I wouldn’t be all too surprised if this is largely down to the consumer’s interest and how the demographic is changing as the motocross racer itself hasn’t done much to evolve and keep up within the last fifteen years or so, anyway. Players have changed, trends have come and gone, and for those who fail to keep up they will finish in last place. My thoughts towards this matter seemed rather evident prior to loading up the game.

MXGP 2 is in all shape and form a Milestone game. The game loads up, you’re given the choice of player name, nationality, vehicle and colour schemes, then as Milestone tradition would dictate there’s a loading screen for just about everything and every menu autosaves upon exit. This has been an issue with all of the studio’s previous titles. Loading takes far too long that which follows and the game chooses to save even when no changes have taken place.

"Players have changed, trends have come and gone, and for those who fail to keep up they will finish in last place."

So what does the game offer? It offers the Milestone formula. To those not familiar with the Milestone formula, what this essentially equates to is a breakdown of the following: An emulated racing career whereby you manage a team, race for money, and become the champion. Practice to your heart’s content in what’s known as Free Riding. Compete against time-based objectives within the game’s Time Session mode. And last but not least, Motocross of Nation: play as a real-life racer from your favourite given country and compete against those in simulated, annually events. There’s also an online-mode to take part in if that’s your thing.

All of these modes are pretty much what you would find in Milestone’s other titles, give or take a few tweaks for certain specifics of the game, and all of them deliver enough motivation and enjoyment to keep the player engaged. Motocross of Nation as it stands seems to be the only game mode that’s worth anybody’s time since it’s essentially the only differing aspect about the game when looking to other racers as a whole. Had I been initially interested in the game and my feelings towards it weren’t already decided then I could easily see myself investing a substantial amount of time into the game.

Once I began my first race one thing was immediate clear and it confirmed my initial feelings towards the game before going in: This is a game for motocross enthusiasts and ten-year old boys with water pistols and rebellious attitudes. That adrenaline rush, dirt and stones spitting from the track, rock music in your ears as you rip round corners. Hate to say it but it’s dated. It’s not appealing nor is it niche, it’s just plain, old and boring. The game lacks thrill. It’s deprived of personality and it’s presenting nothing of transition that allows it to feel modern nor accessible. I mean, the gameplay is fine. As one would expect there’s an adjustable difficulty setting for vehicle handling systems; ranking from beginner to professional. Physics play greatly into each of these handling models, since all of the bikes control as they should.

"This is a game for motocross enthusiasts and ten-year old boys with water pistols and rebellious attitudes."

The problem is, it feels exactly the same as those I’ve played in the past and I have yet to witness anything gameplay wise that makes it appealing to those outside the aforementioned demographic. Playing through MXGP 2 had me thinking primarily one thing: Motorstorm: Apocalypse, that was a good game, that needs a sequel. Differing somewhat from the racing style of MXGP 2, but one can see the similarities. There’s a bike, there’s rubble, and there’s motion blur. And frankly, that’s all the average Joe needs to see when his last deciding factor between the two games is one with a five-letter syllable, and the other being a literal translation for “Racing on judgement day”.

For the motocross enthusiasts out there, it doesn’t disappoint. The game offers up a variety of vehicles ranging from 250cc up to 450cc across 40 different manufacturers, and bordering twenty different tracks and stadiums to participate in there’s enough to keep players engaged. Following the tradition that Milestone bring to their titles, players can tweak, customize, and adjust their vehicles ranging from beginner paint choices right up to the enthusiast levels of switching out exhaust systems. This actually lends the game some weight for making the it feel your own and injecting your own sense of personality into the game which it doesn’t inherently bring. It also adds to the level of depth within the game’s vehicle handling mechanics which are in themselves simple enough to get on with, yet detailed enough to appease the hardcore fans.

Since the game also provides a selection of racers to play as all of who are mechanically based on their real-life counterparts, I’m sure the game caters well to those who know exactly what they’re doing and where each of these racer’s strengths and weaknesses lie. Unfortunately, this wasn’t apparent to me during gameplay and this probably has something to do with my personal preferences towards the game itself. There’s no doubting the differences and changes that each rider and vehicle brings to the table, but since my knowledge on such vehicles is the shortest distance of a straight-line between two points, my focus on actual gameplay was tied to the expectation of an adrenaline rush as opposed to the intricate detailing of bike mechanics.

