The Avengers: Age of Ultron Point-By-Point Review (2015, Action/Adventure/Fantasy/Science Fiction, Disney/Marvel Studios)

 

 

What Rocked:

• Feels bigger; the scale is bigger, more locales are explored, a lot more heroes are involved (and in retrospect when Infinity Wars I & II come out, this will have nothing on the two-part third act), and the stakes are bigger. Loki wanted to rule the world like he always has, whilst Ultron wants to kill everybody and replace everyone with cybernetic beings.

• No slow start. The very opening of the film sees the Avengers beating the ever-loving shit out of HYDRA goons. And the whole scene is awesome.

• Contains a clever jab at Disney, in the form of a joke (that kind of runs its course a bit too much), that pokes fun at how they're still sensitive over coarse language cropping up in major film properties. If only you guys could witness how foul-mouthed much of your target audience actually is, Disney!

• The pacing of the film seems better at times than in the first film, but at other times (yeah, no specific examples needed, just watch the film)...

• Ultron is arguably more menacing as a villain than Loki, but he's a lot more one-dimensional. Loki has a huge inferiority complex and he's not irredeemably evil, plus he's leashed by Thanos. Ultron suddenly wants to pull a Skynet almost right out of the gate. And he hates Tony Stark. Still, I had the feeling that Ultron would have done far more damage than Loki had he been allowed to. And you know what? He did.

• Quicksilver & Scarlett Witch. I liked them both. The former for his cocky wit and the latter for the sheer possibilities her abilities may bestow upon the franchise (much of what she is capable of in the comics is left intact in this film).

• Hulk is one of the better developed characters in the film. In one scene in particular, the Hulk himself sees the destruction he (and Stark, don't forget him) caused and the fear he has struck in the hearts of bystanders. This causes him to feel remorse, and it is on full display. Then he goes through the same offhanded treatment he gave to Thor in the previous movie. Guess what that is. 

• Avoids being a "destruction and special effects at the expense of bystanders' livelihoods" fiasco as seen in the lackluster Man of Steel.

• The Hulkbuster vs. Hulk fight, while feeling a bit cut short in the end, was satisfying.

• Hawkeye is no longer borderline useless. He actually does some damage this time around.

• Captain America, thanks in part to the quite exceptional "Winter Soldier" film last year, shines brighter than he did in the first outing.

• Johannson is as hot as ever as Black Widow. And she was pregnant through most of the filming!

What Didn't Rock:

• The editing was clearly done in haste and to placate the fierce demand for a (condensed) theatrical release, some scenes were altered drastically or removed entirely.

• Thor, aside from a few tricks pulled off with Mjolnir as per usual, does damn near nothing of note.

• The action appeared too blurry, seemed far too closely shot at times (the first battle with Ultron comes to mind), and there are so many jump cuts I felt like I was watching a god damn Michael Bay film.

• We see Black Widow trying to seduce Bruce Banner, hinting at a ship between the two, but we just don't feel it. Not to mention that considering what happened in the first movie (hint: Banner loses control of his Hulking out and almost does her in), it doesn't make fucking sense.

• Ultron made a few too many jokes to be believable as a cold, determined, calculating AI. I know Joss wanted us to feel some human traits in him but they pushed that angle a little too far. It was hard to take him seriously at times. The "we all create the things we dread" scene, anyone?

• Stark's role in, inadvertently I must add, making all the film's shit occur (though Banner's reluctant supporting efforts in letting the shit hit the fan could be considered for him a pass) barely gets mentioned nor taken to task. Sure, Thor hoists him up in the air in anger for his ambitions regarding The Vision, in light of what they produced previously in the film, but that's about all that happens.

• Nick Fury shows up all of a sudden. The tens of millions they spent on shoehorning Samuel L. Jackson into the sequel, in spite of SHIELD having been dismantled previously (and if you're on top of the Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D spinoff, whatever remains of S.H.I.E.L.D. in the shadows is led by Coulson), could have been spent on improving the film in other aspects. So yeah, we didn't get an AoS crossover.

• *MAJOR SPOILER -- YOU'VE BEEN WARNED* Quicksilver gets killed so unceremoniously and suddenly that it's a complete mystery as to why Disney & Marvel went to such great lengths to secure the film rights to use this character. And as it turns out, screwing the nail in the coffin further, is that this character isn't set to re-appear in the MCU for "quite some time." What the fuckery ensues.

• Hulk is played more seriously this time around, and his character suffers for it. Although he does show some humanity at the climaxes of his rampages, the film portrays him in a darker way that kind of at times kills the excitement that he generated previously in the first film. At least he still smashes.

• Twenty minutes or so is spent at the Hawkeye family farm out in the middle of nowhere. Although it's a breather episode in an otherwise frantically-paced film, it serves as a big tease that amounts to exactly the opposite of what it was teasing at (considering Joss Whedon's methodology in foreshadowing the deaths of his characters). And that's also when Nick Fury just suddenly shows up. The entire duration spent at Clint's getaway house served to divide the fanbase, big time.

• The scene wherein Ultron comes to life for the first time, in particular when he's in the form of a holographic programming display (oh Hollywood, AI programming has come a long way from that. You silly Willies), is narmy as all hell.

• Ultron's development is rushed.

• Ultron is vulnerable to being pigeonholed by shutting off the internet. I'm not kidding. And that's just what happens, so of course he's not going to be as menacing as he is in the comics wherein he's pretty much invincible.

• PLOT HOLE: As Ultron is trying to extract Vibranium from Ulysses Klaue (that's his name here), he gets interrupted by a swift appearance of the Avengers. They end up destroying the Ultron chassis present at the scene and though the Avengers are briefly side-tracked during this conflict, one can assume that they wrapped up loose ends here while Iron Man has to round up a rampaging Hulk. The hole here is this: how the fuck does Ultron manage to get the Vibranium he needed to assemble his doomsday device? Said doomsday device consisted of a huge (think long) column of vibranium holding up an entire city way up in the air. That's a lot of vibranium that he, based on what we see in the movie, never attains.

• Based on word of god, we're not getting an extended cut that would, you know, work to correct at least some of the slights seen in the final product.

• Did you know that Joss Whedon considers this to be a good product? That it's exactly what he wanted it to be? Yeah, don't let the door hit your ass on the way out, Whedon. You're clearly too creatively fatigued for the MCU at this point and I welcome the Russo brothers for any future instalment with which they're involved.

• Should have been split into two parts: part one would have been to set up the events to transpire and be rectified in the second part (as well as establishing character developments and properly introducing and developing new characters), while the second part would see the important action and the inevitable climax to the storyline. Everything would have been developed better than what was seen in the final product.

• A Carol Danvers (a.k.a, Ms. Marvel) and a Spider-Man appearance were cut. The latter is understandable though, given that the landmark deal between Sony & Disney didn't come to fruition until just shy of the release of the movie. But Ms. Marve/Captain Marvel was part of the early drafts of the film.

