Showing posts with label choices. Show all posts
Showing posts with label choices. Show all posts

Monday, 4 December 2017

Shadow of War Review



Shadow of War is a game that is simultaneously agonising and rewarding. While the experience itself is competently crafted, with eye-popping graphics, an eye for detail and possibly the best enemy-AI system to come out in the last ten years, the final package is a big downfall for a franchise that started so well in its first outing. Unfortunately, the game’s size is its biggest nemesis; forcing anti-consumer mechanics and creating a poor, over-bloated and over-long storyline that fails to showcase what should have been a triumph.
 
The storyline continues directly on from Shadow of Mordor; involving the creation of a New Ring.
Screenshot from in-game.

Shadow of Mordor was perhaps the best licensed video game since Batman: Arkham Asylum. Taking inspiration from the latter, the first entry into the franchise married satisfying rhythm-based button-mash combat with a well-designed open world to create what was at the time the best single player title yet to come out in the PS4/Xbox One generation. If that wasn’t enough, the exciting Nemesis system was brought into the world, creating a platform for emergent stories that put enemy AI in the spotlight. Combat became much more dynamic and exciting, as did the enemy forces themselves. 

It’s a shame that Shadow of War doesn’t follow suit. Despite a strong attempt, the game ultimately buckles underneath the great weight of its horrible design choices. The result is an experience that seems to both hate and love itself; it is just as ready to reward you as it is to destroy you and laugh at your attempts to enjoy the game, oh, and did you know that you could be slightly less annoyed by buying the Mithril Chest for real money?

One of the most controversial aspects of Shadow of War is the inclusion of loot chests, a practice that has been somewhat over-discussed recently as an anti-consumer pricing model, especially for a full-price game. To keep this aspect of the review concise; the inclusion of loot boxes here is painfully unnecessary and clearly informs some parts of the game to be more irksome than they should simply to attract players to dropping cash, which is not okay at best, and a disgusting and shady practice at worst. Given the game’s ambition, it’s probable that the sheer level of investment and production value that went into building Shadow of War was too high to profit feasibly from a simple full-retail purchase. In this case, my argument is this: if your game fails to profit in such a way, that’s a failing of your own budgeting and not of the market itself. 

 
The graphics are so sharp that this orc's eyes actually gave me nightmares.
Screenshot from in-game.


As for the presentation and production values; yes, every aspect of Shadow of War is out of this world, graphically speaking. This game really took my new PC out for a spin and it was an interesting experience to see the sheer power of graphical and gameplay fidelity made possible by ever-evolving technology. The textures often hit jaw-dropping levels of detail on every little part of Mordor. There is little to criticise here, except perhaps that some of the maps look a little bit drab and rely too much on that modern gaming crutch of brown and grey colour schemes, except for maybe one or two specific areas in the game.


The gameplay itself is the real wow-factor here though; the Nemesis system has evolved into its own and is suitably impressive, especially for a game of this scale. There is a multitude of strategies that become viable when considering the weaknesses of the multiple Orcs that one will face on their journey through Mordor. The sandbox nature of the combat that allows one to exploit different weaknesses through experimentation with so many intricately-overlapping systems is a wonder to behold. Many times, I found myself pleasantly surprised with how robustly the game’s engine could create a multitude of interesting scenarios. 
 
One of my favourite Orc Nemeses, was obsessed about his Black Blade but didn't win a single fight with me.
Screenshot from in-game.

Unfortunately, there was a desperate need for some extra tweaking here: while the system itself encourages exploitation of weaknesses in enemy captains, often combat can feel cheap and even painful. Enemy archers are overpowered and the respawn rates are set far too high. They became a constant thorn in my side and a source of annoyance that held me back from truly enjoying the free-flowing combat that I loved in Shadow of Mordor. Some captains often developed immunities to literally every combat move I had as an option, requiring an impressive, but ultimately irksome, set of hoops for me to jump through to create attacking openings. It would have been so much simpler if every orc captain had at least one weakness you could have exploited in combat, instead the game is satisfied with having you jump in and out of stealth for hours luring them between arrow markers on the map. Impressive for encouraging sandbox experimentation, but in combat terms it is often poorly-implemented and even broken at times. 

Orc recruitment and training is perhaps the biggest aspect of the game, and while it is a fun quest, this is where things start to turn from mediocre to worse. While it is fine enough to gather your army in the open world, especially in the later stages of the game this becomes a slog. One time I lost out on ten hours of progress developing my army because of a cheap love-tap by a captain who happened to have a one-hit kill perk. This is the point where the game is meant to encourage the purchase of loot boxes and microtransactions, and it is so transparently designed that the game almost becomes a parody of itself at this point. It is so clear that the latter part of the game is meant to encourage you to buy the loot boxes that I left feeling that on some level like I was treated to a worse game because of it. 

As for the game itself, it is certainly a ‘bang for buck’ purchase, microtransactions notwithstanding. There is such a mountain of things to do that at first it is intimidating to a new player. This has its own advantages and disadvantages in terms of how inviting and non-convoluted the game is to play, but the sheer size of the package itself is noteworthy. At over 40 hours I still am nowhere near seeing everything that the game has to offer and as a sandbox it is competently designed enough to create the right mood in the player for exploration and play. However, this is also a downside to the game because at the half-way mark it starts to feel over-long, like a painful slog. Enjoyment of the game eventually diminishes to a point that all it will take is a single frustrating battle to go wrong and the player will put down the controller completely.  The game is absolutely bloated and it is a shame to see such promise be underwritten by such a mixed bag, especially given that the maps themselves aren’t particularly memorable on their own; here the only location that really rivals Shadow of Mordor’s maps is perhaps Minas Ithil, but the player only spends a scant amount of time there such that its impression is somewhat missed.

