#the building has been used for immersive stuff before which is neat! ;D

[britishchick09]

the blueprints for the immersive phantom experience have been released...

and it looks like random people are going to hear 'wandering child' when they're walking down the street? 😅😅😅

[delcanprobably]

Assassin’s Creed II Review

i finished assassin’s creed ii (2) and now i will write a thing about it

visuals and gameplay (which i normally wouldn’t group together but for this game it makes sense)

It’s from the era where everything is a desaturated shade of murky brown or sewerage green but once you get past that, it’s really a beautiful game. I think some areas get less desaturated as you play, but that might’ve just been time of day or me getting used to it. Having finished the game, I’ve reached the point where I’m not taken out of it by the visuals, and I actually appreciate the views a lot. I certainly liked it early on, but it took a while before I took it in that much. I feel that everything fits together really well, hard to explain exactly, but it’s just very solid and quite immersive. I didn’t learn the map very well, there are landmarks, but most of the cities are so samey that they don’t have many memorable areas. They’re distinct from each other, but internally, they feel pretty much the same wherever you are. It’s probably historically accurate, but it sometimes feels like you’re just running through what might as well be a procedurally generated series of tiled rooves. Overall though, the world looks good and serves the parkour system pretty well, and that’s what’s important. The parkour system gives the whole freedom thing but is also a bit unpredictable at times. It doesn’t magnet you into things as perfectly as newer games do, so I pretty regularly missed jumps (though I do kinda suck on a controller). It’s especially frustrating when you’re trying to do a leap of faith (super high jump into a hay bale indicated by a flock of birds and birdseed) and you somehow miss, like 99% of the time you go in, but if you don’t you make a complete fool of yourself. I started checking some of the less obvious ones, which kind of defeats the point of the whole system. NPCs are fairly primitive (maybe good for the time considering the crowd density?) but for whatever reason, I found that in tandem with the world, it was enough to be pretty immersive. In typical Ubisoft fashion, the world tries to be immersive while also being very gamey, as in there are all these consistent, familiar setups that you learn and can use as tools. Of course, this does mean in missions you sometimes find many conveniently placed solutions nearby, but rarely was it annoyingly blatant, and it kind of fueled the whole badass thing. The main thing that took me out is that there are a bunch of bugs. Visible spawn-ins (a couple of times I sprinted full pelt into a squad that spawned like a metre in front of me), parkour bugs, odd NPC behaviour etc., are pretty prevalent. It’s not Cyberpunk 1468, but it’s pretty meh. Money is fucking dumb. For the first hourish you’re barely able to afford anything. Then you get access to a town that generates shit-tonnes of money for you, and then you start getting thousands of florins when you so much as cough impressively and money becomes an entirely empty system. It’s honestly kind of comical. It’s good because you don’t have to worry about a stupid economy system, but it’s also obviously a bit dumb. I see what they went for, like you’re meant to build up this place to have a higher value and generate more money that you can then spend upgrading it and stuff, but I was more than comfortable with the amount of money I was getting in when I’d done like 10% of the upgrades. Oh, and then there’s this retarded system where you can buy artworks to add value to your base, but you never see them, they don’t add much value, and they’re really cheap. So honestly they’re just kind of there for the sake of being there, and near the end I started just going to the town’s art shops and bought all their artworks with the billions of florins I’d saved up. Also, to max out your base’s value, you have to buy every armour piece, even if it’s weaker than the one you’re up to (and the best armour is unlocked in the story anyway). And you can’t change which armour/weapons you have equipped without going back to your base. Not that it matters because it’s so easy that it doesn’t matter what you have equipped, more on that later. The classic issue that’s plagued AC forever is the repetitive fetch-questy bullshit missions, and yes they are there, but they honestly didn’t annoy me much at all. There are probably less than one for every story mission, so it honestly becomes a nice way to break it up. The exception is the assassinations, but they’re basically just cool bonus missions. You can do them whenever you want, and they have the gameplay of the main assassination missions. So they’re almost like missions distilled to their best bits without much backstory or polish. Oh yeah, and then there are the towers, but they’re kind of fun. You have to figure out how to get to the top (usually relatively straight-forward), the parkour to get up can be pretty fun, and then you get a nice view at the end. Honestly enjoyed them a lot for what it’s worth.

