Rogue One: Good, But Flawed

Here are my thoughts on Rogue One, let’s dive in!

Rogue One: Good, But Flawed

Andrew Harrington

I’m so happy we can say that Star Wars is good again. The Force Awakens was a fantastic way for us to be brought back into the galaxy we know and love so much, and Rogue One was a great expansion on those original films. Rogue One does so much right, nailing action sequences and comedic relief with ease, but that doesn’t mean it’s a perfect film. It still has problems and can be constructively criticized. Let’s talk about what Rogue One does well, where it stumbles, and what writers and directors should keep in mind for future Star Wars films.

What does Rogue One do well? First, the movie looks and feels like Star Wars, albeit being a bit grittier. The sets, locations, the costumes were all perfect. You can’t look at Jyn Orso wearing rebel garb and say it’s wrong. The attention to detail was nearly impeccable. It was awesome to see the war room in the rebel base on Yavin again, feeling almost as if they had used the same one from the first Star Wars rather than recreating it. Aside from the sets, the rest of the movie is pleasing to look at due to the amazing cinematography by Greig Fraser. Each shot feels like it has been ruminated upon and carefully thought out. It’s perfect for achieving the tone of the film, and also for those who will notice the beautiful attention to detail.

Rogue One’s sound design was also distinctively Star Wars, and this over almost any other aspect of the film helped to bring us back into the universe. Nearly the same thing has been utilized before, for example, look at Star Wars Battlefront. While the game lacked in variety and layered gameplay, it undeniably nailed the sights and sounds of the original masterpieces. In both Star Wars Battlefront and Rogue One the guns sound right, thermal detonators sound right, and the ships sound perfect with their powerful blasts into hyperspace.

The film also offers some of the best Star Wars action to date, yet also some of the darkest. The battles were not only interesting, meaningful and cool, but they were also devastating. For example, when our crew is on Jedha, they get caught in the cross fire between extremist rebels and stormtroopers. The battle breaks out quickly and stops everything on the block. What the director, Garreth Edwards, does though, is make a point of showing us civilian casualties, something lacking in almost every other Star Wars fight. What this does is show us a darker, much more apathetic empire. They want to take out all resistance, and if they take out civilians that’s almost better. It instills fear in those who witnessed and were spared in the fight. This is a conscious tonal decision to make a darker Star Wars film, which ends up working well.

This new darker tone makes it’s way to Darth Vader when he shows us his brutality. In one of the final scenes of the film, Darth Vader easily cuts his way through a squad of rebel soldiers. In the movies, this is the first time we see Vader taking down his enemies without holding back. Edwards brilliantly plays this up and treats Vader less as an action villain, but more as a horror villain. He sets the tone with lighting. The hallway is dark, cutting off one of our senses, and putting us on edge. The entire mission rests on the shoulders of these rebels. If they don’t get the plans out, it was all for nothing. With that, we have tension. Then, slowly out of the darkness, Vader’s red lightsaber unsheathes to illuminate the room with the color of evil. Dark, loud and terrifying music begins to play, encapsulating the rebels’ fear as they watch the cause of their demise slowly make its way closer to them. For Vader, rather than quickly and discreetly discarding this interference, he shows them why he is such a force to be reckoned with. He deflects shots back into those who took them, he cuts someone in half, and stabs a hole in someone and the door. It’s a brilliant way to show Vader who, due to constraints, wasn’t able to be this brutal in the original films.

The film isn’t all perfect though, and was even able to garner some audible groans and head scratches from me. My first gripe revolves around an old playwriting theory conceived by Anton Chekov. He described his theory, entitled Chekhov’s Gun, as such, “If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don’t put it there.” Basically, what this means is that if you are going to mention something, it better be significant at some point. Some films use this idea by nonchalantly introducing us to a later consequential object. Like in Raiders of The Lost Ark, Indiana Jones finds a snake in his plane and says, “I hate snakes.” Keeping Chekhov’s Gun in mind, it makes sense to bring snakes back up later when he is dropped into a pit filled with them.

