One year of blogging: a personal and heartfelt note from Stev3L

On the 20^th of February, 2017, while in despair at my previous job, I decided to make a gaming blog. I was worried at first about how it would go; I knew that the market for videogame writers was vastly saturated. In the end, however, my need for an outlet won the day and I made my first post in earnest; a messy little article geeking out about how Resident Evil 7 brought back a sense of horror authenticity to its franchise.

Starting my blog was the best decision I ever made. As I wrote more I quickly found a passion in what I was doing and though the click count was low, my blog quickly became a much-needed source of pride and hope.

It wasn’t until I started my Twitter account, however, that I began to experience just how great the gaming community as. While growing my own presence, I quickly fell in love with how friendly and welcoming the gaming community was. I really love using Twitter to catch up with the little circles in which I’ve found myself, and I get to enjoy so much more about what I do. I realised that I didn’t just want to write, but I wanted to become a part of this great community and engage with it as much as I could. 

I met the excellent editor of Pressquit, another gaming site that I found inspiring and fun to read, and even wrote a couple of my own articles on the site. I am most proud of my Aven Colony review on Pressquit, as it gave me a taste not just of writing for an audience, but also with getting demo copies of games for review. I felt immensely proud as it felt like a seal of approval on my work that I could write articles that got developer attention.

While I went quiet in the latter end of 2017, as I had a holiday with my fiancée and also needed to concentrate on my new job which became increasingly busy around the festive period, I got back to working on the blog as soon as I felt the writing bug take me again. One of my proudest moments came from previewing It Lurks Below, an inspired survival game built by the industry legend that had a big hand in creating Diablo. Again, it felt like a seal of approval to get attention from such an important developer. 

My proudest moment, however, was in writing my charity article for PixelGirl. This amazing streamer was one of my earliest inspirations as I joined the gaming community. Her infectiously friendly and kindhearted nature made Twitteran uplifting experience every time I saw her post something. To have the privilege of collaborating with such an influential advocate was one of the greatest moments of my blog, even more so that it was for a worthy cause. 

Today, my blog is in the middle of being tweaked for compatibility with my future plans. What started out as Stev3LGaming is going to become XYZGaming, as my focus continues to shift on the gaming community. The most important thing to my online identity is that sense of community that I found; the networks of people I have met along the way have been inspirational. If I can be half the person that these people are, I would be a very happy man indeed.

I wrote this blog post with a sense of newfound pride; XYZGaming is more than just a blog for me now. It’s my gateway to an awesome community, and a much needed creative outlet. My little hobby is now an achievement I can look upon with no small amount of pride. 

I’ve seen some amazing things this last year and met even more amazing people, but what has been the most humbling part of all of this has been the people that make the gaming community what it is. Whether developers, streamers, fans, other bloggers or Let’s Players, the game community has been an absolute inspiration to join and I thank you for being so welcoming to me. I find myself humbled by how the gaming community has shown what it’s truly capable of, and now that I’ve seen a glimpse of this greatness I am filled with elation and pride that I get to be a part of that. So from the bottom of my heart, to every single visitor to this little corner of the internet:

 

Thank you.

-Stev3L, editor and writer of XYZ/Stev3LGaming.

Loot Boxes in 2018: is it really worth it?

Amid news of EA Games bringing microtransactions back to Star Wars Battlefront 2, a move that had long been promised, the question has to be asked: are loot boxes even worth the negative press they’ll generate among consumers in 2018?

Gamers made a significant stand over the issue in the back end of 2017. The backlash over the implementation of loot boxes in Battlefront 2 was so powerful that even the corporate overlords of Disney were forced to take notice and step in to tighten the leash on EA’s executives. This was even enough to force microtransactions to be pulled from the game entirely for a while.

The handling of the fallout from the loot box scandal on EA’s part was just as disastrous; gamers rightfully mocked and ridiculed EA’s statement that loot boxes were supposed to give ‘a sense of pride and accomplishment’, and EA have even achieved the dubious honour of having one of Reddit’s most downvoted comments of all time. Goodwill was just about exhausted when EA stated to shareholders that the decision to remove microtransactions wouldn’t affect profit estimates. This made the situation even worse as it all but outright implied that the use of loot boxes on EA’s part was just a cynical cash grab, not, as had been claimed, an unfortunate necessity to be able to fund the spiralling cost of modern games development. In one fell swoop, practically every justification for microtransactions in full-priced games was dismantled, leaving a smouldering ruin of gambling regulations and unhappy customers.