"Playing through MXGP 2 had me thinking primarily one thing: Motorstorm: Apocalypse, that was a good game, that needs a sequel."

To be fair, the game should’ve provided me with this, yet it did not. If it wasn’t obvious enough, this seems to be my primary problem with the game as it’s such a basic and staple feature. MXGP 2 should be thriving with adrenaline, personality, culture, and a “Don’t give a damn” attitude. It delivers none. This partly extends to the game’s choice of music which I didn’t feel had given enough pump or vibe if you will, in delivering sense of immersion that you as the player is actually part of this motocross world and lifestyle.

In terms of the game’s A.I., I couldn’t overlook the unnatural stiffness of the competing riders. While I don’t expect the most absolute best of the best when it comes to animation quality and natural movements outside of leaning and turning, I didn’t feel as though as I was racing with riders that were convincing enough for me to be engaged. They’re fine for the races themselves and the competition is there to keep players on their toes, but the stiffness that the riders brought frankly didn’t do it for me.

"MXGP 2 should be thriving with adrenaline, personality, culture, and a “Don’t give a damn” attitude."

So where does the game stand visually and how does it perform? Well, it’ll do. Expressing this through a filtered perspective of taking the game for what it intends to be and who it’s appealing to, the “next-gen” visuals that other racing titles have brought are pretty much baron here, and truth be told I don’t think its audience will even care. Could it run on an Xbox 360? Easily. Is it available on the Xbox 360? No. And it’s sad to say, but given my thoughts towards the game appealing to ten year old boys which I’m pretty sure that a fair majority of them are still on last-generation consoles, it seems quite strange as to why it’s not available there.

But this is the PlayStation 4 version however, and given that it’s not impressive yet at the same time looks just fine, that’s all that can really be said about it. More crowds? sure. More dust physics? Go ahead. In terms of the graphical obsession we’ve all come to know and love in how many blades of grass can be rendered on the screen, I guess it could be improved. My concern however is frame-rate. Long story short, it’s a racer and it’s not sixty. Nor is it even stable. It’s not game-breaking and the die-hards won’t care, but if this is a concern for those who considered it, now you know.

"The graphical obsession we’ve all come to know and love of how many blades of grass can be rendered on the screen, I guess it could be improved. My concern however is frame-rate."

A great deal of what’s been said about the game may have one thinking I would’ve much preferred it to have been aborted mid-way through development. Not at all. The game is enjoyable, it provides enough replay value within its game modes to keep people entertained, and it plays remarkably well if you take it for what it is. What it doesn’t do unfortunately is deliver enough excitement or motivation for playing it if you’re not familiar with the genre, but are curious in getting your feet wet. Fans will play it and play it, over and over again. But truth be told, there’s no competing game on the market whereby players have a deciding factor to begin with.

Am I going to play this again? This genre thrived during the PlayStation 2 era and hung in there just long enough to entice the release of MX vs ATV: Alive and MX vs ATV: Reflex. Guess we should be thankful that we saw the release of MUD not to mention Fuel for the Xbox 360. So, no. The game is good and fans will take to it but the genre in itself needs some kind of drastic improvement or overhaul if it wishes to remain relevant.

This game was reviewed on the PlayStation 4.

I’ve just got no interest in playing their games. Overwatch, however…it did peak my interest. And now that I’ve taken to the screen and spent a small section of time with Blizzard’s latest foray in to first-person-shooters, I found myself walking a psychological line: “This genre’s going to become very saturated, good luck to them” and “It’s alright you know. If anyone can spice up this pot of flavorless gunk consisting of corridor meetings and crippled FOVs, then it’ll be Blizzard.

"Here’s the what I took away from Overwatch: It’s got a great cast, it plays different yet familiar and it’s full of shooty, shooty bang-bang stuff."

Here’s the what I took away from Overwatch: It’s got a great cast, it plays different yet familiar and it’s full of shooty, shooty bang-bang stuff. But honestly, what stands out the most is colour. I imagine the game’s developers hunched over their keyboards with Smarties and Opal Fruits drooling from their mouths. But coming from the perspective of someone who occasionally dips in and out of this specific space within the FPS genre, it also reminds me of just how much I enjoyed 2K’s Evolve. It’s right there where my first concern of the game lies as it’s highly dependent upon it’s online team-based nature, which in itself is dependent upon a strong user-base. Where Evolve faced no competition in this space during the time of its release, and had successfully maintained the good will of players from Left 4 Dead, it still failed, miserably. “It Is Not the Strongest of the Species that Survives But the Most Adaptable”…evolve or die.

