God of War Ragnarok: Stepping to the plate.

 God Of War 

”God of war (2018)” was a masterclass in rebooting a stale frachise in decline, that everyone but a vocal few had begun to sour on. The developers and consumers had matured, and so, the product had to aswell to keep up with the times. A grounded story with epic circumstances, about a father and his son grieving over the mother's death. This event, set of a journey to deliver her ashes to the highest point in all the realms, building their father & son releationship and knocking over dominos in the process.

This was a far cry from the old God of War franchise, that lost its way over the years chasing spectical and shockvalue using over the top violence just for the sake of it. This method was bringing on the end of a frachise aswell as a world and they succeeded in turning it around.

The new focus on relatable, human topics and themes like earning new chances, improving one self to be a better father, seeing ones own mistakes in your child trying to guide them was amazing. Not only did they succeed with humanising a monster (kratos), they also wrote a story tighter than most. Santa Monica also kept the level of gameplay quality the series was famous for, except for the lack of enemy variety. I still consider "God of War (2018)"  the best package of mature writing, entertaining gameplay and beautiful visuals I have ever played making it my number one overall favorit experience only lacking that enemy variety I mentioned.

Ragnarok Steps to the plate

Now... This means that ”God of War Ragnarok” has a lot to live up to from its predecessor. Armed with a new lead director, a team of incredible skill and years of hard work they have gone into Ragnarok expanding on what they had built, and is delivering what i would consider another great product that certainly deserves its nominations at this years Video Game Awards HOWEVER.

As I said earlier, what made ”God of War (2018)” special to me was the tight story and grounded narative. "Ragnarok" starts out actionpacked, and in many ways echo "2018" using many familiar  elements from 2018s opening. I did have these moments of family and humanity, using similar circumstances to really show how the characters had evolved. This was great, but I felt like as the game went along it had lost something special. I felt like the game was too ambitious, trying to open up too fast. Going from this personal intimate journey of a father and son, to a doomsday event, in the span of one game? Trying but failing to have the same depth to about 4 times the number of characters? Kept feeling like the story of two games crammed into one. I will say the game did humanise its characters, friend and foe, just not with the same attention and quality as in "2018". The fact it brought up topics and themes that are quite complicated was fantastic, but the way it did it, did brush me against the hairs a bit. I can't stop thinking it was packed in a way, where I would have prefered a third game to really let it breathe and pace itself on its way to the big finale. I will admit though that this is a nitpick and some would argue that it was a enjoyable step up in pacing. 

When it comes to the number of characters "Ragnarok" has really pushed hard to expand, adding a huge roster of new ones. Many of the characters feeling unique with plenty of history to them, but heavily depending on sidequests to add depth. This means that skipping sidecontent can greatly enhance the feeling of losing narative, aswell as character, depth and detail for the sake of faster pacing which is not recommended. I would also like to say that pretty much all the sidecontent is so good, you wouldn't want to miss it anyways. This includes traveling with your PHA (Personal Hip Assistant), Mimir, continueing to tell his amazing stories. Not only that, Kratos and other characters have joined in too, and brings a lot of life to any trip you may take accross the realms. you simply do NOT cut these short by fast traveling.

”God of War Ragnarok” really improves on the lack of enemy variety, which you notice immediately starting the game. The first chapter alone, almost holds greater variety, than the entire game of "2018". Bosses in perticular has become much more varied, and every fight with them feels different, and spaced out great. Santa Monica has also added a lot more finisher-animations, and many different systems and ideas to the combat, some more noticable than others to players who dont min-max. I will say that I found some fights slightly spammy and crowded, where i thought a single harder enemy or two would have been more enjoyable. 

When it comes to puzzles "God of War Ragnarok" has already gotten its fair share of  feedback when it comes to hinting, or what other call backseasting, which I somewhat agree with. I have played through it and largely been able to ignore them giving me the solutions, but watching streamers playing have made me aware how anoying it is to some. So dont get this game for its mindbending puzzles, consider them more like a pacing feature to space out fights and giving you things to overcome or get passed to give the world more flavor. 

Overall I would say that on its own its an amazing experience and a strong recommendation despite its flaws. It still does what "2018" did, really well. The story is epic, and in scale it blows its predecessor out the water. Having expanded its roster, it gives you plenty of charactertypes you can connect to, and Mimir's stories are still making fast travel and rushing the game a HUGE no-no. The combat is still fun, and it is just an incredibly beautiful visual masterpiece. I do however think it was unfair to "Ragnarok" cutting the third game, and I think it could have been better if it was left as a trilogy. As a trilogy it could have gotten more time to really get under the skin of the characters, not just the most important ones, all the characters. As a ending of a duology though, I would still easily call "Ragnarok" a worthy sequel to the game which I consider the best I ever played. 