Battlefront 2, then, is not a game on a good standing in any way. In the months after release for any FPS things get difficult: care has to be taken to keep gamers coming back for more. This all begs the question: was it even worth it to bring back microtransactions to Battlefront 2 considering the inevitable PR issues it would cause?

Imagine the goodwill that EA could have recovered for their IP if instead they listened to gamers and announced that microtransactions would be removed from the game entirely? While many of the more cynical amongst us would claim to see through such an act, many would find such a move to be a positive step. In fact, arguably now would be the best time to make such an announcement, with Battlefront 2 being a few months old surely it would be in desperate need of the good PR that would be generated to revive its player base. Dropping microtransactions would be the shot in the arm to help the game continue to survive as a multiplayer FPS.

Instead, however, we have a sad, predictable and cynical move from a corporation that feels increasingly disconnected from its customers, with many gamers commenting that they will now leave the game alongside the calls of ‘told you so’ from cynics the world over. The poor PR generated from the move must be costing millions, and will undoubtedly have a knock-on effect with player engagement and could cost the company any profit generated from the game in the coming months.

So why would any game company in 2018 continue to be associated with such a maligned practice as loot boxes? Surely any short term revenue boost through such cynical means will be miniscule compared to the loss of goodwill from customers in the long run. In 2018 is it really going to be worth it for any mainstream game to implement loot boxes, knowing that with 2017’s end the microtransaction bubble has burst? Surely by now any loot box announcement will be met with such cynicism and vitriol that any small amount of revenue squeezed from such a move would be insignificant compared to the unsustainable loss of customer goodwill.

No. The ship has sailed on loot boxes and the damage is done. Gamers have proven that they will not take such moves blindly. Surely now, it is time to put the final nail into the loot box’s coffin and accept that whatever measly, cynical cash that can be grudgingly squeezed from consumer’s fingers is not worth the unsustainable loss of goodwill that will soon put AAA gaming’s future in the balance. Loot boxes are dead, it’s time to move on.

DLC vs loot boxes: make it worth buying

On the one hand, we have a practice that single-handedly demolished a gaming brand’s goodwill (loot boxes), and on the other, we have expansions and DLC which, when practiced correctly, offer a way to get extra revenue for making actual, valuable content that extends a game’s value proposition in a pro-consumer way.

We all hate when gamers are nickel-and-dimed into buying content that should have been in the base purchase of a full-retail-price game. Not only this, more nefarious practices have become more commonplace in the last year; loot boxes totally ruined Battlefront 2 and Shadow of War and led to a controversy that left waves rocking the industry for potentially years to come. Utilizing the ethically-questionable methods of gambling, loot boxes inherently represent greed and cynicism in its worst form. Unlike DLC, there is no redemption for the loot box.

On the other hand, with DLC there is a very clear distinction between the wrong and the right way to go about business. Gamers undoubtedly have a love-hate relationship with DLC, as since its widespread adoption in the 360/PS3 generation it has led to some good and a lot of bad, potentially even paving the slippery slope that landed us into the dubious territory of the loot box. There are good DLCs and bad DLCs, and the distinction needs to be made.

The wrong way to go about offering videogame DLC is clear and obvious; stripping content already expected of the game to sell back as an ‘expansion’, holding DLC hostage as a pre-order bonus, or the method most popular in mainstream gaming today which is to sell a ‘season pass’ that is often costed at more than the initial outlay of the game itself. The list goes on of every example of DLC gone anti-consumer. A dishonourable mention goes to the selling of pointless extraneous content such as costumes that would otherwise have been present in the game as a reward for player activities. The much-maligned ‘horse armour’, as seen in Oblivion, is a famous example of how costume DLC can go badly, badly wrong.

However, the important distinction between the practice of DLC and loot boxes or microtransactions is that as a method of keeping player engagement and maintaining a profitable player base is that there is a way to do DLC in the right way. For example, most gamers would agree that The Witcher 3’s DLC is a shining example of how to behave in an otherwise cynical industry.

The best examples of DLC are those that expand the game’s playtime and replay value. Grand Theft Auto IV and Red Dead Redemption excelled in their own DLC offerings, with the content being so meaty that they were later sold as full games (Undead Nightmare, Ballad of Gay Tony and The Lost and Damned). The content described was great simply because it offered a valuable expansion that was tangible to players.

