Depression Quest

Zoe Quinn - 2013 - PC

Depression Quest is a game that makes me really excited about where the medium of video games is now and direction it's going in the future. Depression Quest is an interactive educational simulation about living with depression. It attempts to use game mechanics to communicate to the player what living with depression feels like. The mechanics are simple and certainly nothing revolutionary. But what makes me excited about this game is that to me it serves as an indicator that the medium of video games is maturing to a point where games can start to cover serious topics like this and tell deeply personal stories.

The game of Depression Quest is basically a text-only roleplaying experience that repeatedly presents you with a scenario and then offers you several choices of how to deal with a the presented scenario. For instance, your in-game girlfriend may call you up and ask you if you'd like to attend a birthday party. You're then given several choices like "attend" or "politely decline" or "say you're not feeling well" or something like that. The catch is that while you can see all of the options, the ones you can actually select are almost always limited based on how depressed you're feeling. There's a few blurbs of text near the bottom of the screen which essentially serve as your "depression meter" and as you get better or worse, more or fewer options are available to you. As far as a simulation of depression goes, it was pretty effective. Sometimes you can see the option you'd really like to choose, but you just can't pick it, which is kind of frustrating.

The game states that its authors have personally struggled with depression before which makes Depression Quest's story feel very authentic. Now I'm not sure if it was the quality of the writing or how personal it felt, but I was alarmed at how many times the writing really struck a chord and resonated with me. There were many times where I was like "Oh wow, I think that to myself all the time". Again, I've never struggled with the serious, deep kind of depression this game is about, but those thoughts I had were a testament to how relatable the writing is even to someone who doesn't know much about the subject matter.

Summary:
As someone who has never personally dealt with depression before, this game was a very educational tool for me and I'm very glad that this game exists. I hope it helps to raise awareness of what exactly depression is and how the people suffering from it can feel limited in their lives. I also hope that this can influence more developers to make more really personal experiences like this game. It's probably less than an hour long, but it's totally free and I'd recommend it to anyone looking for a personal game or anyone who would like to try to roleplay what it's like to live life with depression

A Bird Story

Freebird Games - 2014 - PC

Earlier this year, Freebird Games and head developer Kan Gao released a free mini-DLC epilogue for their excellent 2011 game To The Moon. This DLC served as a sort of epilogue for To The Moon that wrapped up the story and tied into the next entry in the series. A Bird Story, which came out earlier this week, was teased as being the game in the To The Moon series and that's both true and misleading at the same time. I found A Bird Story to be actually more like the DLC that was released earlier this year - it's a short mini-episode that's meant to bridge To The Moon and its eventual full-length sequel together and introduce the sequel's new main character. While A Bird Story is a full, albeit very short, standalone game in the To The Moon universe, it also has some notable differences from its predecessor. Firstly, there is absolutely no dialogue in A Bird Story. Secondly, because A Bird Story takes place long before the events of To The Moon (and presumably long before Watts or Rosalene were even born), you play not as Dr. Watts or Dr. Rosalene, but as a young boy who will eventually become their patient in the next game.

The most defining characteristic of A Bird Story is its heavy focus on narrative, but complete lack of dialogue of any kind. This is in stark contrast to To The Moon which was a game made up almost entirely of reading text boxes. I found this to be the most interesting "mechanic" in A Bird Story. This places a greater importance on music to set the mood and the animation to convey the action in the game, which is pretty ambitious for a 2D sprite based game. After finding a few of the opening scenes to be ambiguous and difficult to interpret, I was initially not too fond of this style of storytelling. I was getting annoyed that I couldn't tell what the game was trying to convey to me, so I instead chose to focus on what *my* interpretations of the scenes were. I found this approach to the game made it much more enjoyable and I'll go as far as to say that I think the game was actually intended to be played this way. By the nature of removing all dialogue, A Bird Story sets itself up to be much more open to interpretation than literal like its predecessor. Plus A Bird Story has a very metaphorical and almost dreamlike quality to it which meshes well with its dialogue-less-ness.

While To The Moon had qualities of science fiction, these sci-fi laws were explained and defined and for the most part, the game played by its own rules throughout its story. A Bird Story is much less concerned with what rules govern its in game reality, and instead goes for a very dreamlike aesthetic. It's often hard to tell if what you're witnessing is "actually happening" or if its part of the main character's fantasy or daydream. This is exemplified not only in the events of the story, but in the game's level design too. In the first scenes of the game, the main character walks from his school to his apartment, establishing their physical locations in the game world. But then in a subsequent scene, the character walks back to his school from the apartment via a different path which goes in a totally contradictory direction than the one taken in the previous scene. You still know where you are, but the game invalidates its own rules for how its game world is laid out structurally. It reminded me of how sometimes the architecture of dreams isn't quite exactly correct. You still know where you are, but there are sometimes little shortcuts and inconsistencies with reality.