A major problem I had is that the game is just too damn easy. Yes, it’s meant to be a badass simulator to some extent but even if you don’t touch the controller for a whole fight, by the end of the game it’d take several minutes for enemies to knock your health down close to zero and then you have a gazillion health potions that start you all over again. More and more I felt very little risk in anything, and if I failed to do a cool plan for an assassination, then it usually wouldn’t matter and I’d be better off just going with it than I would waiting to die to try again. Fights with a small group are fun and break things up but it becomes a chore quickly and you start running away just out from fear of boredom. The best moments for difficulty were the forced stealth sections where you can’t get caught, but the problem with those were that if a guard becomes alerted then you instantly lose, even if they went from zero to alerted as you fall into an air assassination. The most fun with stealth outside those missions was the slim margin moments where you kill a guy just barely before they alert everyone, but you can’t even do that in stealth only missions. The ‘hidden in plain sight’ approach to stealth is pretty neat though so I’ll give it that.

It’s action-stealth but very action-oriented. It isn’t like a stealth game that you can jankily do some action stuff in, it’s easy to do things guns-blazing and a bit awkward but possible to be stealthy. I usually took the route of staying relatively hidden until I was in a good spot to assassinate my target and then got them and ran off, and I’m pretty sure this is how they want you to play based on the trailers and such. Coming with the easiness thing is that there are so many ways to kill people. You have a radial menu with around eight different weapons, and I can tell you that I used only three - two of which have quick access on the d-pad - outside of some very specific cases. I could’ve finished the game with just the hidden blade, sword, and throwing knives. It’s honestly absurd, for instance, there’s a knife that does less damage than your sword and is maybe slightly faster(?) Not only do you rarely need something between the sword and hidden blade, but there’s also no quick button for it on the d-pad, so it just never gets used. The excessive number of weapons include a couple that are meant to be tools for stealth, but it’s such a faf to go into the menu and select them that I rarely could be bothered.

story and stuff idk The story was pretty great, but I think some people exaggerate it a bit. Yes, the writing is pretty good, and Ezio is a great protagonist as far as video games go. What compelled me the most in the story was uncovering the conspiracy, not the characters’ story arcs. Even then, I got a bit lost halfway through. That’s not to say the characters are bad, they’re A-tier as far as video games go, but there’s no interesting development or real emotional thing behind anyone other than Ezio, and even then, it’s a kind of. He has some character development, but it’s pretty much done in the first third of the game. I will say I definitely cared a lot and was never annoyed by the story, and that’s rare for me. There are some dumb plot points when you think about them for a bit though, and there’s a retarded twist near the end. There’s the standard moral ambiguity thing you get in video games though. You learn about how you need to respect who you kill and only kill people for the common good and blah blah, but then you regularly kill half a dozen guards to go pick up a few hundred florins out of a box. And then there’s the fact guards instantly get sus if you’re on the rooftops (fair enough), which gives you an incentive just to kill them so that you can keep using the more fun method of travel. Whatever though, video games be video games. (story spoiler for people who have never played assassin’s creed, skip the italic bit if you wanna avoid) Oh yeah, the modern-day bits. Almost felt like there weren’t enough, to be honest. Like, I’m more interested in Ezio’s story, but there is so little closure in the modern-day stuff. Felt a tad underdone. The conclusion of the game gives a pretty intriguing ending for the like the lore of the modern-day story, but it leaves a lot of questions unanswered for both Desmond and Ezio’s story, and honestly, overall, it kind of feels like a massive cock tease for the rest of the Ezio trilogy. The last level is here and there. Very out of place and comes out of nowhere, but also pretty epic I guess. The final boss is pretty meh though; they’ve built a system where it’s impossible to make it actually difficult, so it’s basically just another fight.