A more modern example of DLC done right can be seen in Resident Evil 7. Capcom already earned my goodwill in this case because they delivered a stellar mainstream horror experience, and possibly the best AAA game to come out in years. Not only this, but the deal was sweetened with the initial offering of the free ‘Not a Hero’ DLC. While it suffered from its own issues, there is no denying that there is a good sign in giving an expansion for free that most unscrupulous publishers would eagerly strip out and monetize.

While yes, the concept of the dreaded ‘season pass’ reared its ugly head with Resident Evil 7, the sheer excellence of the content proved to be worth downloading. The banned footage, which gave us an actual expansion and elaboration on the game, used the mechanics to a great effect that changed the whole tone of the product. Simply through delivering something worth buying, Capcom made DLC that I am willing to buy.

It feels so painfully stupid to say this, but 90% of doing DLC right is not rocket science; it’s just to deliver a good package that is worth the price. Resident Evil 7’s DLC was fun to play and offered something different and new to the main experience. If this, and the other good examples of game DLC are anything to go by, it’s that there is plenty of gamer goodwill out there, if you treat gamers right. It may come as a shock to EA games, but the way to sell a product is not to manipulate the customer, or to engage in anti-consumer practices, it’s simply to make something worth buying. 

A Game To Watch: They Are Billions

Developed by Numantian games, They Are Billions is an intense, brutally difficult game that entered Early Access this December. Set up as a zombie survival game, TAB is an interesting take on a saturated genre, offering a steampunk setting with real-time-strategy gameplay.

 

They Are Billions comes complete with Reticulating Splines loading menus. Screenshot from in-game.

The minute-to-minute of this game is satisfyingly difficult. Players are tasked with the construction and defence of a post-apocalyptic Steampunk-styled colony. Usual genre mainstays are in full force such as resource and unit management as well as base defences. An interesting mix of survival gameplay elements are thrown in, including food and some elementary colonist management. 

The graphics are an interesting isometric 2D style, with beautiful, smooth animation of both buildings and units, all styled in a unique way that brings out the game’s individuality. For those with hardware of the right calibre, the game art is capable of scaling to 4K graphics, as mentioned on the game’s website. 

Graphics are layered with interesting Steampunk stylings, and look crisp and unique. Screenshot from in-game.

Of most note is the AI, however. Like many zombie survival games before it, They Are Billions doubles down on the attraction of displaying massive hordes of enemies simultaneously on-screen. However, the game’s website states that a custom AI engine has been built to handle up to 20,000 units in real time. Enemies react realistically to sound and roam about the world with their own paths. When playing the game, the sheer, overwhelming force of the horde is an awe-inspiring sight, even as the swathes of undead lay waste to your base. 

Vast numbers of enemies attacking in force is a sight to behold. Screenshot from in-game.

As isometric-styled survival games go, They Are Billions holds promise not only in its style but in its brutal gameplay. The difficulty of the game itself can be tweaked by altering gameplay time and enemy numbers using sliders, but I would recommend leaving the difficulty at default to experience first hand the brutality of the horde, as it provides a visceral, if unforgiving game. 

Expect to see game-over screens a lot. This game is fiendishly brutal. Screenshot from in-game.

If you’re looking for a survival horror fix with excellent real-time strategy elements running the show, then look no further than They Are Billions, which is currently available in Early Access in Steam for just under £20. This game shows a lot of promise as a game to watch for the future.

Gaming in 2017: A Review

Given that the year is ending, many websites will be dishing out their awards ceremonies and naming their favourite games in any genre. There will be much debate about the ‘Game of the Year’ with shoe-in favourites such as The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Horizon: Zero Dawn and Call of Duty WW2 duking it out over critics’ favour.

I don’t want to do such an awards ceremony, but now is a great time to reflect on some of the lessons we’ve learned through the year. This was the year we saw controversies over loot-boxes, review scoring and the release of a new console. It is a very interesting time to be a gamer. 

2017’s gaming year truly got started with Resident Evil 7. Its survival gameplay was sublime and subtle, a much more understated affair than previous titles in the series and it all worked to the game’s benefit. As fans had been demanding, for the first time in many years we had authentic and atmospheric horror that brought Resident Evil back into the fold as one of the premier titles in its genre. It both pulled the series back and pushed it forward in the exact ways that it needed, critically turning around a franchise much in need of rejuvenation.

 It wasn’t long after this that we saw the release of the Nintendo Switch. As a concept, the console showed a lot of promise; the actual realisation of gaming-on-the-go as many gamers envisioned from the moment they picked up a Game Boy. This proved to be a major draw for customers as well, turning Nintendo into a name synonymous with success once again and putting an end to the dark days of the Wii U.