In Rogue One, Saw Gerrara, an extremist rebel, interrogates our recently defected imperial pilot, named Bodhi, in hopes to find enemy secrets. He tortures him with a squid-like creature able to read minds. Right before the interrogation begins, Gerrara tells Bodhi that as a result of this type of torture, “One tends to lose one’s mind.” The next time we see Bodhi, he seems to have lost his mind. Cassian then asks if he is the pilot, and in the scene directly after, he is fine. There appears to be no sign of memory loss or side effects. To bring back Chekhov’s theory, why would Gerrara say this if it was going to be shrugged off so quickly. There was a total of maybe five seconds where his mind was gone, and their justification for it coming back is nearly as lame as the plot twist in Batman V. Superman. This may not seem like a huge problem, and potentially even good because we weren’t subjected to another film with the amnesia trope. Though, it begs the question, was this line, or scene for that matter, even necessary? Should it have been left on the cutting room floor? My guess is that they were trying to show us that Gerrara was actually an extremist, rather than your run-of-the-mill rebel. However, they could have done this another way that would have even left more of a lasting impression. They could have shown Gerrara interrogating another prisoner and killing him when he was done. To make it even more impactful, Bodhi could have been watching and come to the realization that he was next. This would not only give us a clearer picture of Gerrara, it would cut out an inconsistency that came up early in the film.

It’s hard to write good characters with great arcs in the runtime of a single movie. It’s possible but with limited time it’s both hard to make your audience connect with the characters, and make them layered in subtle ways. In a show like Breaking Bad, we have around sixty hours to learn who Walt is. The payoffs are sweet because we have such a good grasp on who this character. The ending of Rogue One features payoffs that work, and payoffs that don’t. I also didn’t feel as though I had a great grasp on who the characters were. Jyn felt a bit bland and Chirrut Îmwe’s character was his one repeated line. The most interesting character was Cassian due to his vague backstory and morally ambiguous tactics. He wasn’t perfect though and felt a bit too similar to Han Solo. Again, it’s hard to write characters that we can care about in that short of a runtime, but it is possible. I feel as though the characters fell short of being great.

What I will give Rogue One credit for is giving us time to see these characters together in a variety of different scenarios. The first half of the movie was dedicated to character interactions on different planets with different objectives. However, the first half of the movie is confusing and jumps around too quickly for us to understand on what is happening. Certain bits felt rushed through while others felt drawn out in the wrong moments. The film really hits its stride when our team makes it to Scarif. At this point the editing feels near perfect, utilizing Lucas’ classic three planes of action to great results. A muddled first act is hard to recover from, but for the most part the movie did. However, I still left the theatre with questions about what had happened in the beginning of the film.

My final and biggest problem comes from Rogue One’s fan service. There was a lot of it, and most of it wasn’t pretty. I let out a very loud groan when R2 and C3PO were shown for no more than a second. To me, it felt shoehorned in, and utterly unnecessary. It felt like someone was sitting next to me saying, remember you love these characters. The movie would still be the exact same without it. I felt the same way when Jyn and Cassian ran into Ponda Baba. It felt weird and out of place. Plus, it actually created more problems. How did they get off Jedha so quickly to make it to Tatooine? And is this galaxy really that small?

The larger cameos also missed the mark. Grand Moff Tarkin had great lines and served a purpose, but while his CG was decent, we could still see the strings, so to speak. Same goes for Leia. Even though she was only in the movie for one shot, she didn’t look right. As for Vader, I mentioned earlier how amazing his final scene was, but that should have been his only scene. Earlier in the film, the head of the Death Star project, Orson Krennic, meets with Vader to discuss plans and the future of the space station. Vader feels arbitrarily thrown in. Again, the film would be no different without him there. To make matters worse, on his way out he says one of his worst lines ever. While force choking Krennic he remarks, “careful not to choke on your aspirations, director.” How much cooler would it have been if Vader was treated as a distant threat that people merely reference in fear. Then at the end, the film’s build up is paid off by Vader’s brutal fight scene. Or if he was treated like he was in the beginning of the original trilogy as a bit of a relic, an old guard whose glory days have passed. The Imperials only call him in at the end as a last ditch effort, and we see that he is anything but past his prime.

What scares me in terms of future films in the Star Wars Stories series is how liberally and poorly they might use fan service as a way of trying to bring people back into the universe. Quickly flashing a shot of R2 and C3PO don’t bring us in when it makes no sense for them to be there. Instead they should bring us into the film by matching the look and sound of the original films. What they did this time only brought me out of the immersion and made me question what the purpose was for such cameos. These little nods to the audience aren’t only native to Star Wars, they pop up in other new additions to existing franchises. Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them does this to a fault, nearly focusing more on those references than the actual story in the film. If future Star Wars movies continue this trend, we will see worse and worse films that bank off of cheap, quick emotions like those experienced when seeing Leia or Tarkin.