Taking a look towards the strong line-up of upcoming games all of which are of similar nature as well as those currently on the market, the distinction that Overwatch does bring is one I’m largely unsure about. Overwatch is an online focused team-based shooter. Currently it contains twenty-one characters, a handful of game modes, and a small selection of playable environments. The game utilizes a colourful almost cartoonish visual style with a strong sense of personality, and all of this is great. In what Blizzard calls “Heroes” as opposed to character classes, each character within it’s current line-up is ridiculous, wacky, and expressive. While I have yet to find the defining factor of what differentiates a “Hero” from your typical first-person-shooter character class system, I did find each character to be fairly interesting within their own rights.

"Characters are controlled in a manner whereby three out of four from their special abilities are mapped to each trigger as dictated by the gamepad, with the remainder being set to a location on the facepad."

My sense of interest within the game clashes with my concerns for it. For instance, Blizzard has managed to create twenty-one diverse characters each containing their own unique weapons, visual theme, and special abilities. Characters are controlled in a manner whereby three out of four from their special abilities are mapped to each trigger as dictated by the gamepad, with the remainder being set to a location on the facepad. During the course of a match this quartered-off ability will then be unlocked and initiated at the player’s disposal. All of these abilities function on a cool-down basis and despite the large roster they all manage to prove diverse and purposeful to the objectives of the match. The lengths that Blizzard has taken in delivering such a varied and creative system in character abilities and weapons is quite impressive.

However, as varied as they may be and despite the yet to be defined “Hero” system, during my the time with the game I found myself working in the same standard manner to that of any other team-based shooter. You play support, I’ll play attack, he’ll play tank, and she’ll play tactical. And while there’s nothing wrong with this execution I do feel the term “Hero” is little to nothing more than a quick way of saying “Our game has ninjas, assassins, robots, cowboys, and mechanized gorillas. They also have time-powers, freeze-rays, swords, and turrets.” It’s shooty, shooty, bang-bang with two pinches of salt. And to be perfectly honest, I’m content with that. I was just expecting something more innovative when the term “Hero” started to gain traction, as I have yet to save any civilians or encounter any NPCs for that matter.

"Let’s take Tracer for instance and her ability to rewind her position in space-time. This young, quick vixen can backtrack her position on the battlefield in short-quick bursts while dual-wielding pistols."

Let’s take Tracer for instance and her ability to rewind her position in space-time. This young, quick vixen can backtrack her position on the battlefield in short-quick bursts while dual-wielding pistols. She can also fast-forward her position in a similar manner to that of Bethesda’s knife-wielding, masked avenger from Dishonored. That’s teleportation in layman’s terms. While tracer is indeed quick and as intuitive as every other character, she’s also quite fragile. This is where the element of team-based gameplay comes in to action as support roles like Mercy can keep others buffed, while tanks such as Reinhardt and Winston can charge with shields and barriers leaving Tracer to take the offense.

What’s rather unique about this system is that none of the players are confined to a specific class, leaving the strategy of how each team will work together entirely to their own will as they engage in a six versus six battle. Which brings me back to Evolve, not to mention The Division, Destiny and so forth…yes, you need friends. The kind you know and talk too daily that will be willing to invest their time as much as you do your own. While the game does have a narrative or a justification if you will, as to why you’re playing the game, as interesting as it may be it also does well to remind me just how stifled the genre is for creativity when it comes to big guns meets talented story-telling. The focus here is the element of multiplayer but since the game modes at this point in time largely consist of those we’re already familiar with, the narrative resides fairly pointless when you’re simply capturing points of a map or escorting a convoy.

"Blizzard isn’t just building a game, it’s building a universe throughout other forms of media."

This is in fact a shame since the story the game presents is fairly captivating, something which is largely reflected within the maps and levels design which are in themselves quite varied. Long story short: Humans live amongst robots, everybody wants equality, and everybody’s essentially at war -globally. This is essentially every videogame. As mediocre as this may sound where it does prove to be of interest lies within the animated shorts and books that expands upon the game. This is also where I question the long-term support of the game and where I feel Blizzard is really putting in the effort. Blizzard isn’t just building a game, it’s building a universe throughout other forms of media. Frankly, I wouldn’t be all too surprised if they started the development of web-episodes to further maintain the interest of those already invested. Should the game not maintain it’s potential appeal then the support of this expanded universe may not pay off, nor would it be worth it.

