug of milk. The 65,000,000 BC cave woman (whom I so creatively named "Wolfy" because she wore animal skins) made me laugh because of how dumb she talked, and at the end because she basically says she's ready to have a lot of sex with her boyfriend. The frog was over-dramatic. I named him Queen (I don't remember why), which became really confusing because there are actual queens in the story. Characters also often referred to the frog with his original name instead of what I selected for him. But what was cool was the centrality of Lavos, this ever-looming threat across time. I liked that you could challenge Lavos whenever you wanted. By the time I was ready to give him a serious attempt, I was around level 50 and he annihilated me with a magic attack right off the bat. I changed my party composition and used the three characters with the highest magic defense, which worked like a charm...until he used a massive physical damage attack. Turns out characters with high magic defense often have low physical defense. I only had two characters who were fairly balanced with defense (Chrono and the frog), so I figured I should do some of the side quests that the game offered me. That would get me some more levels and probably some better gear. Turns out I had done a few of those side quests already, and I did almost all the rest. Yes, better gear and a few more levels. Now we're around level 55 and have significantly improved defense and attack, having gotten ultimate weapons for most characters. I annihilated Lavos and saved the world. Hooray! This is something very "classic JRPG" about Chrono Trigger. If a boss defeats you, you can just go grind away for a while, come back, and smack it to death. I did this two or three times during the game. And given that you can turn on auto battle, the grinding feels almost automated. I would just sit by Sasha, watch an episode of something, and run back and forth through whatever area auto-battling my way to higher levels. It took no thought. I think that's a larger critique of this game for me, is that I didn't have to think much. Sure, some enemies have strengths and weaknesses, and bosses often had a trick to figure out, but that was such a small percentage of battles. I'm comparing it to something like Clair Obscur where EVERY battle could go horribly wrong, where you could parry and dodge. Or something like Persona 5 where the combat system is predicated on enemy strengths and weaknesses that you need to pay attention to (plus 10 other combat mechanics). Chrono Trigger (understandably) feels basic in 2025. It was really cool getting to experience a classic, basic as it feels today. Next time I play a game with time travel, I'll compare it to Chrono Trigger! Next time the hero's mother steps through a time portal at the end of the game (cue laugh track), I'll also think of Chrono Trigger! And the next time someone refers to Chrono Trigger, I will confidently say that yes, I have played Chrono Trigger (instead of being shamed for having no gamer cred)! dkirschnerFri, 29 Aug 2025 08:02:10 UTChttp://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7894&iddiary=13430http://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7931Okay, this was REALLY good. It's from the people who made The Red Strings Club, which I also liked. Deconstructeam has a knack for thought-provoking philosophical narratives, strong writing, diverse characters, and novel mechanics for a point-and-click. I don't even know if I'd describe this as a point-and-click because most of it takes place in one two-story building and you don't really move your character anywhere in the sense of typical point-and-click adventures. It's more of an interactive visual novel with cards. But it's not a card game either. Let's back up... In The Cosmic Wheel Sisterhood, you play as Fortuna, a witch with the power of divination. You've been exiled for reading in your Tarot deck that your coven will be destroyed. 200 years into your 1000-year exile, you summon a Behemoth (very illegal), who helps you reflect on your circumstances and regain power. Regaining your power involves learning to create your own (non-Tarot) deck of cards. As the story unfolds, you end up being allowed to get visitors whose futures you can read with your cards. So, depending on the cards you create, which are imbued with different elements that have different affinities (i.e., fire is fear, earth is power, water is emotion, etc.), your readings are flavored differently. For example, if you create a ton of fire-heavy cards, your readings will be related to fear, lust, violence, revenge, and so on. Now, there is a huge and awesome narrative twist that I will not give away that makes the divination system so interesting and makes an already cool game even cooler. This is contextualized in the overarching story of your exile, regaining your powers, reconnecting with witches in your coven, meeting witches in other covens, and dealing with the political upheaval in your coven. Without discussing that twist, I really can't talk much more about the game, except just mechanics stuff. Suffice it to say, if you like playing politics, you'll be surprised. The game does a lot of interesting things in its relatively short time and confined space. One interesting thing about this game is that it takes place wholly (except for some flashback sequences) in the place of Fortuna's exile, a two-story home in the middle of space. There are like four things you end up being able to click on in the house, so nearly all interaction happens via dialogue windows and the card creation and selection screens. Despite the simplicity, nothing ever got boring or repetitive. The game regularly changes up what you are doing and the story moves at a good pace. At the end, I find myself curious about a second playthrough, or seeing if my girlfriend is interested in it so I can watch her play. It seems like your choices have massive impact on how the game unfolds, but sometimes this can be deceptive. I would like to see how much things change if you make different choices. HIGHLY recommend!dkirschnerFri, 