I still really enjoyed Rogue One. Its action was awesome and the film was beautiful to look at. We got to see an interesting story of this ill fated group and Vader in his most horrific action. We got an explanation for the first Star Wars’ biggest plot hole and a new tone for Star Wars movies in the future. We got more Star Wars. Sure, there are issues, but this is a good start, and they can definitely get better from here.

Uploaded to Youtube on December 29th, 2016.

You Are on Thin Ice, Bethesda

Sorry guys. I’m a bit late on uploading this here. Here it finally is if you were looking for it, enjoy!

You Are on Thin Ice, Bethesda

Andrew Harrington

On October 25th of 2016, Bethesda Softworks, creators of such classics as Skyrim and the Fallout series, announced that they will no longer be giving out early review copies for their upcoming games. Instead, they have decided to send copies out only a day prior to release, which isn’t nearly sufficient time to review a game in time for release. There have been a variety of different responses to this announcement ranging from anger to excitement and even smug satisfaction. This move is not only harmful for review sites, it’s harmful to the consumer and the gaming industry as a whole. Personally, I find this policy to be aggravating, and I’m not alone with this sentiment. However, I’ve seen plenty of comments from the public applauding their decision. Let’s look at how this hurts review sites, Bethesda, the consumer and finally other developers.

Here’s a little background. The current status quo in the video game industry has been as such: developers give out review copies of games prior to release. Reviewers then form and write reviews of the games, to publish them on or slightly before the game’s release date. In recent years, let’s players and other YouTube gaming personalities have also received copies early as a way of marketing games to specific YouTube communities. This allows for an informed gaming public to make decisions on whether to purchase games based on reviews and second hand experience. This is not an industry requirement though, and developers in the past have decided to opt out of this process by giving review copies after release dates of games, or not at all. Often times this has been a sign that the game’s quality might be lacking. This decision to not give out review copies can be a way for developers with potentially bad games to sell more copies on day one due to an uninformed public. For example, Mafia III was just released, and developer 2K decided not send out early review copies. Many people had faith that the game would be stellar, and yet, were rewarded with a mediocre overall experience. While the game had a great story, it’s gameplay was dull and bugs ran rampant. Despite the game’s missteps, it’s selling well. Some of this success can most likely be attributed to a lack of day one reviews.

No Man’s Sky is another example of this shady practice. Hello Games promised more than would be possible with huge team, let alone their team of nineteen. The game sold incredibly well, but had no reviews on day one. No Man’s Sky was not what people were hoping for and players were not happy. The game now has mostly negative reviews on Steam. Furthermore, reviews of this game have been less than stellar, with most outlets giving the game a score of six out of ten or less. The game may have sold less if reviews were out in time allowing customers to base their decision on critical opinions.

With all that being said, let’s look at how this hurts reviewers. Gaming news sites like IGN, Polygon, and Kotaku make their money by creating content for the general gaming audience. Along with other video features, opinion pieces, and gaming shows, reviews are a major source of income. Reviews of highly anticipated titles garner large quantities of views. For example, Kotaku’s review of Overwatch received over 180,000 views, according to their website. That’s a lot of people, and advertisers love seeing this kind of traffic. Companies advertise on these sites and, if they are advertising in the right place, will bring people to their own websites. The more people who visit a page, the more people who see these ads. These high unique website views and visits directly correlate to the review’s income. So when these reviews post late those numbers drop by a significant margin. People will buy Bethesda’s games without having seen a review, simply because there aren’t any. Similarly, if someone owns the game, they may not feel the need to look up a review. By keeping their games from being reviewed on time, Bethesda is taking away significant amounts of views to review sites and therefore cutting the amount of money these reviews are making.

Bethesda thinks holding their games will help them make more money, and it will, but only in the short term. Bethesda is counting on us to trust them. They want us to base our purchasing decisions on their excellent previous titles, and we can do that… to an extent. While I have faith that both Skyrim Special Edition and Dishonored 2 will be great games, what happens when they release a bad game? Bethesda is riding high after the warm reception of Skyrim, Dishonored, Wolfenstein, The Evil Within, Doom and Fallout 4. However, they are not a perfect company. They have published and developed bad games before. Anyone remember Brink? Brink was an online shooter that emphasized its unique parkour elements developed by Splash Damage. The game received a six out of ten from both IGN and Gamespot, with IGN’s review publishing a day prior to release. On Metacritic users rated it even lower. If you remember, this game had major hype. I was ready to buy it day one until I saw IGN’s review which spotlighted the game’s problems. Bugs plagued both the single and multiplayer modes, making it nearly impossible to play, and the game just wasn’t very fun. What happens when Bethesda releases another game like this, either from their own softworks, Arkane Studios or Id? Due to a lack of critical coverage on the games, they will sell incredibly well, but players won’t be happy. Sure, Bethesda will make their money, but how many people will come back for their next project?