Taking a look to the graphical aspects of the game both console versions appear to render completely identical. Going for a stylized, cartoonish quality the game is vibrant with colour and it fits the theme of it’s character design rather well. Performance on the Xbox One does encounter a few minor frame-rate drops, possibly between two to ten at a time. Since the game uses a dynamic resolution scaler the game targets 1080p and sixty frames-per-second for the majority of gameplay, with these few small dips on rare and random occasions these are by no means game-breaking or intrusive. Textures could be a tad more rich and it would benefit from an increase in anisotropic filtering, but honestly it’s fine. It’s not ugly, it’s striking with colour and frankly you’ve got no choice anyway. “Don’t get picky.” Going forward with the game’s release it will be rather thought-provoking as to what changes and additions Blizzard may introduce and what further steps they may take in order to provide a valid reason for player investment.

"The ace in the hole which Blizzard has going for them however is that it’s also targeting the eSports community, and given Blizzard’s quite triumphant in building and establishing a strong and ongoing community, one without a bad reputation I might add, I have faith in the studio being able to accomplish just that. "

I don’t doubt their commitment just inquisitive. I like what I’ve played here but this is a game which requires dedication. It’s intuitive, fun, and exciting but it also requires a strong set of engagement from the player and their team-mates. Chances are if you’ve already grown bored with Destiny you’ve most likely moved on to The Division or Rainbow Six: Siege, and I feel it’s worth bringing reference to these games since the marketing of Overwatch appears to be targeting a similar audience, regardless of any differences within the genres. The ace in the hole which Blizzard has going for them however is that it’s also targeting the eSports community, and given Blizzard’s quite triumphant in building and establishing a strong and ongoing community, one without a bad reputation I might add, I have faith in the studio being able to accomplish just that.

This game was previewed on the Xbox One.

Secondly, consumer demand may well in fact be quite high but realistic expectations for how many people will be willing to part with their cash doesn’t seem plausible, as of yet. Given the officially listed prices for those already available (Oculus Rift, HTC Vive), as well as the expected price for those still to come (PlayStation VR), then virtual reality is largely out of most people’s budgets. 2016? I don’t think so. 2017? More likely. Plus there will be more games available. Having used both available headsets I can proudly say that I’m a firm believer in the technology and the experience it can deliver is indescribable. Do I think they’ll replace TVs? Not in the slightest. Do I think they’ll provide a reasonable alternative once they become standard within availability, technological requirements, and are reasonably priced? Well, given the fact that the technology has mad more strides in the last 4 years than what TVs have achieved within the last, then yes, I do.

"Games. And that’s where my concern lies with the Vive. Oculus Rift is set to deliver Lucky’s Tale, Chronos, and Edge of Nowhere. PlayStation VR is set to have Rigs and The London Heist, with many people speculating No Man’s Sky as an unconfirmed “No-brainer”."

Fact of the matter is, the very concept of virtual reality has provided more avenues for game design and creativity than our typical viewing screens have in decades. Higher refresh rates and increased pixel counts? That’s expected not innovative. Looking back to the launch of the Xbox One and the PlayStation4 while also taking in to account high-end PCs, the most these machines have done is draw more detail onto the screen, nothing that couldn’t have been achieved in the last generation of consoles. We’re still playing poor regurgitations of Gears of War, we’re still relying on retro throwbacks from one-hit-wonder indie titles, and we’re still facing an identity crisis attempting to embrace the qualities found within cinematography. It’s not necessarily a case of a stifled for creativity, it’s more so a case of the available technology limiting what’s viable for that creation.

“Well, what shall we create in this game, given the viewing format of how it’s supposed to be played?”Really and truly, there isn’t one game on this current generation of consoles that couldn’t have been achieved in the generation prior. Anybody can make the case for graphical detail but when you throw all that away, you’re left with the same ham-fisted, mundane game design that we’ve been used to playing on the Xbox 360. Great then, mundane now. Anybody who’s spent even a fraction of time in virtual reality will be able to tell you just how much potential there is for all that to change. Problem is however, it just can’t be described. And if you’ve yet to try it for yourself then it’s quite easy to see how one might write the technology off as just a fad, like 3D televisions. Having spent some time with the final build of the HTC Vive I’m in two minds of how I feel about the product in reference to its competitors.