Of course, when the Switch came out, it was almost overshadowed by one of its own games: The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild was a masterwork of open world design, that brought the Zelda Promise to fruition. For the first time, gamers held in their hands a true adventure title worthy of the original’s ambition, and despite a few rainy cliffsides, many gamers fell in love with the title.

Controversy surrounded this game’s review scoring thanks to Jim Sterling of the Jimquisition. While I disagreed with his review on a few points, his take on Breath of the Wild, giving it a ‘mere’ 7/10 score resulted in a major backlash from die-hard Zelda fans. This backlash showed an uglier side to the gaming community. It was around this time that ‘meta-bombing’ became a word in gaming vocabulary, referring to the practice of overwhelming a game’s page on Metacritic with negative user reviews. These were just two of many strange, toxic gamer trends that occurred in 2017.

By the time summer had arrived, however, gaming was back in full swing. The release of Crash N’Sane Trilogy brought a sudden mainstream attention on early 3D mascot platformers. Crash was a game with a lot of nostalgic goodwill and this surely helped the PlayStation brand, practically sealing the deal for future HD re-releases. The game’s difficulty was also a popular talking point: who doesn’t remember the cringe-worthy ‘it’s just like Dark Souls!’ type reviews gamers were exposed to at that time? It was discussed how central difficulty was to a game’s overall experience, and the summer of 2017 certainly had gamers everywhere screaming ‘f*ck the High Road!’

As we drew into autumn and winter and big blockbuster releases came out, gaming started to show a little fatigue in the mainstream space. While fan-favourite indie titles such as Oxygen Not Included certainly entertained, lots of gamers were placing their attention on other, more nefarious industry trends. 

This was the time of the Loot Box. With the release of Middle-Earth: Shadow of War, we saw the beginnings of a coming tsunami of Loot Box controversy. Gamers bemoaned the end-game, with good reason; it was purely set up to be a slog to encourage gamers to buy microtransactions, in the form of Loot Boxes.

What came after this was a colossal breakdown in mainstream gaming. While Call of Duty: WW2 released to critical acclaim, attention turned to Star Wars Battlefront 2. The game itself was meant to be an apology for EA’s first crack at the series, which many gamers deemed to be a cynical cash-grab. However, thanks to terrible consumer practices, Battlefront 2 became the symbol of everything wrong in the industry.

There was a massive backlash to the Loot Box practice in Battlefront 2, such that EA’s stock drastically fell. Even the Disney corporation themselves had to step in to help pick up the pieces.

The Loot Box system, as seen in Shadow of War and Overwatch before now, was a gambling-based microtransaction economy where players paid not for items, but for a chance to receive an item they may want (most of the time they would get junk). This was totally exploitative, if not gambling. Indeed, a few courts even stepped in with their own rulings that yes, Loot Boxes were gambling and should be regulated as such. 

Many would see this as a bad time for gamers. On the other hand, this controversy represents the power of gamers as a consumer group. It is amazing that after years of exploitation by big players entering a now-mainstream industry, gamers still have power to change things for the better. EA were forced to swiftly backtrack and their stock was badly damaged for this mis-step. This proved that gamers don’t have to silently stand by and watch the gaming industry go downhill; they can instead step in and kick-ass. If anything, Lootgate represents that the gaming community can still change the course of where videogames are going.

2017 was a strange year with a lot of major news items. My review of the year isn’t exhaustive by any means; I can’t go through all the year’s events and cover it all in the detail it deserves. I left out the release of the Xbox One X and Cuphead, for example. 

But I think that as far as the lessons we have learned from this last year, I can say that 2017 has been most informative; franchises can be re-thought with success, gaming’s community still has major toxicity issues to work out, older series can be brought back to life with a triumphant bang, and gamers aren’t going to just sit down and take bad consumer practices.

2018 will be an interesting year. I’m looking forward to seeing announcements on some big franchises. It may be too soon, but I hope to see the beginnings of a new Halo, and hopefully an actual sequel to some game franchises that are stagnating (a new Elder Scrolls? Or even a new Grand Theft Auto announcement?). 

In more concrete terms, however, what I am most looking forward to next year is the full release of Subnautica. In its current state, the game is well worth playing and is an extremely interesting take on the survival genre, with some beautiful underwater scenery to boot. If it gets a proper performance boost and a full release, I will be very happy.

Thank you for reading my blog over this past year, and I hope you will have a wonderful rest of 2017 and an even better 2018!

-Stev3 L