29 Aug 2025 06:56:47 UTChttp://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7931&iddiary=13429http://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7930I heard people sing it's praises - but usually for a puzzle game I find that means that I think it's "fine" - and then move on. But, I must say that for a straight up mostly abstract puzzle game there's a lot of REALLY clever game design going on here! This is a game where you need to "select" a word from a jumble of tiles - but the word is special (unique to the game), once selected the word provides a secondary selection, and then you have to select a new word until the tiles on each level have all been selected. It's pretty simple - but as you make progress new words are introduced with different secondary selection effects and the layout of the tiles changes such that the rules for selection also begin to open up (e.g. what counts as adjacent for selection purposes). It's a clever game - and I even have the paper copy that I now really want to play. The onboarding is really tight - with new things introduced such that you're both surprised (when you figure it out) and get a sense of the new thing and how it works. And then, there's new things that make you go "what? this can't possibly work" but it does. I'm particularly appreciative of: a. The endgame adds a new word, giving you a reason to go back to find it in order to unlock a bunch of bonus levels. I know there's more to find yet - but I'm still working through. b. The hint system is basically the list of words you need to select - but it doesn't tell you WHAT you need to select after each word. So, it's helpful - but if you were really stuck you'd still be screwed. But it's helped me confirm that I figured out the solution without figuring out the full details. So, like I'm "on track" rather than barking up the wrong tree. c. The undo system is wonderful - it's fast and easy to use - making it really smooth and easy to try out ideas as you're trying to solve each puzzle.jpMon, 25 Aug 2025 19:19:41 UTChttp://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7930&iddiary=13428http://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7887I'm most of the way through the third case and retiring this one. I played most of it (about 10 hours) while walking on the treadmill over the past 4 months or so. I do walk on the treadmill more often than that! The first thing that struck me about Ace Attorney is that it totally inspired Paradise Killer, which I really liked. I had never played anything quite like Paradise Killer, and now its pedigree is obvious. It even uses some of the same sound effects, like the chime noise when something is suspicious. I liked the first two cases; they were a good introduction to the game and its characters. The detective work does get tedious, moving the magnifying glass around the screens to hear Phoenix's comments and to try and find clues. This gets worse as there are more places to explore. By the third case, which involves moving around a movie studio, the detective work was getting boring. The trials were more fun, but even those were getting boring by the third case. I think the trials suffer from the problem of being too scripted. You listen to witness testimony, cross-examine the witness (wherein you hear the testimony again and yell "objection!" [always amusing] when you want to press the witness), successfully press the witness, listen to their revised testimony, cross-examine the revised testimony, and so on. If you mess up on any of these parts or want to hear something again, you have to click through all the dialogue from that part again. The third case is more complicated than the first two, so I have been listening to testimony over and over trying to figure out when and how witnesses are lying. If you accuse them too often by presenting incorrect evidence, you lose and have to start over, which is annoying. So, you can't just guess over and over, even though the game's logic is such that you'll have to guess sometimes. Sometimes, you know when and how the witness is lying, but it's unclear what dialogue option is the correct one. For example, I have been cross-examining a child in the third case. He witnessed fight that ended in a murder, but didn't actually see the murder. He didn't see the murder because he was fiddling with his camera, which I had figured out. When you press him on this, there are three options. You can claim that he didn't see the murder because he couldn't see it, because he was looking at something else, or you can present evidence. Well, if he was looking through his camera, you could imagine that he couldn't see the murder because he had it pointed in the wrong direction or something. If he was messing with his camera, you could also say that he was looking at something else (the camera). Or, you can present the camera as evidence. These all seem reasonable to me, but the game is so scripted that you have to present the camera as evidence; the other two are wrong, even though the second one especially makes sense: he didn't see the murder because he was looking at something else, his camera. Other times, you just have no clue what you are supposed to guess. Like, now this kid is talking about how he took photos but deleted them. I've pressed him on every part of his revised testimony, but don't know what I'm supposed to present as evidence when. I presented the camera a couple times because it seems to me the photos might still be on the camera. I presented the photo of the Steel Samurai because like somehow that might be his photo (even though it came from security footage, who knows?!). I presented the spear (murder weapon). I was wrong enough that I got a game over. This has happened enough times that I'm just going to call it quits on Phoenix Wright. I like the game. It's funny. The character animations especially are great. I love watching the witnesses get all bent out of shape. I like the absurd narratives. But that does make it hard to impose logic to solve a case! The game has its own logic and I'm tired of trying