Now, while it could be debated back and forth as to which of the headsets is better value for money and which of three provides the best experience and most powerful hardware, fact of the matter is the experience will be largely the same across all three devices. If you don’t throw-up, then it works. Given my perspective being that 2016 is not the year for VR, which is largely down to its early adopter price tag and the steep PC requirements, what then is the deciding factor? The same thing that accounts for every new piece of gaming device: Games. And that’s where my concern lies with the Vive. Oculus Rift is set to deliver Lucky’s Tale, Chronos, and Edge of Nowhere. PlayStation VR is set to have Rigs and The London Heist, with many people speculating No Man’s Sky as an unconfirmed “No-brainer”.

"While there’s many more titles on the horizon, some making their way to the Vive, Elite: Dangerous for example, it’s initial line-up doesn’t seem so appealing for gamers, at least."

While there’s many more titles on the horizon, some making their way to the Vive, Elite: Dangerous for example, it’s initial line-up doesn’t seem so appealing for gamers, at least. Tilt Brush, Fantastic Corporation, and Job Simulator. During a recent showing of the Vive I spent some time with a game known as Space Pirates Trainer VR. The game is a first-person-shooter with a neon aesthetic and a Sci-fi theme. Simple enough in geometry and not off the most realistic graphical styling, it plays well and is tailored around that which the Vive is geared towards: Open space. While the game is enjoyable and is largely comprised around shielding oncoming fire from enemy drones while dual-wielding pistols to fight back, the game encourages you as the player to take advantage of navigating an open space. And that right there is where I’m not entirely convinced by the Vive as a viable VR proposition, at this point in time.

The headset by standard is inherent upon the idea of space and while it’s most likely possible to hook up a controller and play as you would do with say, the Oculus Rift, the standard inputs for the device prove to be a blessing as much as it is a curse. The body tracking technique the Vive has opted for via the use of lighthouse posts do work well, and may ultimately prove superior over what the Rift has to offer in delivering similar experiences for the games that make use of full-room set-ups. But given what we know right now as well as the confirmed games being released for both headsets, outside of VR itself I don’t have much faith in full-room gaming experiences, with it being reminiscent of the Xbox Kinect.

Truth be told, I don’t really see a vast majority of people restructuring their lounge or building a dedicated room, especially with the line-up of games and from what I’ve played. Each to their own mind you and personal preferences aside, the games said to be shipped with the Vive are best described as tech-demos and tools for creationists. I have no doubt that future offerings will certainly appease gamers, especially with partnering of Valve. The double-edged sword to this partnering however is one I see potentially hurt the device, leaving it with the public perception of a sub-par experience. What am I referring to? The Steam marketplace. Valve’s curation of what’s considered eligible as a quality product is for lack of a better term, a laughing stock. So too is their customer service.

"The problem resides in the lack of a “Killer App” in order to make the case for what Valve and HTC are hoping to achieve."

Quite frankly, the moment a game releases on Steam, more times than none it’s a race to the end of a bottomless pit with no real care being given as to what’s classified as a solid, fully-functioning product, and what’s just another zombie-themed Minecraft rip-off. It’s two steps away from being a Google Play Store equivalent for PC gaming. And given the open nature of Valve which I do in fact respect, my concerns with a digital storefront for the Vive being anything remotely similar to Steam is one that’s fairly high. There’s three big dogs in this race, two of which are sure to have a loud enough bark when marking their territories. As for the Vive…well, unless they pull of some kind of wizardry and announce Half-Life3, then unfortunately, the cake is just a lie. And let’s face it, Half-Life 3 is not going to live up to expectations anyway, no matter how bad people want to see it.

Am I suggesting that Valve should abandon the full room experience in favour of something more traditional? Something more in-line with the Oculus Rift and its Xbox controller? Absolutely not, we need the differentiation. We need them in order to pioneer the technology. The problem resides in the lack of a “Killer App” in order to make the case for what Valve and HTC are hoping to achieve. Convince me.

We previewed the HTC Vive during the recently concluded PC Gamer Weekend.