Then there is the plot. There are so many mis-steps here in terms of Tolkien story that the game might as well be considered non-canon, and a face-heel turn toward the end that doesn’t quite hit the right notes. Story was never this series’ strong point. While the setting promises an epic tale that will engage gamers, instead there are a couple of charming scenes where some of the more interesting orcs can shine through. Unfortunately, here it is also a case of bloat where the storyline suffers from feeling padded because of the game feeling twice as long as it should have been.

Bruz is one of the more fun characters in the game.
Screenshot from in-game.
While Shadow of War offers a well-designed open world with a backbone of a great Nemesis system that promises more interesting orcs than the previous entry in the series, ultimately the poor, anti-consumer decisions force it into being a much worse game than it has any right to be. Despite amazing production values and satisfying gameplay, instead the fact is that the game seems at every turn to offer you something to love and something to hate.

Shadow of War is my marmite game of 2017; I have a love-hate relationship with it and it is difficult to occupy a middle-ground at any one point in the game. At some points, you’ll hate where things are going, while at other times you’ll find some genuine sandbox enjoyment, but ultimately the loot chests and terrible post-game create something that I would only recommend if it was at least half of its full-retail price.

This orc knew it, apparently.
Screenshot from in-game.


Friday, 12 May 2017

Morality Choices in Gaming

My introduction to moral choice in a video game was Fallout 3. As first impressions go, it wasn’t the most ideal. I wasn’t a massive fan of the game when it first released and it was only when Skyrim came out that I became open to the Bethesda formula and tried it again. I enjoyed my time with Fallout 3, but personal reasons make it hard for me to enjoy and play the game again.
           
My issue with Fallout 3’s moral choice system, however, is quite simple. It is too easy to be good. 

The problem with a lot of the choices in the game is that to be ‘evil’ you truly have to make an effort; you have go out of your way, travel half-way across the wasteland and find a very obviously evil rich man and another obviously evil suit man, and push a button to literally nuke a city. The problem with this evil choice is that one has to make a genuine effort to choose to do something they know is evil, and not only that, make more effort than the good choice would be.

The problem is that being the ‘good guy’ is the easier choice in Fallout 3, and that doing the more ‘evil’ choices are so evil that nobody would genuinely pick them unless they were playing an evil character. When taking the choice between installing a poison into the water supply to cause the genocide of all mutants, many of whom you have met and engaged in conversation, or simply turning on the machine and creating a reliable source of clean, free water for all in the wasteland, it seems almost comically ridiculous to pick the ‘evil’ option.
           
There needs to be more ambiguity in the moral choices that we make in games, if we are to answer the questions that should be asked by the inclusion of a morality system. It is not enough to have a moral choice, but one has to make that choice feel meaningful. We need more options where it is easier and less obvious to be evil. Not ‘if you choose not to step on the puppy you’re a hero’.

How about instead of the poison option in Fallout 3 the decision is more grey. Perhaps the water purifier doesn’t have enough power. It would have enough power if you can install a module, but the installation means that you would poison the water for mutants. 

The choice would then be a lot harder, and more real, if either choice had a real negative consequence attached. Either you fail, or you discriminate against hordes of mutants. Of course, this choice has issues; between irradiated water for all or clean for some, I’d certainly be okay flipping the switch if it meant clean water for some. But this is just one example of how we can alter the morality choices to be more meaningful; by altering the consequences involved.
           
Morality choices and storytelling in general have a far way to go in games. Perhaps some storyline decisions will be incompatible with gaming as we know it. Maybe in offering the kind of open-world choices that seem so stylish today, game developers are keen to let players have their cake and eat it by experiencing a power fantasy. It is possible to save everyone. It is possible to make the right choice.

But if gaming is to continue to tell gripping stories that will blur the line between art and entertainment, then we need to be more evolved in our approach to morality. In films and books, many of the best stories have come about from the hero having limitations, or from showing impossible choices that people have to make.

We need to feel more comfortable limiting the gamer in their moral choices. Instead of making them go out of their way to be evil, we need to make 'evil' the more realistic choice at times, with real impact in making the game easier or more difficult. Perhaps we can even make storylines where there is no good and evil. Given the directions that Telltale games seem to be going in with their storylines, there is certainly a trend toward more morally ‘grey’ choices.

Morality in itself is an interesting idea in gaming. The notion that one can measure their current ethical standing is intriguing. But how do we reconcile this with reality? By having the labels ‘good’ and ‘evil’ on our actions and by measuring one’s position on a straight line, we’re not doing justice to a complex issue. 

In the real world, morality is not measurable and it is not so easy to tell evil apart from good, as much as politicians and newspaper companies would like you to believe otherwise. Perhaps we need our stories to reflect this, and modern trends are now shying away from traditional notions of good or evil, focusing instead on the consequences of our actions rather than a strict black-and-white moral dichotomy.


It will be interesting to see how this impacts morality in gaming. Given that games are ultimately computer programs, I don't envy games developers in having to come up with systems to emulate such hard, complex issues as morality. However, I am very interested to see just how they can manage this in the future.