Kan Gao's excellent musical composition skills are on display again in A Bird Story. I did catch at least one recycled track from To The Moon, but I'm pretty sure all of the rest of the music in the game was original. I'm also a fan of the old school 2D sprite aesthetic and some of the backgrounds in the game are very well drawn. Without any dialogue, the music and artwork get an increased emphasis, and they do a good job of creating mood and atmosphere.

Summary:
A Bird Story does stand on its own, but I'm not sure I'd recommend this to people who haven't already played To The Moon and enjoyed it. It feels more like a shorter and more compressed version of everything that was great about To The Moon. Clocking in at just over an hour, it's a very short experience, but is probably priced appropriately at $5. The storytelling without dialogue works, but it just didn't quite have the same impact on me as To The Moon. I'm now looking forward to Finding Paradise which I guess will be the next "proper" game in the To The Moon series

Beyond: Two Souls

Quantic Dream - 2013 - PS3

Beyond: Two Souls is the fourth game from developer Quantic Dream and director David Cage. Other titles by Quantic Dream include the excellent Heavy Rain, Indigo Prophecy - which I really want to play, and Omikron: The Nomad Soul - which I had never heard of prior to reading the Wikipedia article for Quantic Dream. Beyond plays very similarly to Heavy Rain (and Indigo Prophecy, from what I understand) which made me very excited to try it as Heavy Rain was one of my favorite games I played last year. But, oh boy, Beyond has so many problems. This was such a disappointment after what was a very promising game in Heavy Rain. This review is probably going to get pretty rant-y, so heads up. I don't even know where to start with this game. I guess I'll start by tearing apart the plot.

Beyond: Two Souls tells the story of the life of Jodie Foster who is played by actress Ellen Page. Yes, this is the game that actually stars Ellen Page, as opposed to The Last of Us, which just stole her name and likeness. Anyway, Jodie was somehow linked at birth to a ghostly entity named Aiden, hence the "Two Souls" moniker in the title of the game. Aiden has the ability to manipulate objects in the physical world, give Jodie visions of the past, can phase through walls, and has the ability posses others and force them to do whatever actions he pleases. But Aiden cannot otherwise speak or interact with the physical world. How did Jodie and Aiden come to be linked together? How did Aiden get his powers? How do we even know Aiden's name to begin with??? These are important plot points that the game just chooses to never address.

The plot of Beyond is delivered Pulp Fiction style, which is to say that important parts of Jodie's life are sliced up and given to us out of chronological order. Why is the story presented this way? I have no idea, it only serves to make the narrative more confusing and it felt unjustified. A lot of the pieces of Jodie's life that we are given seem to be largely unrelated to one another and are stylistically and tonally completely different from the last. I remember noting this back in my Heavy Rain review - that some pieces of the plot didn't seem to fit in or progress the story in any meaningful way. But Beyond is an entire game made of these unrelated segments. It's as though 20 different writers wrote 20 different stories about Jodie and no one bothered checking to see if they were related in any way. Then to make things worse, they're presented to us all out of order.

I'll say this though: Beyond has a very promising and interesting open. The first tutorial chapter sees a young Jodie being tested for "physic powers" by recreating the scene in Ghostbusters where there's a supposed physic on one side of a room and someone with symbols on flash cards on the other side of the room. The game wants you to take control of Aiden to peek at the flash cards before Jodie gives her answer. This is a really interesting scenario because it gives the player information that the playable characters in the game shouldn't otherwise have. Aiden essentially becomes a personification of "The video game camera", which is a really interesting concept. The physic tester then asks Jodie to manipulate objects in the other room. The game lets you take control of Aiden to accomplish this. Then Jodie asks Aiden to stop, but you don't necessarily have to listen to her. This is another interesting scenario because it puts the player in the position of performing actions that directly oppose what Jodie, your player character, wants. This is another really interesting scenario that I was really excited to explore. But nowhere else in the game do these scenarios exist. Okay, maybe there's more time where the game gives you the option of pitting Jodie and Aiden against each other, but it's still a really interesting concept that went way underexplored.