Contrary to the beliefs spewed in their comments sections, reviews are pro consumer. They are made in order to help gamers decide what to spend their money on. They concisely tell us what a game was able to do well, and what it was missing. By giving us this comprehensive, full look at the game, they can help us spend our money wisely. Oddly enough, I have seen comments on videos reacting to to Bethesda’s new policy thanking and encouraging them. Guess what people, this hurts us! This only benefits Bethesda by allowing them to increase their monetary gain at the expense of their customers. People will buy Bethesda’s game regardless of a review due to the reputation they have created. However, they will continue to put out games that are buggy and potentially even broken on day one. Without a critical voice to keep Bethesda in line, the quality of their games will soon begin to decline. Why would they put in more effort if it’s not needed to make money? If Bethesda sticks to their guns, they will inevitably break the trust of their fans and have to gain it all back.

To smaller developers, reviews can be scary. They can be the deciding factor on whether your game sells or not. If a small studio with a low advertising budget releases an outstanding game, it can sell incredibly well due to positive reviews. We’ve seen this with both Shovel Knight and Axiom Verge, two of the best indie games of the past ten years. However, reviews can also utterly destroy the chances of success if the game is bad. These small studios may see what Bethesda is doing and, driven by fear of failure, choose to follow the same path. This could destroy that company, though. Small games that receive reviews will sell more than games without reviews, regardless of their score. If a game reviews poorly, people may still buy it out of morbid curiosity, or to see if they agree. While their game isn’t great, it gives them more money for their next project. If the review is late or nonexistent, their sales will be significantly lower. Bethesda may be able to make this work for the time being, but a smaller studio with less of a reputation can’t bank on those guaranteed sales.

What I don’t get is why Bethesda thinks this will make them more money in the long run. Bethesda has nothing to lose by giving out early review copies. They have some of the best games coming out now, and they want us to believe that this standard of quality will continue. Why wouldn’t they continue making their amazing games, receiving amazing scores, and thus seeing amazing sales? This seems like a weird misguided step that will ultimately harm their reputation. The only justification I can think of stems from Fallout 4. Fallout 4 reviewed very well, but was hurt a bit by the countless bugs in the game. Also, the fact that the game was painfully similar to Fallout 3 kept it from feeling revolutionary like we were expecting. Those problems with the game, however, were valid critiques and should have been examined rather than thrown aside. It seems like Bethesda can’t handle a bit of constructive criticism, so they’re trying to kill it altogether. We, as consumers, can’t allow this to happen for our own sake.

So what can we do to combat this destructive practice? Well, we can stop preordering their games. Other then a small, and I mean small, amount of extra content, what do preorders really do for us? The way I look at, preordering a game is a way of telling developers that we trust them. So what happens when they show us that they can’t be trusted? If you have a problem with Bethesda’s shady new policy, show them by waiting to buy their games until we know they’re worth the money.

Uploaded to Youtube on November 16th, 2016

A Grizzly Environment – A Movie Synopsis

Let me give this some context before you begin reading. In one of my college classes called, Race, Activism and Climate Justice, we were asked to write Climate Fiction movie synopses. We had to make up movies similar to Mad Max, The Day After Tomorrow or Waterworld. Everyone wrote boring, typical, overdramatic thrillers, so I wrote this. There are a number of homages in here, anything that seems like it may be copying was very conscious and meant to honor rather than steal. Enjoy!

A Grizzly Environment – Movie Synopsis

Andrew Harrington

The year is 2170. Earth has been nearly destroyed by human’s changes to the climate. Vast deserts have engulfed the majority of the world and are juxtaposed only by small slivers of nearly perfect environments that span for only a few miles each. The population has diminished to a mere one billion, and poverty runs rampant while the rich only become richer. Places that were formerly vast rainforests have become the last vestiges of hope and homes to the richest of the rich. Water is scarce, power is scare, and animal life has been all but wiped out. The rich are pampered and live life well. They have created androids to do their bidding, which are coming much to close to sentience for the comfort of those enslaving them. These androids have been the key to keeping the few environmental oases alive. They cultivate the land and have taken the place of the absent wildlife. On the other end, the poor wallow in filth and have no way of climbing to the top to join those amid the microscopic rainforests.