Small note: the DLC is basically two extra chapters before the final chapter. So you end up hitting that, and you get voice lines that are kinda confusing (cause they’re written like you’ve finished the game and come back), and then you have that thing where you can tell that it’s DLC and not the main game. Kinda takes steam out of the tension built up to the second-last chapter of the main game, but whatever. The DLC itself is pretty great, but I’d maybe not be saying that if I’d explicitly paid for them and it wasn’t just included with the PC version. Oh yeah, there’s one mission that I loved the premise of but hated in practice, and it’s pretty much the peak mission in the whole game (it’s even the one depicted in the trailer). Basically (major game spoilers, minor story spoilers, skip the whole paragraph), you have to win a series of games at a carnival to get a ticket into a party hosted by your target. Once you’re in, the guards start to catch on, and you have to blend in while they swarm the party. Then your target shows up on a boat for a speech, and you have to kill him, preferably without having the entire city guards notice you. So conceptually, that’s pretty sick really. But there are so many issues with it that completely took me out of it. First, the carnival games. Instead of being bothered to program a whole new system to make this make any sense, you just have to “win” all of the games, two of which are basically just standard side-quests where you’re just competing against a clock or not dying. It completely took me out how the whole concept doesn’t make any sense, like you only get the ticket if you *win* all the games? What if you came second in one? I’m competing against no one though, so there is no second. It just makes zero logical sense. Then there’s the party. It’s pretty good up until the bit where you actually have to assassinate the guy. A character you’re with suggests that you don’t swim across, and instead you shoot him with the gun you just unlocked and do it in time with the fireworks that are going off, so that no one notices, and it’s given in that typical video game character giving gameplay directions kinda way. Great, except the fireworks are just a background sound, and there’s no difference whether you time it right or not. Also, guards get alerted the second you start charging up your shot if you’re not entirely hidden, so it doesn’t even matter. You still get the guards chasing you if you do the suggested method. However, I realised that there was a convenient tower nearby and thought maybe I was meant to sneak to the side of the party and climb the tower and “snipe” him! But no, because the game doesn’t let you target him from that high up. As far as I could figure out, there’s no particularly elegant way of taking him out, especially not without getting the guards on you. It was just so unsatisfying to have this great setup, probably the best in the game, but have it feel rushed and broken. Other than that I rarely had a problem with the story missions, other than the standard few “oh great a tailing mission” moments, but come on man, that’s such wasted potential. [spoilers over]

conclusion What I loved about this game was the atmosphere and jumping around exploring 15th century Italy. That’s followed by the aforementioned badass simulatorage and some aspects of the story. There was very little about this game that I proper disliked other than what I’ve mentioned. It’s an easy game to get lost in, and it’s not as stupid long as most open-world games, so if you’re a little interested, it can’t hurt to give it a shot, I guess. You have to appreciate exploring worlds a lot though, which I do. Zero challenge, so avoid like the plague if that’s an issue. If you want an actual stealth game in a similar setting with far more choice and challenge, you want Dishonored (which imo is the better game, but it’s a different type of game). This game is more jumping around buildings and taking in the world, and oh yeah also you’re meant to be a sneaky assassin. Also would highly recommend using a controller. Avoid playing the Xbox 360 version on backwards compatibility though, because I did that, and apparently, it’s a common problem for your entire save to get wiped at one specific bit. How d’you reckon I found that out? Thankfully, my old PC save was at the right point. Also, Ubisoft protected sexual predators for years :). Thanks for listening to my TEDx Seatle talk.