Last of Us 2: Is it as bad as they say?..

Is it as bad as they say?..

Introduction

Man! This is one difficult post to write, in a way that won't spark controversy and trigger the fans of a true Naughtydog classic. So many emotions have been flying across the keyboards into forums, comment sections, and video manuscripts trying to argue how good or bad this sequel truly is. 

The number of people I have read saying "The game is shit" or posting the same spoiler jokes/memes as so many others since the leaks, makes me sad. I feel like it was unfair, a way too simple reaction to a complicated piece of storytelling doing something different from the beaten path. 

Just remember this is my personal opinions and theories, based on my time beating the game.

SLIGHT SPOILER WARNING

Rough story concepts and narative perspectives are revealed in this post

no plot details are mentioned, leaving experiences to discover as you play.

The Last of Us Part 2 is an exercise in unconventional storytelling setting up a philosophical scenario of ethics for players to judge, which i have never seen done in this way before in interactive media. 

An action game giving the player a totally unbiased view of a conflict, where terms like "right and wrong" and "good and evil" is put to the test. This is NOT a game where they perfect traditional storytelling and plot structure, however, it does things in a way that is quite interesting and unique. We are not meant to have a certain feeling or thought at the end of this, we are given the gift of insight, and we are free to judge the people in this world as we want. Obviously, in an action game, we do not get mechanical freedom, but we get the freedom to judge the actions without being chained to one perspective. We naturally look for a hero and villain in a story so we can pick a side and try to make the actions during the game justified, but actually, there are no wrong answers here. No right person to cheer for, no villain to 100% rightfully prosecute. I understand that this isn't the sequel some of you wanted, but as consumers, we have to accept we are not the writers of the art we consume. Our expectations do not have to be met for it to be a good piece. The Last of Us Part 2 has been very thought-provoking to me, and hopefully eventually to the people that closed their eyes and ears after feeling mistreated by the writers after the leaks. 

Actually I think the fact we are discussing this game so intensely and will be discussing it for years when brought up, means it has done something right. I hope more people will get to see that, as the plot grows on them and we talk about it together in a respectful way.

Story

The moral choices of Joel in the first game were obviously questionable, and we all know Joel has done questionable things post-outbreak. The results of these actions start an avalanche of vengeful events, that we as players are asked to experience to inform our final judgment of these darks characters' morality. Naughtydog brings a balance of two rivaling moral perspectives throughout the game, to bring a complicated case at the end of it to the judgment of the player's own morality and point of view. It could have been told in a shorter tighter fashion, and pacing could use a tweak for sure. Still I think the story concept adds more to the game than pacing detracts if you get to the finishing line.

Worldbuilding

 The world is fantastic, it feels lived in and the factions are so cool I kept wanting to learn more about them. The small notes, letters, and diaries you find, the skeletons, everything takes part in telling the story of a world falling apart or already broken. I can't tell you a time where I felt this awed by the level of detail, love, and care put into every little microcosm that was the lives lived in this unforgiving world. They brought life to those we never met, and never will meet, and I applaud them for it! 

Gamedesign

The core gamedesign was mostly similar to "Part 1" with small additions like going prone, and dogs tracking you. The level design felt a bit off to me sometimes though as clear design language guiding players forward through areas had occasionally taken a backseat to realism. The darkness in some levels added a lot to the atmosphere, an atmosphere I haven't even felt in most horror games
I have played. I loved the tense feeling of walking down a dark hallway, dimly lit by a questionable flashlight. I love the times when I successfully snuck around enemies or did a cludge stealth takedown. When these things worked it was amazing, but in scenes meant to be action-oriented, it was pretty problematic. I became so frustrated by long wave-based action encounters, where I often got hit in the back by clickers while I was fighting some other enemy. The darkness made me depend on the barely useful listening mechanic which mixed with one-hit killers could be infuriating. A few times areas would feel forced like I had to engage in a fight no matter what. This was great in some cases, but a few times, this became so infuriatingly frustrating I went checkpoint hunting. I would run till I hit a checkpoint and let myself die. This was rare but I would feel dishonest if I didn't mention it. 

Final Thoughts

This game was not the 10/10 the gaming media promised us in my opinion,  however, I can't bring myself to give it less than an 8 or 9 either. Even though I felt like the gameplay was frustrating at points, and I think it could be shorter, I feel like the game is a unique piece of videogame storytelling. The way it does things with the story, demands to be finished and talked about.
I sure did feel tired, beaten, and then relieved as the game ended, but I felt like it was all worth it in the end.
This game was meant to be an unpleasant, unforgiving beatdown of emotions and hardship. A trek like no other. When I finished Last of Us Part 2 I finally understood what Playstation meant when they said they wanted to make "experiences" rather than "games".