One scientist, named Gregory O’Stethoscope, has a plan to bring down the ultra rich. He has been working on the mass cloning of wildlife for his entire life, and has just cracked the code. Ecstatic by the new achievements in science, he finds himself locked into a quandary that will be written about in the history books. Should he use his new science for aiding the rich, or harming them? His wife, Gloria O’Stethoscope, his muse and partner in science, believes that they should take the high ground, help the rich in order to expand a safe environment for the poor. While she disagrees with the rich, she wants to stay on their good side while helping out those in need. Gregory, on the other hand, has a different plan up his sleeve.

In Neo San Francisco, which has been moved to Muir Woods and is one of the last surviving areas of environmental diversity, a plan is underway. Unmarked trucks roll into the city slowly as people watch intently, they know something sinister is afoot. Out of the trucks, quickly and ferociously, cloned bears begin to funnel out, immediately dealing massive amounts of damage. Four trucks, each containing twenty-five bears, adding to a total of one hundred bears are let loose on this tiny city. God help them all. Gregory O’Stethoscope watches from a safe distance as the bears terrorize the city and send its inhabitance into a frenzy. This is a day the city, no, the world, will never forget.

The president of the United States, John America Jr., has decided to jump on the news to plead to this terrorist. America Jr. gets on to the news, shaking, sweating and on the brink of fainting, addresses his country. He says, “People of America, we are in the middle of a terrorist… no scratch that, bearorist attack in Neo San Francisco. We are unclear of the total number of bears ravaging the city but it must be close to a hundred. While this act is deplorable and horrific… you gotta give the guy some credit. Figuring out the logistics behind getting one hundred bears into the city is pretty dang impressive. With that being said, the current state we are in is unbearable.”

Back in the O’Stethoscope household, Gregory and Gloria are in the middle of a heated debate. Gloria is furious that Gregory went forward with such a devastating, and downright childish plan in order to poorly send a message to the world’s richest. She yells at him, asking what message he was trying to get across, because it seems like people aren’t really going to get it. Gregory goes into a monologue explaining how bears symbolize a great force when brought together, those below the poverty line, and when unleashed on the rich, can take down the status quo. He also states that the very thing the rich are getting rid of, is coming right back to kick their asses. She responds by telling him how stupid that is and that he should’ve probably just mobilized the poor instead, I mean, people would’ve definitely been on board. Gregory, being the stubborn rapscallion that he’s always been, tells his wife that he can’t give up on his plan now. He understands where she is coming from, even admitting that she should’ve been the one planning all of this, but god dammit, he needs to finish what he started. I mean, she’s just way more rational than he is. He then runs away to his “secret lair,” or his closet, and dons his new attire.

Back in the city, people are being ripped to shreds by these bears. The death toll is up to probably twenty. That may sound low, and it is, the city has a really good evacuation plan. But you should know that the property damage is in the millions of dollars. All of a sudden, over the largest city square, appears a man dressed as a super villain. His costume is yellow, with a red cape, and on his forehead… a stethoscope. With the click of a button Gregory hacks into all of the city’s electronics, including the androids. He delivers a message to the people.

“People of Neo San Francisco! It is time for a change to the structure of our world. The people in charge are pretty terrible and we need to take back what is ours, the gosh danged world!” People trapped in poverty on the edge of the city watch their illuminated screens with bewilderment. “It is time to revolt against those in power. Join me as we take down our oppressors and make our world inhabitable again!” Those stuck in the desert see his message and decide to join his call to action, even though they are completely lost on the whole bear thing, they think it’s pretty funny, but it just doesn’t make sense to them like it does to Gregory.

In the following week, Gregory and the people who are ready to fight for their rights prepare to storm the White House. Gregory gives a speech to his fighters. “People, we are on the dawn of a new era. We have seen the brink of extinction and we are turning back from it. No more will we allow this elite class to dictate our lives. Join me brothers and sisters as we take back this land. I warn you though, not all of you will make it, in fact, most of you are going to die… in really bad ways, it’ll be gruesome. But think of the children! We can send them in first! As frontline to slow down the oppressors, then we can storm in after.” Someone goes up to him and explains how this is a bad idea. “Right, send the kids home, then. Most of you won’t live… especially without that frontline… dammit, are we sure we can’t use the kids?” They assure him. “Okay, fine. Let us begin this epic battle.” He turns around then shouts his battle cry, “For Narnia!” He seems to be confused on what movie he is in.