[identity-matters]

Edinburgh Fringe: My Reviews

I've just come back from The Fringe and these are my thoughts. You can scroll down to see play-by-play reviews but I have a short pre-amble first. Theatre has been a passion of mine for quite a long time so I'm surprised it's taken this long to get up to Edinburgh. On the basis that I didn't know when I'd next be up I took full advantage of my trip and saw as much stuff as I could; and as varied stuff as I could. I like taking risks with theatre because in my experience, for every 3 shit things you see, you see 1 thing that stays with you for a very long time. I've rated what I saw below but it comes with two very strong provisos: 1. These are personal opinions shaped by, among other things: my life; my hopes and expectations of theatre; how I felt during the show and the particular performance I saw. A high grade means I enjoyed it and is no guarantee you will do the same. 2. Everybody who came up to Edinburgh to put a show on is amazing for contributing to the cultural hotpot. A poorer review does not reflect on my views on the people behind it. They are all genuinely great artists for throwing so much into the melting pot. I've given 'A' to three shows, all very different. This is as close as I'll get to giving you my 'pick of the fringe'. * Michelle McManus: The Musical. A great crowd pleaser for lovers of cheese and musicals. * The Last Resort. A dark semi-immersive examination of Guantanamo Bay. * John Robertson (Dominant). Do not go if you are at all prudish or shy, but if you are not this is a anarchic comedy tour de force. With that, on to the reviews: (Monday August 7th) The Dark Room: B+ Comedy based on getting audience members to play an impossible 80s retro text-based game. It had built a cult following - which did not improve the show for first time viewers. The formulaic game portion was surely innovative and hilarious at one point, but now felt like an inside joke with the repeat audience chanting along from the start. That said, the new material and the improvised audience interaction was great and kept it fast-paced and snappy. 5 Guys Chillin': B- A drama exploring the gay 'chill'/sex party scene using verbatim quotes from interviews. This felt like it wanted to be eye-opening and expose a subculture. The problem is that it was exposing a subculture I'm well aware of. I knew the people they speak about and their words. It was certainly interesting and well-acted, but (for me), it slightly outstayed its welcome. This is not culturally significant: D A naked one-man character-driven show that seemed to build itself on the brief 'emotional whiplash: the sketch show.' It seemed to be well-received by many in the audience so it's possible I missed something. The problem for me was that the humour never hit hard enough and the vulnerability felt quite contrived. The actor and especially the technical team were excellent, but the content felt like it was at 60% of what it needed to be to make an impact. (Tuesday August 8th) Briony Redman: B A traditional 'Harold' comedy sketch show exploring screenwriting and modern genres. It was an gentle show, never offensive, often giggly. However, it lacked the bite to be hysterical. None the less, it was sweet and fast-paced and always had something interesting to say. The Canon: B A comedy sketch show based around the literary canon. There is nothing groundbreaking or truly original about this show, but it does present a lot of interesting scenarios and garners a steady stream of laughs. Bonus points for Taylor Swift/Shakespeare mash-up. Shame: B+ A drama about female sexuality told half through vlog and half through live action theatre. This was a really interesting medium that added to the story, made up of likeable but distinctly human characters. The ending packed an emotional punch but the moments leading up to it were slightly too expositionary and fell a bit tepid. Michelle McManus: The Musical: A Actual Michelle McManus from actual Pop Idol puts on a Glaswegian Hyacinth Bucket character for her fictional comedy musical revue. This is a riot from start to end. The songs (ballads from broadway) add to the show and are delivered powerfully and comically. The numbers are linked by an extremely funny and well-delivered performance that surprised a lot of the audience. Evocation: E A retelling of Giraud poems through the medium of gothic puppetry and drone music. This mark may be very harsh, and reflects more my inability to interpret what the hell went on than any mistakes the production team made. It looked gorgeous and chilled me out. It turns out watching theatre has a hard mode and this is it. Reformed Whores: B Musical comedy duo, satirising country and western through sex-positive messages. I like country music and the songs here were definitely catchy. There was a danger they relied a little too strongly on shock humour at times. The biggest problem here was the venue. These are performers that need interaction and raucousness. You're never going to get that in a sterile, small conference room. (Wednesday August 9th) Heroes: B+ A drama from an Icelandic company about how demonising enemies of war impacts young communities. This was well-acted, and the young cast clearly had a great time putting it on. There