These missed opportunities are a symptom of a larger problem: Beyond is a game that has no idea what it does well. The best parts of Beyond, for me at least, were the sections where I was roleplaying as Jodie and making decisions about how she would act in certain situations. Would she tell her friends about Aiden even though it may make her seem strange? Or lie to fit in? But the game seems less interested in these character shaping decisions and would rather tell this action story about how the U.S. government wants to weaponize Aiden's abilities.

(Mild spoilers in this paragraph). Okay so there's this scene later in the game where the CIA sends Jodie to Somalia to assassinate a warlord. After the successful assassination, Jodie learns that the CIA had lied to her and her target was not an evil warlord at all, but a democratically elected president. What's worse is that she learns she has made a young boy fatherless after also killing one of the president's bodyguards. It's a pivotal moment in the game where Jodie realizes she can't trust the CIA and is only a tool being used to perpetuate an endless cycle of death and violence. So she throws away her weapon, quits the CIA and goes into hiding. But then after the next couple scenes, she's right back to killin' more dudes again! Aaaand then she rejoins the CIA... YOU CAN'T DO THAT!!! You can't write these pivotal, character defining moments and then undo them a couple chapters later when you want to tell another story and it becomes convenient to the plot! It was pretty obvious that there were sections of the story that were added in order to pad out the game's length, but these sections didn't fit in at all thematically and sometimes clashed directly with the rest of the story. It seemed to me like Beyond struggled to find its identity throughout the entire duration of the plot. This culminates in the game's ending where the last topics and themes have absolutely nothing at all to do with the story leading up to that point. The game then tries to execute what I'm guessing was supposed to be this surprise twist ending, but the twist doesn't really add anything at all or change the player's understanding of the story in any way. It was a confirmation of my theory that the writers were not at all on the same page about what they wanted Beyond to be about and the result is an incohesive mess of a plot.

Alright, alright, enough ragging on the plot. So how does the game actually play? It's fairly similar to Heavy Rain which is to say there are lots of quick time events and moments when you can give input on what choices Jodie will make or what her dialogue will be. The main difference coming from Heavy Rain is that you can also take control of Aiden during certain action sequences to either strangle enemies or possess them in order to use their physical bodies to take out more enemies. How does the game determine which enemies you can possess and which you can strangle? It seemed totally random and inconsistent to me. There were enemies I wanted to strangle that I could only possess and there were enemies that I wanted to possess but could only strangle. Coming from Heavy Rain, the QTEs are a bit different as well. I see what they were going for here, they wanted to eliminate all of the button prompts from the screen so the player can focus on the action, but I don't think it really works. The idea is that when the game prompts you for a QTE, you're supposed to simply follow the motion of Jodie's body and press the joystick in that direction. But it's often really ambiguous and hard to tell which direction Jodie is punching or dodging or whatever. No meaningful feedback is given to the player when they miss a QTE either, the screen just flashes red as if to only say "NOPE! YOU DID IT WRONG!".

(Sigh). Beyond was a pretty big disappointment for me especially after playing through Heavy Rain. This game felt like a big step in the wrong direction. I'd like to close this review/rant with an open letter not only to Quantic Dream, but to all game developers: Please respect the player's time. If you have a story to tell, tell it. But please don't pad out the game with filler or copy/paste segments of the game to artificially lengthen the play time. I may not speak for all gamers, but I'm way more likely to be angry when I can tell that my time is being wasted as opposed to the notion that a game I'm playing might feel too short. Sincerely, James.

Summary:
As for a recommendation - if you haven't played Heavy Rain, please go do that first. It's a much more complete, cohesive and interesting game than Beyond. If you have already played Heavy Rain, just be sure you know what you're getting into before you start Beyond.

Super Smash Bros. for 3DS (Smash 4)

Sora Ltd. (Nintendo) / Bandai Namco Games - 2014 - 3DS

I am huge, huge fan of the Smash Bros. series. I've poured literally thousands of hours into the first three Smash games and love them very dearly. I first played Smash 64 at a friend's house and instantly fell in love with this series' accessibility and wacky party game-like zaniness that all came wrapped in a package of Nintendo characters I already was familiar with. After dozens of hours of play, my friends and I found that we really enjoyed playing with the items off and on the more neutral stages, and we started playing the game from a more competitive angle. When Melee came out, its faster game speed and emphasis on combos and juggling nicely facilitated this playstyle and I fell deeper in love. Brawl didn't have Melee's speed, depth or balance, but Brawl mods like Project M have quenched my thirst for playing Smash competitively and I actually recently competed in a national Project M tournament earlier this year. (Don't bother looking for my name among the finalists, although I did manage to take 3 stocks off of one of the guys who tied for 7th). Anyway, I wanted to preface this review with my history of competitive Smash so you know where I'm coming from here when I talk about Smash 4.