• We're not going to find out who that mystery woman briefly glimpsed in one of the trailers is. Sorry guys. At least not in this messy film.

• I still enjoyed the film.

Jurassic World review (2015, Action/Adventure/Science Fiction/Horror, Universal Pictures)

Life found a way.

The 1992 original was an accomplishment of film-making for the ages, to be written into history books. It set new standards, kicked dinosaur popularity into high-gear, and even brought some (long since obsolete) innovations to paleontology itself. Just those three achievements alone made the original a very difficult feat to replicate, let alone top off with a sequel. 

To speak of sequels means I should quickly spell out why both of them were not quite worthy of their production; The Lost World lost damn near all the sense of charm & wonderment, while III appeared more like a cash-grab than a legitimate attempt to keep fanning the flames first lit in 1992. The first sequel saw Ian Malcolm go to Site B to collect his girlfriend from certain (and definitely inevitable, given the character's weaknesses) demise although all sense of chaos and desperation was lost. The third film made sure to shoe-horn Dr. Grant for lip service, and to be the one sane guy in a jaunt amongst understandably pissed monsters. But that's in the past.

And this movie is kind of stuck in it.

Our subject, Jurassic World, was stuck in development hell for 10 long years. Colin Trevorrow, the director of the final product, wasn't always helmed in the role. Nor were Bryce Dallas Howard as Claire Dearing & Chris Pratt as Owen Grady originally slated to appear as characters. And the I.Rex was not originally intended to be the dino villain. But, that's what we ended up getting here and it's not to the film's detriment, but there's something amiss in the film that is. It's a particular feeling of...been there, done that.

This nigh $1 billion grossing, record-setting film doesn't do anything new for the franchise, and the little, few things it does that are new for the series are, of course, of little consequence. Nonetheless, these are neat new grounds to tread; the genetic mish-mash abomination in the Indominus Rex (casually referred to as the "I.Rex"), and Owen Grady's trainer/lion dynamic with the film's velociraptors. The former serves as the film's primary villain and displays a staggering degree of cognitive understanding & adaptive intellect, whilst the latter is a Chekov's gun.

The 1993 original film was lauded as a landmark achievement in special effects, thanks to the skills on hand at Industrial Light & Magic. Twenty-two years later and Jurassic World doesn't really up the ante at all, which is a shame, but it doesn't mean it is a step down. The Mosasaur is one of the more impressive feats to be seen in the film's run, and practical effects weren't completely bereft of their grandiosity and relevance. There was a gaffe that could have been corrected in the editing stage, however: an avian dinosaur can be seen clipping through the aviary in a blink & you'll miss it moment.

Otherwise, the film retreads much of the same ground previously trodden in the franchise  ̶   two children directly tied to park manager/owner find themselves in peril, something goes wrong in the park's defenses and all hell breaks loose, a dinosaur (or in this case, dinosaurs) save the day from the big bad Dino, and even character archetypes return. While repeating old tropes isn't in itself a bad thing, it's the stunning fact that the movie does nothing to stand out from the franchise that is.

Why is that inexcusable? Well, it's because of the previously mentioned development time, as more could have been done with the final release. Ten years could have, should have produced a superior flick. It could have truly surprised moviegoers and fans alike, but alas, it didn't do that for me. It paid too much lip-service to the previous films, especially the first, and did almost nothing to set itself apart.

It is a genuine thrill-ride, however. Damn near every scene with the I.Rex in it will see chaos and death ensue in the process, and the raptors are as nasty as ever. A new dinosaur to the films, the Mosasaur, makes a welcome entry into the fray and serves as an important plot device. The pteranodons have become menacing and are used by the villainous I.Rex to sow disarray and bloodshed. Bryce Dallas Howard manages to brave Isla Nublar in its entirety whilst wearing high heels for fuck's sake. And Star-Lord is the god damned alpha of a pack of raptors rather than the leader of galactic misfits. There can't be anything in this movie you'd say you didn't like no matter how stupid they were.

But there's plenty that you may not like at all. There are plot-holes left unexplained, there are leaps & outright debasements of logic, and then there's the fact that it took ten god damn years for moviegoers, whether they're fans or not, to get this rather mediocre installment. Owen Grady and, uh, Bryce Dallas Howard apparently have chemistry that we're supposed to believe is genuine. Yet, people probably paid more attention to Owen Grady being a headstrong badass who is a composite of Dr. Grant & Dr. Malcolm from the original film. The kids do evoke a sense of actual sibling chemistry, but it doesn't go anywhere in this film because it wasn't made to be a drama. At the same time, however, the older brother is a dick to the younger brother and really, these kids received so little development in comparison to those in the original movie so why should anyone really care? The woman who plays the assistant tasked with looking after them goes through what may be the biggest "kick the dog" moment in the franchise (a merit, albeit a kind of sad one, for the film indeed). And a few rather dull scenes involving the kids' parents, in the midst of a divorce (it is why the kids were sent off to Isla Nublar), add timid, rather pointless drama to a film that would rather be having fun.

Somehow, some cliche sci-fi villain dude thinks that raptors would make great replacements for highly-trained field infantry in the game of war. Somehow Owen gets his hands on the chunk of flesh  that the I.Rex ripped out of its own body in spite of the fact that Owen was nowhere near where the I.Rex did it. Somehow someone thought it was a good idea to go inside of the I.Rex's pen despite the lack of intel on where the fucking thing actually is. Somehow the park's owner has no idea what actually went into the I.Rex's design until the movie demands the 'shocking' revelation. Somehow the I.Rex catches up with Owen & Dearing when they're investigating the old park visitor center (well after the boys had left) even though it had been stated multiple times before that the I.Rex was on a direct course to the park proper. Somehow the boys are able to fix a 22 year old Jeep by replacing the battery for it, and the damn thing runs as if it were fresh out of the auto-shop. Somehow none of the idiots thought to trigger the shock collar technology they have on each dinosaur when there's a whole flock of avian dinos closing in on the park's visitors. Somehow Claire Dearing pulls off the entire flick walking/running around in high god damn heels, and even manages to outrun ol' Rexy wearing those fucking things. Somehow, and this is for last, why did someone think that the raptors (in spite of their clandestine status on the island and being feared so much because of previous movies) should be made all over again?

Oh and product placement. Holy fucking shit, guys.

And it really does have fun. But very little of the fun in the movie is original fun. I must re-iterate: this film took 10 god damn years to make. It was stuck in development hell for most of that duration, but there's little excuse to get a movie that hardly stands out on its own in a franchise that, in spite of its raw earning power, hasn't critically pleased anyone in over 20 years. At least it's guaranteed that a sequel will be ordered, but will they at least try to do something interesting with it?