Dark Souls 3 on the other hand, well, let’s just say trailers and concept art can do a lot. But with that being said, my expectations for the game other than improving upon its predecessors were fairly quite minimal. So why did I choose to play it? Because I’m a sucker for its artistic design and I’ll support any game which places an emphasis on challenge. Real challenge. The world of Dark Souls 3 is filled with dread, torment and misery, and everything within the game’s environment reflects this. Similar to Dark Souls 2 in terms of it’s overall theme the similarities here are one to be expected. That’s not to say there’s nothing within the games’ world that isn’t new, far from it, but given my limited experience with the series and the fact that this was simply a preview build, it’s best described as familiar territory.

"It’s within the captivating essence of what makes the game so enticing that just so happens to be responsible for turning others away."

Superficial, distressful, and beautifully entrancing. The game also appears to have taken a slight influence from Bloodborne, mixing in architectural elements and enemy design while still remaining true to the original aesthetics of Dark Souls. Journeying throughout the game’s world I encountered many strange and bizarre things. Skeletal tombs, candle-lit hallways baron to signs of life, and gravestones, just randomly placed in the obscure of locations. Offering flames to the memorials of these unknown deceased revealed brief information about the games’ lore. “Raised his sword for the lord of cinder” & “This exile was chased from his homeland, and haunted by a black sun”.

I don’t know who these fallen may be but I did find it intriguing.  I’m sure the Dark Souls aficionados out there will piece these together and no doubt discover a link to other games in the series, possibly including Bloodborne. These warning signs are for the most part scattered everywhere and encouraged me to explore during my limited time with the game. Everyone’s dead. And those who are not, well, they’re just a sack of miserable, deluded hacks who for no justified reason have an unhealthy desire attack you on sight. No one in this world seems happy, motivated, or potent with any sense of life.

They simply march up and down anticipating conflict. And it works well with the overall mood of the game, as every creature you spot from afar looks threatening and cunning, making you think twice to find another route. It’s this feeling of unintentional player choice that makes the game so rewarding while simultaneously risky. Should I choose to fight I’ll feel mighty and powerful, given the possibility I survive. Should I loose however, then I’m left with two other choices: Fight again which is what the game originally intends me to do, then prepare to die again. Or, I find myself an alternative route whereby I’ll inevitably do conflict with someone else. Every encounter I had within the game felt like a win/lose situation. A never ending loop of addictive torment, an enjoyable limbo if you will, and it’s brilliant.

" It’s this feeling of unintentional player choice that makes the game so rewarding while simultaneously risky."

What’s interesting about this system of game design is that it falls directly in-line with the pacing of its combat, which has undergone some slight minor changes. Dark Souls 3 provides four classes to choose from: Wandering Knight, Northern Warrior, Herald of White, and Academy Assassin. While the fourth of the bunch resembled a pot-head dropout from the Assassin’s Creed labours school of performing arts and technology, classes two and three looked just as daft and pitiful as their names clearly suggested. So I left it up to the Wandering Knight to show me the ropes, and thankfully enough he proved to be fitting.

Although each class differs each to their own accord with something unique to offer more specific to their class, the game in general felt far more quicker and on the offense than previous titles. Talking in reference to Dark Souls 2, performing five dodges one after the other while still maintaining just enough energy to perform a strike on to my imposing foe without the fear of pushing my own boundaries. Everything feels more free and enjoyable, balanced in such away where battles still feel challenging and again risky, the game feels accessible while still maintaining its overly used term of a cliché: Brutally punishing. In terms of it’s visual design the game remains true to its predecessors while taking things up just a notch on a technical scale.

Textures are sharper, there’s been an improvement to the lighting system, and environments and characters appear to be just a touch more detailed. Whether or not any of this is improved upon more closer to its release is one that’s doubtful, but it does look pretty…in a horrific way. As this was PC version I previewed the game on, being capped to thirty frames-per-second felt largely insulting. This is something the first game was criticized for, rectified with in Dark Souls 2. Whether this changes or not on release is questionable at this point. But it would benefit greatly given the responsive nature and requirements of its gameplay.

"The game is balanced in such a way where battles still feel challenging and again risky, the game feels accessible while still maintaining its overly used term of a cliché: Brutally punishing."

While my knowledge of the series’ lore is best described as well, non-existent, but as a newcomer to the series I found an enriching sense of mystery to it all. Outside of the games’ combat mechanics which are for the most part unchanged give or take a few new weapons, magical attacks and all-round faster movement, I found this to be one of its most appealing features. Dark Souls 3 is promising, and as someone eagerly looking forward to the game,  ready to sacrifice a good portion of my social life and submit to unfathomable torment of never-ending death, I for one can’t wait for its release.