to follow it. I did look up rankings for cases, and it seems that cases 4 and 5 in this game are among the best ones. Of course I got tired of it during the 3rd case! I can't imagine another 10 hours of this though, even if the next two are supposed to be really good. I've got other "treadmill games" lined up to try.dkirschnerFri, 22 Aug 2025 15:46:42 UTChttp://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7887&iddiary=13427http://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7914I just picked this up again after not playing for...months? (I have to check my last gamelog for this one - assuming I even wrote one). I was worried that I would have forgotten everything - and that re-learning would be such a chore that I'd just give up and move on to something else. Thankfully, I had last set the game to "easy" (whatever it's actually called in the game) which made the process of remembering/re-learning it NOT a chore, and actually kind of enjoyable. I then looked at the controller mapping to see what actions I had missed in my re-learning process. I've been having a lot of fun playing it on "easy" - I was really looking for an adventure, not so much a challenge. But it made me realize - typically when a game has difficulty settings they only affect ONE "vector" for that game's difficulty. In this case, the "vector" relates to the games combat - you have shorter windows to react, enemies might have more HP, they might be more aggressive, that sort of thing. But, this game also has environmental puzzles - and I've assumed that the difficulty of these is basically fixed: it doesn't vary depending on the difficulty level. From the perspective of "designing challenge" - having varying difficulty for puzzles is a tough design problem. Really though. Generally it is "solved" by having some sort of clue system to hopefully give the player some guidance on the puzzle at hand - and the more sophisticated systems might have different levels of clues, with each one giving more information and thus allowing the player the "minimum" amount of help needed to solve the puzzle. Anyways... that's where I'm at in my headspace - since I'll be playing a lot of "thinkygames" and I've also been thinking about challenge in games. In terms of progress I've unlocked Kashyyyk as a destination - but I'm currently exploring other parts of Zeffo just to see what's going on. I've also appreciated the fact that the collectibles are all cosmetic stuff. Ok, ALMOST all - there's a few that help with your health and force stats..but most so far are cosmetic and related to your lightsaber (multiple components, each with their own cosmetic), poncho/cloak, spaceship look, and little robot look.jpWed, 13 Aug 2025 19:11:18 UTChttp://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7914&iddiary=13426http://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7923This was a good indie with some strong points, though a little rough around the edges. It's like a Grimm Brothers fairy tale, the original dark version. There's suicide, ritual sacrifice, baby murder and other disturbing things in this story about a boy trying to rescue his sister from the titular Mountain King. Patrick kept saying, "Aaah, why are they showing us this?!" Then he made a joke, something to the effect that Germans tell horrifying children's stories. Like, a little boy was wandering through the woods and came upon an owl. "Hello!" the owl said. "Hello!" the boy said. "What are you doing in the woods?" And the owl swooped down and ripped the boy's face off. Germans tell horrifying children's stories. The game has moments of great camera work that show off some beautiful environments. It also does well with scale, especially when you are foregrounded against a big enemy or stuff happening in the background. I’m thinking of one time where in the background there is a big troll pushing a handle around in circles to work a smelter or something. It occasionally causes a great thunder and sparking of electricity. You are in the foreground platforming right to left, hiding behind objects to avoid the electricity. In this, Bramble definitely reminded me of Little Nightmares, itself a legacy of Limbo. Bramble has more 3d sections though. The platforming could be a little frustrating. The character sometimes doesn’t like to jump very effectively or grab on to where you are trying to go. There were a handful of sections that we did over and over trying to get the finnicky platforming right. Annoying, but overall not all that frustrating. So, fun little indie, not too long. It’d be great if a sequel had a bigger budget! dkirschnerWed, 13 Aug 2025 09:58:13 UTChttp://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7923&iddiary=13425http://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7929I finished playing Real Crimes: The Unicorn Killer and then, five minutes later, booted this one up. MSL is behind both games (as publisher I think?) so I was curious to see if I could tell... ...both games seem like night and day from each other! They're both hidden object games, but their basic game design is different. This surprised me and I also felt that this game was "worse" than Real Crimes...but as I played I realized I wasn't sure why? From a "strict" game design perspective - Tropical Lost Island, at least as far as I got, has more variety in its gameplay... a. Each level has a list of items to find (the list is shorter in Real Crimes). b. In some levels you get a picture of what you need to find! (so you have to do them in the order the game gives you) c. One level only had one object! d. Some of the levels are "action" stills - so instead of a really static shot of an area (like most games), they're almost like a cinematic image. Combine c and d above and you can have a really interesting effect on the game's pacing - for the level I had played, the character was in a plane crash, and you had to find their PDA (presumably this would help other characters locate the crash site?). It sort of added some urgency to the game's narrative...obviously this was a cost production wise (someone made