                                                                             

C

The Good: 

+ Chris Pr--Star-Lord, leading a pack of (scientifically inaccurate) velociraptors. Stupid, but fun.

+ They didn't discard any all practical effects

+ Final battle is nonsensical but it is fun nonsense. 

+ The Mosasaur is a welcome addition to the bestiary.
+ A tad bit of tension can be felt in the scene where our hero has to investigate the I.Rex's compound.
+ That scene where the assistant gets chomped on by the Mosasaur. That scene.
+ It's another Jurassic Park movie. Only the first one truly stands the test of time (the rest are... serviceable at best).

The Bad: 

- In many ways this is a re-tread of the first film. Only that movie had a superior director, character development, tension, and Jeff Goldblum.
- It's PG-13.
- The special effects gaffe mentioned previously produces unintended chuckles.

- Somehow the boys manage to "fix" a vehicle that was left unattended with zero maintenance for twenty years running as if it were brand new. Keep in mind that the setting is tropical, and goes through hurricanes at least once a year. Also, one of the night vision goggles seen briefly in the original film, in spite of running on battery power, still works. Ever heard of battery drain? What about leakage?
- Hoskins is a very weak character with vaguely implied ties into the massacre in the park.
- Predictable plot that gets more predictable with the more shoutouts to previous films that you can literally rattle off by the minute.
- What kind of park and its owners doesn't understand what their most ferocious dinosaur is made from?
- A few forced lines of comedy.
- The CGI is on overload in comparison to the original movie, which used it sparingly. And to top it all off it hasn't even grown all that much better in quality since 22 years ago.
- Owen is a total jackass to Claire
- Claire is a total airhead and is not fit to manage a park with giant killer animals that should have been left extinct in the first place.
- Nowhere near as suspenseful as the original movie.
- A leap in logic regarding how the raptors behave in the movie.
- The fight at the end, in spite of its entertainment value, very likely wouldn't have happened if the film didn't predictably call for the action contained within.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   EDIT: Wanted to update some of the body of the review to coincide with my vwawdd                                                                                                                                                            

Terroja Kincaid, You Officially Suck at Men's Rights Advocacy

Roughly two weeks ago, TJ/TheAmazingAtheist made yet another contribution to the insufferable yet laughable Anita Sarkeesian hate machine, entitled "ANITA SARKEESIAN, YOU OFFICIALLY SUCK AT FEMINISM." It need not be mentioned with much depth that all of the mansplaining and hatred that has been fired in her direction for the past three years has had an ironic effect rather than an intended one, but TJ's video adds to this cesspool of ignorance.

Below is the video in question:

The context of the video (The Scythian - Positive Female Characters in Video Games) to which TJ was responding was flat-out diminished in TJ's response to it, not that I find that surprising. If you actually watch her video, then you'll see that she does admit early on that the character is, personality-wise, a blank-slate. However, in the realm of video games, even in Zelda-inspired adventure games as seen in Anita's video, this is pretty much the norm. Often, in fact, player-characters are given a blank template in order to facilitate a flight of fancy in the player. Or in other words, this method allows players to insert themselves into the action. Well, some of the time it works, but I digress.

What TJ didn't tell you, like he almost always does, is that Anita's argument as to why the player character in that game is a positive female character is because in-universe, she is not discerned by her gender, but by her acts, and ultimately, her heroism. The gender neutral treatment of the character from others around her, and the fact that the character defies all odds stacked against her to save the land, is what earns Anita's praise. I have in fact seen Anita's video for myself and quite frankly, it was surprisingly unassuming and rather tame. As for why, or how for that matter, it triggered such a hilariously over-the-top response from TJ is not surprising given his recent contributions to the internet. But I guess you could say that this is just another nail in the #GamerGate coffin, one more among many.

Our hero fixates dubiously on the character's lack of personality when, on the other hand, it's her gender neutral treatment in-game that is most important in Sarkeesian's video. In fact, the Scythian's lack of personality is not even an important detail. By making a video that echoes the arguments that other Gamergaters/MRAs have made in equally (or moreso) stupendous videos, TJ has solidly cemented his place in the MRA/GamerGate echo-chamber. Said echo-chamber, in fact, has yet to demonstrably prove Anita false, nor produce content that reasonably debunks her arguments. Instead people have to watch idiots like TJ take her out of context, ignore entire parts of her videos/tweets, and whether inadvertently or not sic their tone-deaf subscribers onto her, thus continuing the vicious cycle that has both harmed and helped Anita.

He has proven in his video that he doesn't actually care about what Anita says in her video, or anywhere else for that matter, so there's no point in paying heed to his screeds about her. Not yet, anyway, because like all the others, he really has nothing to use against her but to resort to dishonest tactics like that seen in his response. It's funny though that in doing this, he hurt his side of the argument WHILE ALSO proving Sarkeesian's points about (typically male-derived, but there are females who do it too) treatment of females in our culture correct; condescension and belittling, two attitudes often exhibited toward women, are very real to this day. And they are both rampant in his video. Meanwhile, he failed to address her actual arguments in his response to her. Oh the unintentional comedy of it all.

All of that aside, I will poke at one of TJ's more ironic, hypocritical arguments, which is a strawman of epic proportions to say the least. The strawman in his video was his jab at Anita's puzzling inefficiency to deliver on all of the scheduled videos outlined in the infamous crowdfunding page all the way back in 2012. So far she has produced three of them, and there are eleven of them slated for production. While it may be telling, in some ways anyway, that her progress has been lacking on this project, I don't think TJ is the one who should be commenting on this at all. Why, you may ask?

It's because of NotProductive.

An embarrassing chapter for sure, NotProductive was supposed to be TJ's answer to ThatGuyWithTheGlasses, a site from which he was given the boot prior to his pitch for the project. With a target of $20,000, and an ultimate conclusion of $17,287 donated by various bleeding hearts & blind fanboys, one had to ask of it all: why? To get into details as to why everything about the project was fishy would require a dedicated blog post, so I won't bother with much more than that. From before the site's actual development was announced, I knew something wasn't right.

A year had passed before the site managed to launch, because the development cycle was mired in a lack of confidence (even if TJ worded himself otherwise) and a stunning lack of transparency, amidst setback after setback, a switch in developers included in it all. When it finally went online, the result was mixed, at best. An ugly, uncompressed background picture; sub-par (and probably cheap) webhost; disorderly arrangement of channels AND categories; in-your-face google ads; and blatant shortcuts like external hosting for comments for one. On top of that all, the fact that the videos were hosted externally on YouTube meant that everything could be watched through there, so the site as it was served little use to most people. Another deception was the "less editorial meddling" line, which is priceless because it contradicted the god damn mission statement for the site. Oh and there was a contest present when the site started, but who the hell knows what really came of it since the site crashed and burned.