The people rush in for the fight of the generation! Both sides begin to lose people left and right as the poor slowly begins to make their way further and further into the white house. Their numbers are superior making it a sure loss for the elite. Gregory then calls in his hail Mary plan. Out of nowhere, hundreds of wolverines bust into the fight killing indiscriminately. Both sides are losing numbers fast. Then, again, panthers. Then, lions, tigers, fuck! More bears!

Gregory makes his way to the oval office, he’s covered in blood and a giant smile has crept across his face, he just loves violence apparently. Gregory then kills the president and the elite realize they have lost. The poor win the day and the government concedes to the uprising.

The people begin to rebuild their society, however, they decide not to elect Gregory as their new leader, even though without him they would never have made it this far. The people decided that his planning skills are just too terrible, I mean, did you see how many of his own men he killed with those animals? It was up to like a hundred thousand or so. Just too many casualties. They elect none other than Gloria O’Stethoscope, and the day is saved… for now. The last shot of the film shows the president, who is dead, being zipped into a body bag. As the zipper passes his face, his mechanical eye blinks. He was an android the whole fucking time! Impossible, they had so little focus in the movie it seems so weird to add them into the movie now! We’re not really are even sure what that implies, the powers of the androids weren’t even spoken about! None of that matters though, he is an android, and he’ll be back!

What We Want From The Last Guardian

What We Want From The Last Guardian

Andrew Harrington

The Last Guardian has been one of the most anticipated games for the past ten years. Ever since its announcement, Team Ico’s latest project has undergone a mysterious, rocky development whose story is still unknown to the public. We are now, finally, nearing the game’s release date after what has seemed like an unending cycle of announcements and delays.

The Last Guardian was first announced at E3 2009 where it was given a 2011 release date. Sadly, Team Ico missed the release date and was forced to push the game back. Shortly after this delay the game’s head designer, Fumito Ueda, left Sony. However, Ueda was still under contract to finish The Last Guardian. Team Ico quickly went into radio silence for nearly three years leading many people, including myself, to believe that the game had died during it’s incredibly long time away from the public eye. Out of the blue, at the 2015 E3 Sony Press Conference, like a beacon shining from the heavens, a new trailer for The Last Guardian was premiered. A year later, at the 2016 E3 Sony Press Conference another trailer was presented featuring a release date of October 25, 2016. Somehow, after nearly a decade in development, The Last Guardian was delayed again, and its release date was pushed from October to December 2016. While the new release date is only two months later than the date announced at E3, another delay could suggest issues with the game. It’s unclear what we can expect from The Last Guardian. At this point, the real question becomes: what could the game feature that would live up to the enormous hype the game has garnered? Let me tell you what would make this painfully long wait worthwhile. The Last Guardian has the potential to be outstanding if Team Ico implements four major ideas to their game. We will discuss storytelling with moral and ethical quandaries, a unique environment, having a partner to exploring with and the importance of controls. Let’s dive in.

The reason The Last Guardian has attained such a large amount of hype is because of Team Ico’s previous two spectacular games, Ico and Shadow of the Colossus. To understand what will make The Last Guardian successful we can observe their other games. Shadow of the Colossus, one of the best games on the Playstation 2, was Team Ico’s last game before beginning work on The Last Guardian. The game tells the story of Wander, a boy trying to resurrect a woman named Mono. To resurrect Mono, Wander is instructed by Dormin, some sort of god, to kill giant creatures throughout the land, known as colossuses. The game shows Wander in a moral quandary. Wander is determined to do whatever it takes to bring Mono back to life, yet once we find the first colossus, as Wander, we immediately become mesmerized by it. It is majestic, unique, and beautiful. Finding each new colossus is bittersweet. Initially enamored by their beauty, we soon come to the realization that we must murder these creatures to further our journey. This idea of morally questionable choices that drive the plot should be applied to The Last Guardian. We should be guided through a morally ambiguous or ethically conflicting plot. It would be interesting to see The Last Guardian present us with similar bittersweet moments in regards to the mysterious Bird-dog creatures featured in the game’s trailers. For example, we may find these creatures chained up around the world, and upon first glance it seems that the character should unlock them. However, the character may learn that keeping these creatures chained ensures their safety from the harsh world, causing the character to leave these creatures when they need his help the most. This type of morally conflicting storytelling would be perfect in giving players a memorable and lasting story.