As of right now my only concern with the game is the frame-rate, as I for one will be making my entry into this world on the PC. And would like to do so without the need of having to wait for a third-party mod, or having to dig through the games’ configuration files in order to unlock it myself. Nevertheless, everything else appears to be on the right path.  It’s funny, Dark Souls is the only game people look forward to where the main attraction of the game is dying, over and over again. To quote Tom Hardy’s stunning performance in The Dark Knight Rises: “You don’t fear death, you welcome it. Your punishment must be more severe”

…I do, yes I do.

This game was previewed on the PC at the recently concluded PC Gamer Weekend.

Now under the watchful eye of Xbox Head Phil Spencer, the company’s new initiative in bringing former Xbox titles to the PC is one that’s welcomed. And with many titles hitting the PC this year there’s one in particular that seems most appropriate for leading the pack. Releasing last year on Xbox One, Gears of War: Ultimate Edition, served as a refresher of the original game as well as providing a taste of what’s in store for Gears of War 4 in terms of visual prowess.

Bringing a horde of new features such as support for 7.1 surround sound, dedicated servers, additional multiplayer characters, and all the DLC from the original, this stands to be the best version of the game yet. And let’s not forget the game’s complete graphical overhaul. This isn’t your everyday, run of the mill remaster. Gears of War: Ultimate Edition has been re-built from the ground up, based on the original source code. The developers at The Coalition have taken things that much further with the PC version, delivering native 4K support and 60Hz gameplay.

Now that we have some history on the game and why it’s so important to the platform, what’s it about? Well, if you want the full scoop read our initial review of the Xbox One version. We delivered a full run-down on its multiplayer, the new and improved cut scenes, bonus features and a brief story flashback, which for all purposes sake remains the same. For the purposes of this article, it’ll be entirely focused on PC specific features. Any PC gamers out there that may be new to the series, here’s the long-story short: You’re Marcus Fenix, a big, bad gorilla-sized soldier imprisoned for disobeying military procedures. Marcus is granted release because you know, he’s big and bad and the locust-infested planet of Sera has reached a breaking point.

So how exactly does it hold up on PC, now that it’s no longer held hostage by the constraints of a console?

The first and foremost interesting aspect is that it’s the first title to run solely on DirectX 12, a next-generation API said to provide low-level, console-like access between hardware and software. To put this into layman terms: Getting thirty frames-per-second in DirectX 11? Play in DirectX12 and you’ll get ninety, in theory.

So, visuals. Our PC sports an i5 3570K, 8GB Memory, and an Nvidia Titan Black. This sits in similar territory as a GTX 970 and 980, bearing this in-mind, one thing’s immediately clear: Epic Games pushed the Xbox 360 to its limits. Fact of the matter is, Gears of War: Ultimate Edition looks exactly how you remembered the original but had someone told me this was a PC port of Gears of War: Judgement with a revamped lighting model and high-res textures, then I would be none the wiser. The improvements are noticeable but they strike me more as a testament as to how good the prior game looked on a much older platform.

Where the game primarily shines is in the attention to detail. Environments are incredibly detailed and characters models are drastically improved. It takes a while for everything to mentally kick-in as to just how good the game actually looks. Marcus is clearly at his best as everything from the textures in his bandanna to the scratches on his armour, all contain such fine detail. No polygonal fingers here and no sharp jawline. Every wrinkle and skin-discolouring around his face are immensely rich and intricately carved. That cliché camera pan while you slow-walk around the game’s environment thinking you’re too cool…it’s worth it.

It’s certainly an improvement over the Xbox One version but that being said, I stand by what I said in regards to the Xbox 360. Had the game launched in 2013 it would’ve held more visual dominance.

A subject of controversy since the game’s initial outing was its change in art direction. The original Gears was dirty and full of grit and it gave the game strength indicating its tone and mood. It also provided visual filters emphasizing photographic techniques. These are now absent opting for a more natural approach. While these aspects of the original game made it so appealing it’s purely subjective.

So, performance. Well it’s clear that throwing more pixels at the screen then relying on Moore’s Law to take care of the rest isn’t going to cut it. Does it reach sixty? Yes. Are the system requirements hefty? To an extent. Playing at 1080p with maximum settings it met its target but stuttering issues and prolonged freezes hampered my enjoyment. These issues were present regardless of graphical settings. It’s playable but it’s also patch-able.