When you look at it today, you see that NP is a boring YouTube channel which TJ seems to wish would be swept under the rug to never be heard of again. That or he simply doesn't promote it anymore because it is about as irrelevant a channel as you can get. The fact that the vLoggers involved were already at least marginally successful (with one of them even having two-hundred thousand plus subscribers) prior to NotProductive's launch, meant that he was a bit hyperbolic with the "people you've not heard of" line as seen in his sales pitch video below:

I'll give TJ this, however; Anita has indeed been slow, for whatever reason(s), but given his own history he really isn't in a position to give her shit over her own failings. Contrarily, at least she is more honest about her project, and hasn't thrown it under the rug like he has. He's failed to produce anything substantive with all of that handout money, and while she's taking her sweet time doing so, at least she's continuing to produce content that was outlined on the crowdfunding page for "Tropes Vs. Women." Also, she asked for a mere $6,000 on her Kickstarter campaign, but because of the army of idiots giving her a bad rap, she drummed up a lot of attention that afforded her nearly $160,000, which is nearly thirty times greater than the asking. 

Perhaps he could ask himself the following: "Why do I keep giving Anita the attention that has benefited her so well so far?" Better yet, maybe the Gamergaters and MRAssholes who are so obsessed with her as to constantly draw attention to her should take this kind of advice. Or maybe they can keep it up so that people can laugh at their expense.

And TJ needs to learn how to actually argue with people with whom he disagrees. Because clearly from this video, he's not only dishonest about it, but he's not very good at it. Age has dumbed him down, evidently.

Edited: Fixed a few typos.

F.E.A.R. 3 (PS3, Xbox 360, PC, 2011, Day 1 Studios/Warner Bros. Interactive)

What do you F.E.A.R.?

Well, no really, what do you fear? Suffice to say, you won't come to feel much of any in this installment. While it was hyped for John Carpenter's involvement in directing the cinematic department, the game didn't really deliver anything astounding, story OR plotwise. This franchise has always been a horror-FPS one, and while it achieved some level of success in that vein, this is definitely the lowest point. Carpenter might as well have not even been involved at all because it made no difference.

One of the problems that has always set the franchise back, as far as horror goes, is the mute protagonist cliche present in every last one of them. And in the one game where the story is hyped the most, and pretty much falls flat in the end, it should have been a no-brainer: give the Point Man some god damn personality and maybe you'll get some tension, dramatic and all. I know they have explained why, although in a cryptic fashion that may have very well eluded you so far in the series, but it's an excuse to "make you feel like your own action hero." Only the Half-Life series does anything right with the mute protagonist trope, and even lampshades it. I know this may seem like a run-on point, but when your secondary playable character does have a personality as you play, it becomes so jarring as to hurt the game, significantly.

A common criticism of this installment is the overall lack of horror, and that's certainly the case. It's hard to feel that when all of its horror tropes have been done before in the series, and better at that. It's hard to feel scared when you're such a power-house, plowing through all that stand before you. It's hard to feel scared when the atmospheric moments come so rarely, and for all but the final section of the game, there's no subtlety and mind-fuckery. And most of all, it's hard to feel ANY horror brilliance when the UI in this game blatantly tells you that you have unlocked something.

I don't know what Day 1 was thinking with the UI in this game. It's not the HUD or the menus that are problematic, but the score system that flat-out kills most of the horror aspects of the game because they're so in-your-face. If you kill enough enemies with a weapon the game will tell you that you've earned points; if you establish a "psychic link" with a random corpse in a level, it tells you that you've earned points; if you are in a section that would otherwise grant some degree of tension and you do just about anything, you are likely to earn points. All of this is shown in bright, vivid colours in an arcade-like presentation. At times this is what the game felt like, actually. That's not what the series is about and Day 1 really dropped the ball here. Subtlety is one of the key methods of achieving a horror vibe, and this entire feature eviscerates that.

It's not all thorns and ugly ducklings, though; the controls are some of the best in the series, which has so far never had them down-pat for some odd reason. Gunplay is also on par with the first game (since the second game not only simplified that aspect for no discernible reason, but toned down the "oomph" factor that the first game had) in many regards. The AI won't stand out in your playthrough, but they're loaded for bear and on higher difficulties will present a challenge. The Point-Man more-or-less finally seems like a real super soldier, since he was conceived as one in the first place. When you play as Paxton Fettel you are presented with body-hopping and psychic "slam" abilities, opening up for tactical options. The graphics in this title, while a little behind in the times, are the best in the series yet. And some of the multiplayer modes, while absolutely devoid of activity today, are unique and interesting, such as "Fucking Run!" and the game's own take on the survival craze seen in Call Of Duty & others as of late.

You'd be better off experiencing the game from the perspective of Paxton Fettel, at least to experience the unique, well somewhat unique at least, gameplay that he presents. But that's not to be had until you beat the game as the mute, dull, and at best sufficient Point Man. The problem with this requirement is that you'll come to realize that the storyline is pretty much dead on arrival. Like, somehow, you come across Jin midway through the game, who was a supporting character in the first game, only to lose all contact with her for no real reason. It all feels a bit disconnected from the previous game with only a few nods to it at all. For one, Sergeant Beckett (the player character from the second game) is shoe-horned in and, somehow, his sacrificial-lamb status in the plot leads our heroes to...their childhood memories? Alma's role is damn near minimal in the storyline, replaced mostly by the irritating (but at least challenging, finally) Creep, who is implied to be the spirit of Harlan Wade, the man who was responsible for everything in the series.

The two brothers are still at odds with each other, but have to work together to achieve their respective goals. Paxton wants to reunite with their mother and usher in a new age, or something, but the Point Man is driven solely to carry out the objective he was assigned all the way back in the first game. Rowdy Betters, the handler for First Encounter Assault Recon (which is a team of paranormal special ops, or something), is nowhere to be found and the token black guy from the first game is nowhere to be found, either (and no, "Extraction Point" is not considered canon). Inexplicably, or at least it's cryptic as to why, the Replica army is still standing strong AND now fully controlled by Armacham. Alma doesn't mess with the player anymore because she's in her birth pangs, and somehow before the opening level the Point Man got captured by Armacham for reasons unclear.

Anyway, the story is paranormal but mediocre, and doesn't hit any high notes. At least, not until you've finished the game and you're treated to a ridiculously awesome video of Paxton's first "synchronicity event", where people basically burst like watermelons (from the inside, mind you) while trying to sedate him during one of his breakdowns. Throughout the game you see snippets that lead up to that scene, but story-wise, the aforementioned scene is a treat for any who would find the mythos of the series at all interesting. One of the means of gaining new insight into the series' story came from "Intel" items, which after finding them in the game world, gave you some reading material describing the lore, basically. This game doesn't have that feature, which is a little off-putting for me, personally.