As of this writing, the WiiU version of Smash 4 has yet to be released, so the version of the game I'm reviewing is the 3DS one. This is the first iteration of Smash that has appeared on a handheld platform, and I'm glad to say it's made the transition about as well as it possibly could have. Any complaints I'd have about the mobile version of the game would be more against the 3DS' hardware than Smash 4's software. The circle pad feels a bit flimsy for a quick reflex based fighting game like Smash, but other than that, the game plays fine. I still don't like looking at that tiny screen and my hands do start to hurt after after a few matches of gripping that un-ergonomic surface of the 3DS, but those are more complaints against the 3DS than Smash 4. Speed wise, Smash 4 plays somewhere in between Melee's speed and Brawl's speed, although Smash 4 retains Brawl's "floaty" feel when characters are airborne. I actually think this "game feel" is a good fit for the 3DS version of Smash 4. I don't really want to have to press a million buttons really quickly on the tiny 3DS gamepad. I think the game speed of Smash 4 is appropriate for the mobile hardware and I don't think it would work if Nintendo tried to put a game as fast as Melee or Project M on the 3DS, even if they could.

I know most players treat Smash as a party game, but I'm going quickly discuss how Smash 4 plays as a competitive fighter because I belong to that small subset of hardcore Smash players who are interested in such things. I know some fellow competitive Smashers may disagree with me here, but I don't think Smash 4 really works as a competitive game. At least not in the same way Melee or Project M do. I know Nintendo has made concessions to competitive players like "For Glory" mode and the neutral "Omega" versions of each stage, but I don't think the actual game engine quite facilitates deep competitive play. While the slow speed and floaty feel makes the game feel appropriate for the 3DS, it also de-emphasizes combos and technical skill. In Melee and P:M, once you win the situation that is referred to in fighting games as the "neutral position", you can use combos, prediction and technical play to rack up as much damage as possible while your opponent uses mix-ups and DI (Directional Influence) to attempt to escape your combos and counter your efforts. These deep and complex systems are what I love about Smash. Almost none of these systems are present in Smash 4. In my experience, once a player wins neutral in Smash 4, they can get one or maybe two hits - that's it. Then the situation is reset to neutral again. I recently competed in a local Smash 4 tournament and I found it to be...well... not really that much fun. Games took nearly 8 minutes to finish, even when we played with only 3 stocks (competitive smash is normally played with 4). Systems like "auto-sweet spotting the ledge", "multiple air dodges", and blast zones being too far away all contribute to Smash 4 just not feeling quite right when played competitively.

But alright, enough comparisons to Melee and Project M. As a party game, Smash 4 is just as fun as ever. Once my friend and I stopped trying to play this game competitively, turned the items back on and played on some of the non-omega versions of the stages, the game became very fun for me again and I found myself enjoying Smash's wacky "anything can happen" feel all over again. The roster of selectable fighters has been expanded from Brawl's 39 characters to 49 (50 if you count the Mewtwo DLC) and you can additionally play as any Mii character found on your 3DS. You can also customize your fighter's movesets which is something I admittedly haven't played around with much yet. Old game modes from previous iterations make a return and are joined by new ones like "Smash Run" which is the sort-of successor to Brawl's "Subspace Emissary" which can also be played multiplayer in Smash 4. Speaking of which, the multiplayer on the 3DS works pretty nicely. It's quick and easy to set up and we never had a problem with connectivity, even when there were tons of 3DS's in the room at the local Smash tournament. I've only ever played one Smash 4 game where I experienced any lag as opposed to Brawl's online multiplayer which was a borderline unplayable laggy mess.

Summary:
Smash 4 may not be the competitive successor to Melee like I foolishly hoped it might be, but it's still a really fun party game. I think it's great that tons of people will now be able to play Smash together on-the-go now. It'll also be nice to have something to do now when waiting at Melee/P:M tournaments in between matches. Also if you're interested in learning about competitive Smash, I would highly, highly recommend this documentary on YouTube. It's an 8-part series and is kind of long, but it's really well made and provides a window into why players like me have fallen in love with playing the Smash series competitively. Also if you own Brawl, go download Project M.