were definitely scenes in this that had strong impacts on the audience, and this made it well worth watching. However, the characters and fictional backdrop of the play were so one-dimensional and far-removed from reality. I feel like this eroded the social commentary they wanted the play to take on. The Last Resort: A A dark and invasive play, in which you play residents of the recently converted Guantanamo Bay holiday resort. This is excellent and a key example of why it's worth taking risks with theatre. The semi-immersive approach is a great way to make you laugh and relax before the show takes a dark and eye-opening turn. You will feel uncomfortable and you will love it. Oxford Imps: C A standard improv troupe from Oxford Uni. I saw them a lot whilst I was there and enjoyed them, so I went in with high hopes. Despite a few great moments, this was generally a disappointment. Enough of the troupe felt like they were trying to get their own ideas heard at all costs. This made the scenes feel messy and loose because they didn't agree on a reality. Monster: B+ A one man show about toxic masculinity as it relates to domestic abuse. An excellent character actor explains how tapping into unsavoury characters to method act leaks into his every day life. The blurring of all the characters builds into a heavy momentum. There's no payoff here - though I wonder if possibly that's the point. It's an interesting piece of theatre with a great actor but one that feels a little unsatisfying at the end Paul Sinha (Shout out to my ex): B Chaser/Comedian/Former GP performs a stand-up set about the annus horribilis since his partner left him. Stand-up comedy has a different job from a lot of the other work I've seen. First and foremost it's about making you laugh: and the show did that. The audience was in a good mood and the personal anecdotal style kept the laughs rolling. It may not have made me cry, or think, or challenge my beliefs but that's likely beyond its brief. John Robertson (Dominant): A This was billed as stand-up, by a crude and acerbic Australian (host of The Dark Room). In reality, none of it was scripted and instead we got a loose collection of thoughts inspired by the audience and his S&M past. It was a small audience (15ish people) and so all bets were off. Anarchy reigned and all audience members were involved. It was shocking, anarchic and unsubtle but constantly hysterical. He is a master of his work. We're All Going to Die: C+ An ensemble comedy about a group of scientists dying one-by-one on a remote research station. This had a young cast, and I assume this was scripted by them as well. The script was trite and lacked direction or purpose. The constant quipping removed anything but facile humour from what we watched. The characters were all one-directional. That said, it was enjoyable enough. There were some fun one-liners and set ups. It was a perfectly pleasant way to pass an hour. Thief: B+ A dramatic monologue by a queer sailor who puts a brave and defiant face on being forced into sex work. The acting deserves considerable credit here for bringing this complex character to life. In lesser hands this would surely fail, but it was a captivating if invasive performance. The show never knows what it wants to do with the character, though, making his backstory almost comically dark. There is an attempt at moralising at the end that feels a little too neat and tidy. At the end, I left feeling impressed at what I watched, but wondering why I watched it. (Thursday August 10th) Salome: D A one-man production of the Oscar Wilde epic. In typical Wilde fashion the dialogue is clever and knowing and that pulls you through this otherwise ropey production. Production values are low; characters are barely distinguished (Salome speaks falsetto and wears a scarf) and audiences are left questioning whether Salome really needed a one-man production. Kafka & Son: B A dramatic monologue adapted from a letter Kafka wrote to his father explaining his fear. The aesthetics of the play were beautiful and the team clearly had a great deal of respect for Kafka. It was an interesting and relevant biography: I feel like I'll see Kafka's works very differently now. The issue was the content of the show was dry, and at multiple times I found myself looking at my watch. The Odyssey: B+ A highly energetic physical performer reads the story of the Odyssey with pep, gusto and silly noises. The energy and tightness over the whole 70 minute show was impressive and brought a lot of life to the performance. The problem was, I felt like nothing was added to above the story. It brought back feelings of sitting cross legged on the floor in primary school being read classics. It was certainly charismatic and enjoyable but unmemorable. Noose Women: C- A comedy-drama about a TV production company who are convinced by a charismatic cult leader to host a reality show where the prize is death. It was perfectly watchable but a deeply flawed production. The story was paper thin and all drama was resolved within seconds. The central conceit took a back foot to meandering subplots that went nowhere. None of the characters were likeable or consistent; and unfortunately the humour did not make up for it. You could do much better than this at The Fringe.