Enough about the story, let's get on with talking about the gameplay. Well, control-wise, it is the smoothest of the series so far. Your character moves much more fluidly than at any point in the franchise, with spot-on reaction times, and a sprint that actually resembles one. One of the off-putting features introduced in the second game was the sprint function, which was more akin to a jog, that only allowed for a two-second jaunt for evasion purposes. You also couldn't pivot or change direction while sprinting, so it was very awkward. That's not the case here. Also, cover mechanics work just fine, requiring appropriate swings of the mouse to situate your aim where you want it. You have a more capable melee attack as well, allowing you to chain swipes and stabs which can save you some precious ammo.

The guns, while somewhat lacklustre in design (they're quite generic, until you get to the experimental weapons later on), serve their purposes. The pistol has just the right recoil, deals the right amount of damage, is properly accurate, and coupled with ADS, is an effective side-arm throughout the entire game. The shotgun is king again; it sounds good, packs a huge punch as it did in the first game, and ammunition is not as scarce as in the second title. The devastator returns just as badass as ever, and there's a lightning gun which, while definitely not an original idea, works in this game's favour for delivering swift death to the evil that stands in your way. You can't lay traps anymore, so there's fewer tactical options at your disposal. Oh and, you spill a LOT of blood in the goings ahead.

Some new enemies come to challenge you. There are a bunch of raving nutjobs that occupy the inner city, called "cultists", which have been warped not only emotionally, but physically by Alma's widespread influences. There are also a few instances where you fight ATC bosses who have a phasing ability as well as high amounts of armor, who also summon basic grunts to keep you distracted. Snipers, which were a thorn in your side in F.E.A.R. 2, are nowhere to be found, which is both a blessing and a hint as to how much easier this game really is (not entirely for the better). Alma's powers have always generated monstrous apparitions, and this time we come up against "Scavengers", born out of the memories of Alma's time locked up in the vault. And you sometimes encounter ghastly "spectres", which possess similar abilities to Paxton Fettel.

Through the arcade-like features noticeable in the rewards system, you gain a slew of perks accessible both in single and online gameplay. They typically consist of increasing how long you can use Slow-Mo, how long Paxton can possess enemies, the amount of ammunition you can carry for weaponry, your total health, and regeneration time. However, this system, as described earlier, will likely ruin the immersion and you might come to dislike it a lot, even if it amounts to improving your character's abilities. The developers couldn't have chosen a more intrusive, horror-killing experience system if they tried, so this is definitely a negative aspect of the game in spite of its positive ramifications.

It's also far too easy for my liking, even on hard difficulties. Yes, enemies will kill you quickly in the hardest level, but you don't have to manage any of your resources, aside from how many rounds you use in your quest (as per usual, anyway). All other games in the series had medkits, and you increased your total health & slow-mo time with often hidden boosts for each; that's not the case here because your character, while it makes a little bit of sense in context (you play as a supersoldier & a ghost, respectively), has regenerating health. It doesn't make you unstoppable but it still makes the firefights more tedious than challenging, since you don't have to worry about your ability, or lack thereof, to restore lost health. The only challenge may come from the Creep itself, and because of said monster, he becomes pretty much the only final boss the series has featured so far.

To summarize, F3AR doesn't do everything right, and it really doesn't bring anything all that new to the formula. The horror aspect is at an all-time low, it's far easier than any game before it, and it resembles Call Of Duty a bit more than it should. What few positives it has in its favour is that the controls are better than ever, guns are actually fun to use again (anything that isn't an assault rifle or sub-machinegun anyway), and there's some distinct multiplayer fun to be had even if no one really plays it anymore. John Carpenter may have had a directorial hand in the game's story, but it didn't make a difference as per its quality.

The Rundown:

Positives

+ Smooth, fluid controls and character movement.

+ Playing as Paxton Fettel opens up new ways to play through the game story.

+ Weapons (mostly) feel good to shoot again.

+ The sprint function actually resembles a sprint rather than a lethargic, two-second jog.

+ Can actually challenge you at times.

+ Some standout multiplayer modes.
+ Graphically decent, but nothing earth-shattering.
+ The perk system sees steady growth of your character over time.

Negatives

- No one plays multiplayer anymore.

- That GOD AWFUL reward system UI

- Much too short a campaign for a F.E.A.R. title
- No intel items, which previously provided reading material in older games.

- Regenerating health, although you can make excuses for it (you're playing as a supersoldier and a specter, basically)

- Alma takes a backseat in the story, with none of the menace she exhibited. This goes against one of the hyped promises of the game's story.

- Not scary at all, unless you're the most timid motherfucker around
- Sgt. Beckett, the playable character from the second title, unceremoniously dies to serve as a plot forwarding device.
- There are a number of plot holes present. One being the fact that you begin the game in some nondescript, dilapidated prison in fuckknowswhere? How the fuck did the Point Man end up there? Why is he there, beyond the fact that he is, just before you start playing, under custody of ATC goons? Just where the fuck is this place in relation to Fairport, the same location where all the shit was hitting the fan to begin with?
- The perk system is delivered by the shitty, intrusive UI mentioned previously. And eventually you get every perk in the game and realize that you couldn't be arsed to play anymore.

C-

Tomb Raider Review (PS3, PS4, Xbox 360, Xbox One, PC, Mac, 2013, Crystal Dynamics/Square Enix/Eidos Interactive/Feral Interactive)

Look at that headline. Oh and spoilers are ahead.

And forget about it, because survival is hardly the point of the game at all. You know what it really is? It's to get off the island with a sordid history with your guns blazing. If you have to route hundreds of desperate lunatics loaded for bear on the way to your escape, then so be it. Oh and, since Lara is conveniently an archaeology student, you'll find some artifacts in your journey. But that's really not the point of this entry in the series.

Not at all.

Already we're off to a great start with this review. And it's not to foreshadow a negative one, really, it is just a means of venting some of my frustrations with this game. I've been a fan of this series since the first game, and short of the Crystal Dynamics titles (which left fans divided), I've played them all. They certainly did suffer from sequelitis given that each title was released year after year, but you always got an all-new story and a whole slew of new challenges to come with them. Yes, they didn't all have tombs, and arguably the best entry in the series, the third game, didn't even have any, but if you're going to include tombs then at least make them worth your while. Also, the point of the old games wasn't to kill everything in sight over and over again, it was to explore obscure areas to obtain an artifact of great power. 

The essence of the series is virtually gone in this title. How so, you may ask?

There are tombs, sure, but they were most likely an afterthought. Each one follows the same exact formula: go through a brief walk wherein you can't draw any weapons (for whatever reason, given that nothing happens each time) and you hold a source of light, come across some kind of chamber with a puzzle (I previously used the plural, which is inaccurate), then solve the puzzle to access a chest full of...XP. I'm not kidding, all you get is XP when you beat these admittedly piss-easy 'tombs'. With almost no exception are there are pitfalls or traps to overcome in this game's tombs, so what the fuck is the point of including them at all when you just get some experience points out of them and nothing actually interesting, like artifacts?