art that was only used once, though perhaps it appears later in the game again) So, I think overall my distaste for this game (compared to Real Crimes) has more to do with how the objects are hidden in the scenes...Real Crimes felt more "fair" with this one having objects that both made less sense and seemed more arbitrary? Perhaps if I had played them in the opposite order I'd feel differently? Playing both together - it's interesting to see how the games are dated in what you have to find in the scenes... a PDA, CD, mobile phone (represented with an old-pre smartphone picture), etc. I wonder how inaccessible the games will become just by virtue of what people will look for/recognize from the clues? (yes, I'm old so I knew what a PDA looked like...)jpMon, 11 Aug 2025 15:50:48 UTChttp://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7929&iddiary=13424http://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7928I only figured out at the END of this game that the whole thing is based on a real-world crime! Wow, that changes things. Not that the game needs to change - it's a pretty standard "hidden object game" (I seem to have a soft spot for these, or perhaps it's because I'm picking up a few of them due to their being cheap on the used market?). I don't think this was ever released in the US, which is also interesting given the subject matter. I wonder why that was? I also noticed - and this is because I played this game and "Tropical Lost Island" (GameLog coming soon) back to back, that the same company (MSL) is behind both games though it's possible not the same dev teams? (I'm too lazy to boot both games up now to check). They're both hidden object games - but this one (Real Crimes) felt like a better game in some ways...but I recognize that the other was doing some interesting things as well. The game was remarkably short - I wonder if it was a budget PC title later ported to DS? Not a lot of levels - and no way to re-play anything other than starting over! Each level is the same - with things to find with some "special" things - there's Go boards you can find to solve a puzzle to get a clue for the main game, and sometimes the clue is indirect (rather than the name of the object) or has a two-part component (find object and then find another object to use it on such that both meet the clue - e.g. cigar and lighter with clue being "time for a smoke" - I just made that up it wasn't in the game). You get clue points you can spend for a direct "answer" (camera moves and directly shows you an object you're missing from the list) and you can earn clue points by finishing levels, and a few other ways. Clue points are capped at 9, so when I had that many I'd just use the clues to clear the level. As with many of these games - sometimes the object is hidden in an "unfair" way or it's not evident what the object is from the name (and the quality of the image on the screen). So, clue points really solve for this in a way I appreciated. Occasionally there are some other puzzles from which you can earn an extra clue point if you succeed. They're sort of palate-cleansers - with the hardest one being a pile of fingerprints you need to match to 4 fingerprints on the top screen. This one felt really hard - because of the screen resolution. It felt hard but I somehow solved them, which surprised me... After a while, especially as I got past the mid-point, I was getting used to the game's art direction and how they hid objects and such. It felt mostly fair - which I thought was interesting. So, they were consistent in how things were hidden, rotated, resized, etc. such that I could learn and improve!jpMon, 11 Aug 2025 15:36:22 UTChttp://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7928&iddiary=13423http://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7927I had some fun with this one for a few hours. I think it's interesting - and I kind of want to figure out a way to incorporate this into my teaching - to look at old games with low budgets on platforms that are now obsolete but not THAT obsolete? Partly I'm thinking - this is exactly the level of stuff that students can do nowadays with current tools, etc. But, I'm also thinking - these low budget games have lots of little game design issues that are interesting to notice and discuss. It sort of shows how far game design has come? But also shows how little things can really tank the experience of a game while (possibly) having easy/quick fixes that are easy/quick to implement EARLY in the development process but are probably much more expensive to implement later. Especially when you're making a game on a tight schedule, with little budget and a small team. So, tight schedule and small team is many student teams! So, the bigger picture is that I wish students had a way to play this game - critique it - and learn from it! Without getting hung up on the technical limitations of the platform, etc. So, interesting things about this game (to note and or discuss if this was in class): a. You fly a plane with touch controls - really simple - but you can also use the buttons (yay for accesibility!) Guess which form of input makes the game easier to play? (answer: it's harder on touch screen - or at least it was for me) b. They added a few "special moves" you can do with the play at the bottom of the touch screen - 90degree turns in each direction, a hard U-turn, and a loop that leaves you facing the same direction (now presumably behind a plan that was on your tail). Why did they add these buttons? (you can use them whenever you like, so they're not limited in any way). I think it's because it makes the plane easier to fly, they also do a nice thing with the camera so you see the plane do the move - and I found using the u-turn and other two turn moves really helpful as a "fast" way to change direction.. The loop was less helpful - but this might change on later levels if the enemy planes get smarter? c. You play as a nameless pilot - and a lot of the story is told through the letters you write to your loved one (Wendy was it?) back home. This broke immersion a bit for me - but mostly because the letters have all sorts of information that would have been censored at the time (at least I think they were censored - I know the US mail was, I've assumed the same for the RAF) - stuff like where he's stationed, what they'll be doing, etc. d. I got a bit frustrated because I lost two missions due to running out of fuel - which is annoying (but maybe shows I need to get better at the game). I wondered how often this happened historically - and it seems like there's a missed opportunity here for some storytelling. Wouldn't it be neat to, say, choose to stick around, bail the plane and then you find out later if you made it back (or were captured/killed). This stuff really happened, so it could add some flavor? e. Missions are all pass/fail with fail meaning retry - Could we design different ways to move forward with the story that included more "not quite a win nor a loss" situations? Sure, maybe you didn't shoot down all the enemy fighters, but eventually they also had to fly back because they ran out of fuel? So, many missions/sorties might have had mixed outcomes (and yet the campaign moves on).jpMon, 11 Aug 2025 15:02:34 UTChttp://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7927&iddiary=13422http://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7891I beat this like a week or 10 days ago or something. I wish I remembered when! But I've been too busy to sit down and write about it, though I have given it some thought. Most of my thoughts relate to the story, tied as it is for me with the HBO show. I played the first game alongside watching the first season of the TV show, which was a fascinating way to experience both and heightened my appreciation for both. I tried the same thing this time, but wasn't able to keep my playing up to speed with our watching the second season (I think we were watching around the end of the semester and my Game Pass month, the former of which meant minimal gaming and the latter of which meant bingeing Game Pass games). Therefore, instead of experiencing them together, they were more sequential. I did go back and forth with the show until Ellie and Dina arrive in the TV station in Seattle. Then I finished the show, and a month or two later finished the game. It turns out that this is a decent way through the show, but only the earlier hours of the game. This is because the second season of the show stops a little more than halfway through the second game. This was frustrating (a) because the season alone felt unfinished even before I knew that the game kept going and (b) now I have to wait however many years to see how the show compares to the second half of the game, and there's a decent chance I won't care by then. Anyway, I won't spoil anything related to the story, but will note that the show and game continue to be really similar; I had expected more differences, as typically the longer an adaptation continues, the farther it strays from its source material. Granted, there were a couple large parts of the show that were created for TV, such as the entire first chunk in the town or introducing the Scars early to develop them (early) as an antagonist, but most of the differences simply involved a character in the show doing something that a different character did in the game. I think the biggest of these "character swaps" happened toward the end of the show/game (and you'll know that the same character can't do the same thing at the end of the show and the game once you get there). These swaps were generally to expand Ellie's character or her relationship with Dina, which was fine, but I worry that it will diminish Abby's characterization in season three. I preferred the game's characterization better. It's hard for a six-episode TV show to create the same depth of character as a 25-30-hour game. And given how the second season of the show pulled material from the second half of the game, the third season of the show might have less punch; they'll have to create more content not currently in the game to fill space. This is fine if they write some excellent new material, but the old material was great where it was in the game, and after playing and looking back on the show, the absence of that great game content could really be felt in season three. Story, story, story. How did it feel to play? Great. It's got a nice rhythm back and forth between combat-heavy parts and exploration parts, and these weave together seamlessly. I liked and actually used all the guns, though I didn't bother with all the tools (bombs and traps went ignored). Enemies are tough and there are multiple ways to approach many encounters. I used both stealth and guns-a-blazing. There are lots of buildings and places to explore off the main path; this game definitely had a bit of an open world vibe compared to the first one, especially when you first arrive in Seattle and are exploring the city on horseback. The crafting system returns and is really useful. I was always crafting new shivs, silencers, health kits, deadly melee weapons, and so on. I know that a game is doing something right when I engage with the crafting system and "optional" tools (even though I ignored the bombs and traps)! The only gripe that I have about the entire game is that (but yay useful crafting system!) there are so many crafting materials to pick up. Exploring a building became me methodically running up and down aisles, scouring bookshelves and cabinets, going in every corner, looking for a little highlighted thing to pick up. I didn't look at the environment, just head down, scanning the shelves for crafting materials. I would have to pull myself away from scrounging around to actually take in the building! This is partly a "me problem" but when there are items all over the place, it's hard for me not to become very instrumental in my exploration; I don't like being so instrumental, but am compelled to do it. So, A+ for The Last of Us II. Now I can give it to my friend to play, hooray! dkirschnerWed, 30 Jul 2025 06:57:30 UTChttp://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=7891&iddiary=13421