Both of Team Ico’s previous games have compelling stories that aid in creating memorable experiences. However, they focus more on the journeys the player is taken on rather than the overarching plot points. In these games the world is used as a tool for cultivating a mood and tone. Games in our current gaming generation tend to cram as much as physically possible into their environments to show realism, add content to the game, or flesh out the universe. Shadow of the Colossus was different, though. It showed us a world that feels barren and forgotten in time, creating a more somber tone. Exploring this landscape isn’t a joyful romp through bustling city streets or quaint villages, it’s a dark trek through an abandoned land filled with ruins of a different time. In other circumstances, we would most likely avoid this sad place. From what we have seen of The Last Guardian it seems that this idea of using the world to build atmosphere will be used with a similar barren landscape. Throughout the game we may not run into a single other human character, which would be a great way to not only establish a distinct tone, it would also help separate the game from others being released now.

While these worlds feel unique and work marvelously for cultivating a tone, they can get lonely. That isn’t always a bad thing though. For example, the majority of Half-Life 2 has the player embarking on a solo journey through a harsh empty map. Upon reaching your destination, you feel like you can take on anything. On the flip side, there is something special about being able to bond with another character along the way. Bioshock Infinite does this wonderfully with Elizabeth. Throughout the journey players fell in love with Elizabeth. The shared experience and conversations helped to build upon the duos character development. Neither approach is best, they are totally different. With one we get to see more of the landscape and find comfort in isolation, while the other makes us fall in love with our partner joining us. The Last Guardian has the potential to use either one of these two approaches, however, it seems more likely that it will use the latter. Our partner will most likely be one of the aforementioned Bird-dogs named Trico. Since this creature will not be able to speak Team Ico will have to create that bond through common experiences and a visual relationship. Our companion Bird-dog, Trico, being necessary for completing puzzles would be a great way to do this. If we are able to use teamwork in order to progress through our journey we would quickly grow attached to our feathered canine companion. As the relationship strengthens between the us and the creature, both parties could begin to show each other affection. The boy could pat Trico or Trico could nuzzle his giant head into the boy. This would give our journey emotional weight, while increasing the stakes.

Here’s where things get a little dicey. As much as I love the previous Team Ico games, they are difficult to return to. It’s been eleven years since Shadow of the Colossus hit store shelves and it shows. Not only is the game visually dated, its controls are dated as well. The game features funky, loose controls that keep Shadow of the Colossus from becoming a timeless classic. Games with weird or bad controls are difficult to play. They can break the immersion quickly, and if something feels off within the first five minutes it’s easy to quit. People who have had the pleasure of playing The Last Guardian in it’s current state have mentioned that the game plays like its predecessors. That’s not good. Without tight, understandable controls the game may end up underwhelming, confusing or infuriating players forcing them to give up prematurely. The importance of gameplay cannot be stressed enough for The Last Guardian. This game, if anything like the developer’s other games, will be mostly gameplay with bits of story sprinkled on top. If the biggest element of the game is lackluster, then it will be destined to fail.

Due to the insane amount of hype accrued by The Last Guardian over the years, it seems nearly impossible for Team Ico to deliver a game that exceeds expectations, let alone meets them. Let’s not give up hope yet, though, there is a chance that this game will impress us. If the game is able to introduce us to an interesting, unique world that helps build the tone for the game, give us an interesting story spiced with Team Ico’s brand of moral ambiguity, and utilize our furry-feathered companion for puzzles to make us fall in love with them, we will be immediately captivated. Good, solid gameplay will keep us playing it for years to come. I am skeptical of Team Ico’s latest project, but let’s give them a chance to astonish us a third time with The Last Guardian.

Stop Complaining About Walking Simulators

Stop Complaining About Walking-Simulators

Andrew Harrington

A relatively new game genre has come out recently that has been receiving a lot of flak from people on the internet; enter the Walking-Simulator. Games like Gone Home, Everybody’s Gone To The Rapture, or Firewatch are some examples of the genre. If you don’t know, a walking simulator is a game that focuses less on gameplay than it does telling a good story. The player mainly walks around an environment and can maybe pick up items around them, that’s basically it. Personally, I love them. They are an interesting way for games to tell a story that other media wouldn’t be able to. They cut out game mechanics that may actually hinder the developer’s ability to tell an impactful story.

Today, I saw a comment on the IGN review of Virginia, another walking-simulator type game that just came out. It received an 8.5 out of 10 from the author of the article who thoroughly enjoyed his time with the game. The comment I read criticized the genre itself and complained about how IGN rates these games highly. He even went as far as saying that the genre should die because of how they boring the are. My response: stop it. I’m going to tell you why these games are great, and why you really need to stop shouting about nothing.