Oh and, if you're a glutton for the saturated shooter market, then you'll love this title. In spite of the mysterious traits of the island, where you apparently cannot leave due to some magical forces, you're too busy gunning down hundreds of boring mooks through almost the entire game. They are nutty, desperate, and are effectively a small army. This game was compared quite often to Far Cry 3, and given some of the features shared between the two games, it's kind of apt. On another front, you'll think that this was a Michael Bay production, because explosions occur often inexplicably as if there are barrels of petroleum everywhere. Oh and there's a lot of blood; a hell of a lot. Even a god damn creek consists of seemingly none other than blood. And Lara swims through it.

And spills it a lot, too.

Lots of detractors of the series would complain about the old Lara's ridiculous chest proportions, calling it a sexist portrayal of women (they'd be about half-right). Where are those some detractors in regard to this game, where she becomes a gung-ho mass slaughterer with mood swings? First she was an oversexed but cold anti-hero, and now she's a blood knight on a killing spree. Poor Lara will never be a proper role model at this rate.

So another thing I'd like to complain about is the nature of the game world. It seems open world, and it kind of is in some regards. One way is that it allows you to travel from one save spot to another upon their discovery. Also, each major location has a number of collectibles and minor sub-quests to endure, requiring very little thought to complete. However, that's really where this aspect ends and where the sheer linearity, deceptively hidden from the casual player at that, becomes obvious. You're only allowed to explore so much before you're rendered unable to go where you feel like. This game relies on context-sensitive controls, such as Lara hoisting herself onto the top of ledges and grabbing onto the sides of cliffs to climb them. You can only do those actions, among others, wherever the developers wanted you to go. Because if you could go where you wanted to then the game's flaws would start to become readily apparent to you. That's what I assume, anyway.

I must say, though, that this game is fucking gorgeous. It may not possess the most striking level of detail seen in gaming, even for its release year, but it's definitely well designed. The single best looking aspect of the game is Lara herself, who looks so human that I thought I was dreaming. The sheer amount of work that went into her design, from her skin to the way dirt & blood smears her person, and then how the lighting and shadows bring out the best and the worst in her, is absolutely impressive. You won't leave all that impressed by anything else but when you're near the coastal areas of the island, you'll see some spectacular, yet chaotic vistas that are appropriate given the theme of the game.

In spite of my knocking of the excessive action sequences, they are not without a strength or two. If you dig this kind of non-stop action then this game won't disappoint. And it can get a little tense at times, which is always welcome. However, there's just not much depth to any of them because you don't have to worry about much in the face of battle. In the old games, you had non-regenerating health and had limited means of healing; here, you have much less health but it regenerates quickly if you hide, like almost all action games seem to do these days. 

Let's develop on that last bit there. One thing this game is missing from the old titles is an inventory system; it is non-existent here. Gone are the days of managing your limited resources, and cherishing each pickup that you'd find in the Tomb Raider games of yore. Here, you pick up so much ammo so often, and are given new weapons so easily that you really don't come to care much about any of them. They're simply a way of quickly neutralizing all the bad guys you face constantly. You can also use your ice pick to brutally kill foes from a short range. Oh and as mentioned above, don't worry about health kits, because if you're hurt then all you need to do is hide for a moment or two to heal. As a consequence of the lack of inventory, there are no meaningful secrets to discover, no hidden rewards for actually exploring the environment.

If anything else, the battles become tedious because there's no depth to beating them except for making sure she doesn't die. If you can aim your gun and pull the trigger, then that's really all there is to it. Sure, the old games weren't much better than this, but you had to account for your vulnerabilities as well. When you're close to death, the game grays out, so it's hard to die at all. Enemies are not strategically placed, and don't poise a challenge, but rather act as props to shoot at. They do take cover, and may have various abilities/equipment that will add variety to each encounter, but the old games had this too, in spades. 

Lara does control well, though. She's also well animated, given that there is motion capture at work. But she responds to your actions accordingly and with fluidity, which is a good touch.

In the games of old, Lara often keeled over and died; it was uncommon for her death to play out differently, unless she of course landed on spikes. In this game, however, her deaths are cruel and gruesome. She's even subjected to a near-fatal beatdown by two of the nutbars you have to kill in the game, and much earlier she's threatened with rape. At the get-go, Lara gets impaled and set on fire. Fail to match the on-screen prompts right and she'll get crushed beneath tonnes of rock, impaled on re-bar, get impaled through the head, and many other things. She endures multiple injuries throughout the course of the plot. This game is brutal as far as violence goes, because you can put your enemies through hell too, including jabbing an axe into your enemies' jugulars. It's a wonder none of the detractors towards the second and third Tomb Raider games were screaming bloody murder in regards to this one.

There are a lot of set pieces to go through in this game, so you'll have to come to live with it. Most of the time these set pieces are playable, to an extent, but where the old games would leave it completely up to you to overcome the challenges, this game just sends buttons prompts your way that are more trial & error based than skill-based. Also, reports from players of earlier versions of the PC port cited the inability to correctly complete some or all quick-time events, due to a few bugs. They're also highly numerous, often in excess, and it's a common criticism that must be emphasized. If you can't stand QTEs, then you're going to be annoyed to all hell when you play through this game.

After playing through the game completely the first time, I noticed a few game design choices that I would like to call 'condescending'. The aforementioned QTEs, which comes in such a quantity as to feed Africa were it a food source, are one of those things. Another condescending game design comes in the form of the Survival Instinct feature, that which can be abused as needed by the player. It highlights all interactive objects/items/terrain in your immediate vicinity, and even shows pillars of light for far away places of interest such as checkpoints. As indicated, it can be used ad nauseum; there is no limit as to how long or how often you can use it. So if you just want to plow through a "puzzle" section, of which there are few that are worth critical thought, just press the button to execute the Survival Instinct ability and have your hand held.

Another condescending game design is in how little the game expects you to master. Want to traverse a narrow length of wood requiring intense focus and balancing? Just jump at it and Lara clings to it, never at risk of falling off unless a cutscene demands it. Want to even try exploring your surroundings beyond the small hub sections? The game will outright refuse to acknowledge what you're doing as you plummet to your death. Want to learn on your own how to perform, and thus improve, the abilities you learn over the course of the game? Well fuck you, says Crystal Dynamics, because we're going to tell you how to do everything new and leave nothing to the imagination.

So let's get down to the story: Lara and a group of friends are on an expedition near Japan, and they get shipwrecked near an island. It becomes immediately apparent that previous ships have met the same fate, so something does seem off. Lara is separated from her group and has to find them whilst avoiding a number of pitfalls. As she gets further into the island, it is clear that a bunch of crazies inhabit the island. Soon after meeting up with the gang, they set out to escape from the island. Yet some force is preventing their exodus, and they have to deal with the army of crazy assholes with guns and all that.

That's pretty much the gist of the story. A rescue plane gets struck by lightning and crashes; there's ritual sacrifice to appease some spirit; an army of undead samurai sets their sights on Lara, and other crap. It's not terrible but it doesn't do anything remotely intriguing with its premise. In actuality, it is an excuse to kill more and more bad guys. After all, the focus of the game is not on the adventure & hunting of artifacts, but of trying to get off of the island and shooting everything in your way.

There's nothing wrong with innovation, of taking an old formula further than ever before. But this game took steps backward, and not forward. Somehow Crystal Dynamics took a series that had an identity of its own into territory that renders it generic & trite. Fantastic visuals and sometimes thrilling action sequences can't save this game from earning much of my displeasure. It may be somewhat unfair to compare it so heavily to previous entries in the franchise, but how could you fault me for doing so when I consider it one of my favorite game series of all time? 

The Rundown:

Positives 

+ Some of the best visuals you'll experience out of 2013

+ It is very story-driven, so if you're into that, then this will deliver.

+ To expand on the above, Lara Croft looks stunningly real. The detail on her is borderline crazy.

+ Has a few legitimately thrilling action sequences.

+ There is a tiny bit of exploration to do, so it's not a straight-up linear game.

+ Lara gets a lot of focus, and has a bit of character development too, which was admittedly in short supply in older games.

+ It does have tombs, but...

Negatives

- Why have tombs when you won't do anything exciting or challenging with them? It's pretty much pointless. Solve a simple puzzle, avoid no traps or pitfalls, and open up a chest at the end that rewards experience points. Rinse & repeat. Screw that shit.

- Way too many QTEs for my liking, and they're too finicky, so they often end up killing the player character because of somewhat shoddy programming.

- The story is kind of dull. Doesn't help that it takes a big backseat to the actual gameplay.

- No inventory or any kind of item management.

- Sometimes resembles a Michael Bay flick with the constant explosions.

- No survival gameplay to speak of, despite the "a survivor is born" tagline.

- Takes several steps backward and ends up being a generic third-person shooter with light adventure elements thrown in.

- Has one of the most condescending game mechanics ever programmed in the history of gaming: the survival instinct function, which highlights everything important in the game world. Say bye to actual exploration and/or honing of skills.

- None of the characters you deal with are intriguing and besides, this game is not about them, but about Lara. So why should we care?

- The undead samurai enemies you fight near the end are far easier to defeat than one would hope, so their eventual appearance in-game loses all menace.

- It's so violent and cynical yet I wonder why we, as gamers, are supposed to take all of it so seriously in spite of the series being heavily inspired by the Indiana Jones franchise.

C

Resident Evil 6 Review (PS3, Xbox 360, PC, 2012/2013, Capcom)

Talk about a divisive game.

The last few Resident Evil titles are not without their critics, let alone those who are outright dismissive of them. However, in spite of the very vocal bandwagon that derides this game at every turn and all that they say this game is guilty of, there are some things you can consider positive about this outing.

What we have here is pretty much a cash cow franchise. Almost two dozen games have been released with the name, with very few of them considered non-canon (Gaiden comes to mind). Three of them managed to sell upwards of five million or more copies, it has spawned a lacklustre but financially reliable film series, a bunch of shitty novelizations have since been written, and it has become a focal point of the survival horror genre. 

Then again, Resident Evil 6 is not considered survival horror anymore. Would that be a correct assertion? Overwhelmingly in the face of all odds; yes, this is not a survival horror title. Survival elements are at a minimum, and frankly there's too much shit going on at almost any one time for it to be considered horror; it's not visceral, it doesn't play on your fears, and it's just not scary. But is that really so much of a detriment? Has this series ever been all that scary, considering that only the first game (and it's startlingly good remake) actually managed to be so?

This is an action game, through and through. It has very light horror elements, namely in Leon & Helena's campaign, but you won't leave scared. The tension is very low, as well, only ever coming to fruition during a frustrating sequence (typically quick-time events, though this game is more forgiving than most in that regard) or a halfway challenging boss battle. Otherwise, this is a straight up action shooter, and it doesn't suffer from that. If you just stop looking at it as an entry in a "scary" game series, which the series has almost never been (again, take note of the one exception), then you may be able to look at it with less unfair scrutiny.

The amount of effort put into this game is quite evident: a sprawling, if not overstuffed story, large cast of characters, up to six hours of gameplay per chapter (and there are four of them), possibly the best Mercenaries incarnation yet, and a fantastic roster of enemies means that Capcom didn't quite skimp on anything here. The old favorite zombies return, nastier than ever, almost acting as a foil to the Ganados/Majini-like J'avo. The difficulty is downright brutal at times, which doesn't include the ridiculously over-used quick-time mechanic. And each character has their own movesets and playstyles, setting them apart from the rest.

Yet there are many problems present. One is in the sheer length of the story mode, and just how inconsequential it ends up feeling. Too much crap is piled into the story and it just doesn't end up working all that well after what feels like thirty hours into the game. Most of the time, each character storyline simply meshes into the overall narrative shared between them, so it means that you're only really taking on a different perspective of the same incidents depicted in the plotline. Only Ada's campaign comes off as meaningful, because the rest are burdened by red herrings: Leon & Helena are hell-bent on killing the guy who jumpstarted the viral infection, at least in their starting location; Chris & Piers are hell-bent on capturing/killing Carla who thinks she's pulling all the strings; Jake & Sherry are just trying to get the hell out of dodge pretty much. While all of that crap is going on, Ada is unraveling every villain's plans & giving everyone cover at one point or another, effectively curbing the apocalypse just about all on her own. If any character is the real main character in this drawn out story, it is Ada, because she has the most far-reaching effects on the entire plot. Which is a neat touch considering how much of an enigma she is in the other games, but this really could have been just her game and it wouldn't have suffered for it. The other character storylines would have been better used as shorter bonus chapters, but then people would mostly have ignored them anyway.

And then those fucking quick time events come into play. And how often they do!

Do I need to haunt myself with the knowledge that these things exist in such an abundant supply in Resident Evil 6? This game contains more of them in just the tutorial than half of any of the previous games combined. And they often occur as part of what should be normal gameplay, usually as a dodge mechanic or simply because Capcom tried, and failed miserably, at cramming too many controls into the game. I'll get into that last bit later but this game is brought down by the sheer number of button prompts, big-time. The only upside at all is that they aren't buggy (at least from my experience) and they are a bit more forgivable than most. That's not much of a defense, though; this mechanic will be seen as an anachronism quite quickly, if games don't fucking drop them soon enough.