This genre, as I said earlier, is able to tell different stories in ways that are impossible to tell in other types of media. Let’s take a look at Gone Home. In Gone Home you play as a girl named Katie, who has just returned home after her semester abroad in Europe to find that her house is empty. No one’s home and the only things in the house are notes and trinkets that help enlighten Katie as to what’s happened. If this game were a movie it would be the most boring film in existence. We would watch this girl walk around a house she has never been in, finding small items, and that’s it. People would hate it. If it were a book it would be the same. It would just be descriptions of the house with the occasional minute action.

Why does it work as a games then? Two words, exploration and atmosphere. When you first enter the house you’re lost. You have no idea what lies in the hallway to the left of the stairs, or what looms behind the basement door. Before you begin searching, the game subtly creates an atmosphere that puts you on edge creating a tension. This house is creepy, like really creepy, and to make matters worse the game takes place during a thunderstorm. Random cracks of lighting are certainly going to add to the uneasy feeling you get while roaming the house. The game doesn’t tell you where to go, it simply places you at the front door and lets you search for yourself. There is no tutorial, no arrows marking your path, all that’s there is an empty house. So, naturally, we explore the house. Being able to explore a new environment at your own pace and direction feels good. Sure, you can’t leave the house, but there is enough in the house that will make you want to see the entirety of it.

There are so many amazing games that are able to both, tell a good story and have more intensive gameplay, but that doesn’t mean they’re better than walking simulators. For examples of this we can look at The Last of Us or the Uncharted series, two of my favorite IP’s. These stories are more traditional, not to say they are bad, because they are anything but. They work because the gameplay makes contextual sense in the story (for the most part). The games let you play through the action sequences and the scenes that would be cut from the movies due to timing and pacing. But this doesn’t always allow us to experience smaller scale stories like the ones in Gone Home. These small stories also wouldn’t make sense if huge action sequences were crammed in. If you had a gun and were shooting zombies or shadow creatures in Gone Home, it would feel incredibly out of place and you would lose most of the games subtle story telling. Games like The Last of Us and the Uncharted series focus more on the big moments, the massive set pieces, or emotionally gut wrenching scenes. But Gone Home is about the little ones. Those moments that others might miss. They might make you think or cry, but are so subtle you might even walk right past them.

This leads me to visual and environmental story telling, something that many games seem to miss. Good games often have moments where taking a minute to stop and look around rewards you with an entire story hidden in the background. These moments don’t often happen in high action, high voltage games like Call of Duty where there is no stopping to smell the flowers. The few times it is present in more fast paced games it can be lost entirely. There are exceptions though, like in The Last of Us. Scattered through the game are abandoned houses and neighborhoods that can detail the stories of those living there when the outbreak happened. Again, though, these are moments are quiet. You explore them slowly while looking for supplies. These moments are powerful and have become fan favorites. After The Last of Us came out people wanted DLC, or downloadable content, that chronicled a character named Ish. Ish is a character that the player never actually meets in the game. His story is told through notes and environments that you stumble upon when exploring with your group. Similarly, in Gone Home we can learn about Katie’s father. In his office there are notes to himself about his writing. In his bedroom closet there are boxes of his unsold books. In the greenroom there are letters from his editor. These are heartbreaking, and brilliantly laid out. When the pace is slowed and we are encouraged to observe stories can be presented in completely new ways.

Walking simulators can also focus on telling a story rather than trying to stimulate the player one hundred percent of the time. How many times have you been wrapped up in the story of a game but can’t get past a boss, and your story progression is halted? In the Batman Arkham trilogy, or quadrilogy (I mean, honestly, what do they want us to call it at this point?), this happens all the time. Towards the end of these games, right as the story ramps up, there will be a spike in difficulty, and while this is a great for testing the player on the skills they may have learned, it kills the pacing of the story beats. It can be incredibly satisfying using all of the skills you’ve learned together to overcome a challenge, but when it happens in between story beats, the emotional payoff becomes less gratifying than it should be.

This genre isn’t exempt from criticism, far from it, and while the comment I read was a form of criticism, it was invalid. Walking simulators are not meant to overstimulate a player and make their fingers sore for next few hours, they are meant to draw you in and tell an engaging story. By no means do you have to like the genre, gaming is subjective. If you understand what walking simulators are created for, however, we can still appreciate them for what they are able to accomplish from the storytelling side. Next time you see a walking simulator receive a high rating, maybe you can think about what it may have done well comparatively to other games in it’s genre.