Another plague, perhaps a plantar's wart on the foot of this game if you will, is the camera. It is hands-down, the single-worst camera system in the series' history. No other game comes close. When I played the demo, I had no idea just how nauseating the camera can be. Just the act of running (a neat but long overdue gameplay mechanic) forces the camera into conniption fits, with it bouncing wildly with each stride. It gets caught in the scenery often, and the angles that it defaults to are horrendous, requiring constant readjustment from the user. Sometimes it's a battle against the camera that leads to the player getting killed, and that alone makes this a huge negative for the game.

Of additional note is both the interface and more importantly, the controls. The interface isn't entirely bad, but it requires understanding just what the fuck it all means. There are symbols for each option and while it is mostly common-sense, you're often too busy fighting against the real-time nature of the pause menu to figure out what each option does without clicking on the quit button. But what is worse yet is the control system. It's just as bloated as the storyline, if not moreso. There are so many commands to pull off in this game that I don't even think the game itself lists all of them. 

Often is the case where you have to pull of multiple combinations of each & every button, sometimes just to pull off rather arbitrary moves. Want to dodge an incoming attack? Hold the attack button and press the run button. Want to perform a dive-roll? Hold the attack button while moving forward and press the run button, too. Want to, almost pointlessly at that, switch your orientation from the default left side of the screen to the other? Well, learn yet another combination of buttons. Get used to it, and try to remember it. This is excessive and unneeded. Less is definitely more here, and I hope Capcom learned something in this regard.

In spite of these flaws, and there are certainly more, this game does have its strengths. It can be legitimately fun, there are a number of mechanics that were long overdue such as the ability to sprint and free-standing melee attacks (limited by your energy gauge), and like I mentioned, the enemies are great. And about the only good thing about Jake & Sherry's campaign is also one of the most badass things in the series; the Ustanak, who is the successor in virtually every regard to Nemesis. You may or may not come to embrace the eventual final exit of this juggernaut, which is something of an accomplishment in this bloated story. And this game does challenge you at times, legitimately outside of those dastardly quick-time events. Often it is because the game conceals easily missed but simple ways of moving the game forward, or taking down a boss, clearly because most players come to expect something much more out of these situations. And the game has a skill system that adds some depth to how you play, allowing for all sorts of combinations each time. 

The Mercenaries, as mentioned previously, makes a marvelous return. And while it may turn off some players because of its difficulty, for seasoned players such as myself it is a welcome evolution. Couple the game's new controls (which is certainly a good & very bad thing at the same time) with that which has been established in the last couple of games, and you have a clear winner. There are many stages to tackle, there are unique challenges in each, the enemy progressively gets nastier over time with each successive kill, and you get a feeling of accomplishment through it all.

And while it certainly does recycle a lot of the functional foundations of the gameplay (many animations and moves, even some sounds and mechanics, are noticeable to a seasoned player such as myself), it doesn't have a shortage of newly-created assets. If anything, the game has a lot to offer, but it all feels so fragmented so as to lose cohesion between it all. And if the storyline didn't suffer from excess and from one frustrating forced cinematic sequence after another after another after another, it wouldn't hurt so bad. I don't live in a bubble where I truly believe that this series was ever, with the exception of the original game, scary. And I don't clamor for the days where we had fixed camera angles, tank controls, and sometimes superfluous item management in the classic games. Not to say they were bad, but they were wearing thin to a point.

Here's to another title, addressing all of its legitimate issues and paying heed to none of the obsessive bullshit from bandwagon-riding detractors.

The Rundown:

Positives

+ The Mercenaries returns, delightfully.

+ Has overall the best graphics in the series yet.

+ In spite of the overlong storyline, it has its engaging parts.

+ New character Jake opens up new gameplay styles.

+ Ada's chapter shines among the mostly "meh" ventures preceding it.

+ Adds an actual sprint function, actual dodge ability, and free-standing melee (perform it at any time), among other things.

+ Almost all of the enemies are a blast to, well, blast away or boot in the face. 

+ Zombies make a return, and they're nastier than ever.

Negatives

- The story mode feels way too long for its own good, and overstays its welcome.

- In spite of Leon's short-lived atmospheric appeal, and Jake's hybrid of survival & high-octane action, Ada's campaign is the only one really worth playing.

- Complicated and overpopulated controls.

- The most quicktime events ever witnessed in a single Resident Evil title yet. Just the tutorial section had about a dozen of them, all amounting to about five minutes of gameplay!

- A few bugs affecting play, most noticeable in the Mercenaries.

- That fucking camera is about as bad as watching any Michael Bay film. In other words, it stricken with attention deficit disorder AND an extreme case of Parkinson's disease.

- Zombies all over the place, with dynamite, at every turn is more frustrating than anything else (The Mercenaries: No Mercy mode)

- No one plays the multiplayer anymore.

- Somewhat poorly conceived UI.

- Inconsequential story conclusion and a misguided primary villain.

C+

Mark the Calendar: December 18 (RE: Ian Watkins' Sentencing), Raising Awareness on Depraved Sexual Abuse of Minors

Come December 18th, I will take part in/initiate a hashtag whereby I praise the very necessary indictment of the monstrous, sickening, depraved piece of shit known as Ian Watkins, formerly of Lostprophets fame. The children he has hurt, damaged, irrevocably violated will never be the same, and his sentencing is not enough. He took full, disgusting advantage of the fame & power he had amassed, and thankfully, people locked him away so that at least for up to 32 years, he cannot violate another soul.

We're talking about, at the time of his most disturbing crimes against humanity, infants less than a year old. He did things I don't want to describe on here, as this would get some attention.
Awareness of the monster that this Ian Watkins truly is is key to the bigger picture, the greater awareness that people like him are to be found elsewhere, doing things that would drive people mad with rage, disgust, and despair. Not only that, but there are two women who willingly became accomplices who are nearly as depraved as he, for they, (quite apparently) with glee, presented their VERY young children to him to be...god.

If you can stomach what you`d read about this scum of humanity and his most disturbed accomplices did, then you can read about the court remarks/findings here: http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/…/Ju…/r-v-watkins-and-others.pdf

December 18th couldn't come any sooner. He was sentenced that day last year, and for the honour of the children he, and others like him have violated, awareness shall be spread via Twitter. It's a useful platform to make sure people are aware of crimes like these happening around the world today.

To say "Fuck you" to Ian Watkins is truly not enough, and does nothing to alleviate the destruction he has wrought. I can only imagine how his former band-mates felt when they heard of what a monster he turned out to be. I can only imagine how his victims through the last ten or so years feel, having been destroyed by him. One can only hope that the pain that those two infants will feel when they are older and become privy to the truth, that it doesn't overwhelm either of them.