4K was met with mixed results and lowering settings to medium resulted into a fairly decent performance. But with four graphical presets there isn’t much to tweak. Textures have an additional “highest” settings, anti-aliasing is off or FXAA, and the remainders are passable at best. I do appreciate the built-in benchmark though.

Something I am curious about however, is just how much DirectX 12 actually delivered upon given the way the game looks? Had the game been developed with a DirectX 11 option, would performance have been better? Nvidia’s made strides with Direct X11, to the point where I’m willing to bet it would’ve performed just as great.

A larger cause for concern are the stuttering issues within its audio. What happened to that 7.1 surround sound? Well it’s there, it just functions off its own accord. Ironically, there’s no adjustments available within its audio settings aside from music, sound effects, and dialogue.

Here’s the take away. Gears of War: Ultimate Edition has finally come to PC, brilliant. Does it run well? Yes, but keeping in-mind my system specs which are essentially powering through, I can’t say how well the game will perform on lower-end hardware. I will say this though, regardless of the Xbox One version being locked to thirty frames, the visuals on display have clearly peaked the console’s capabilities. If not peaked, then it’s definitely received better optimization than the PC.

Should players decide to install the game on an SSD then the aforementioned stuttering issues may not occur. Maybe it’s down to the the way assets are loaded for the environment, I can’t be certain. But since the Xbox One version also relies on a HDD, the requirement for an SSD is certainly pushing it.

On the positive side, the cover-based mechanics that Epic first introduced in 2006 have not aged at all and they feel great. Despite some saying it feels weighty and clunky, it’s these aspects of the game that made it so unique, none of which were actually noticeable until they were refined in Gears of War 2. Throughout the years there have been countless clones of these mechanics, none of which quite cut it and it’s partially down to the balancing act of challenge versus enjoyment. It’s within these solid gameplay mechanics and ruthless swarms of enemies that allow the game to deliver its full potential when experienced at a higher difficulty level. Gears of War Ultimate Edition delivers on classic gameplay, enhanced visuals, nostalgic resonance and a much welcomed frame-rate improvement.

Welcome home.

Sebastien Loeb is regarded as the most successful rally driver in world rally championship history, placing the man’s name on the front of your box means the enthusiasts have a watchful eye on you. If it wasn’t obvious already this is a simulation-based racing game, and in many instances it’s justified. Milestone’s fascination for the motorcycling scene is evident. Most recent titles such as RIDE and MotoGP 15 are some of their finest.

Transitioning to the area of rally it’s an interesting if not a curious affair as to what the studio will do in order to standout amongst its competitors. Common to most racers the most prominent reason for playing resides within the career mode. Requiring the player’s details such as name, nationality and racing number, the player will also be asked to provide details of their team serving as an avatar within its career.

"Consisting of single stage racing, time trail, championship and rally cross, players can participate in any event so long as they meet the vehicle requirements."

While this is traditional it’s also contradictory to its primary feature: The Loeb Experience. While neither detracts from the other, first impressions have players assuming the role of Sebastien Loeb. This infact remains exclusive to the Loeb Experience. Browsing through the main menu the variety of content is satisfactory at best. Players are presented with a career, quick mode, garage and The Loeb Experience.

Consisting of single stage racing, time trail, championship and rally cross, players can participate in any event so long as they meet the vehicle requirements. Conveniently there’s a rental section should the player be in need of a ride. Once the player progresses and earns enough credits they can visit the dealership. This rental section is essentially a car selection screen and doesn’t require actual fees. The downside however is that credits and awards will not be earned upon completion. Naturally this differs in the career.

The good news is that some vehicles will be unlocked at specific moments in the game, assuming the player has become good enough to participate in these events. The game will always provide a reason to play and will do so without the mundane techniques of grinding for credits or force-feeding an ensemble of poorly developed filler-content. Making things a touch more interesting is Pikes Peak; an international time trail event which pits the player against a harsh and vicious hill climb which Loeb took the championship for in 2013.

"There’s no doubting the enjoyability and the distinctive touch the studio has given in making the game unique, but in a similar manner to recent first-person-shooters it feels like it’s trying its hardest to bore players to death."

Reliving Loeb’s career through certain events that he experienced at specific times in his life, the game literally puts the player in the racer’s seat in The Loeb Experience. Appropriately titled The Early days, A Young Champion, The All-Time Greatest and so on there’s a lot to do, each with their own rules and game modes, all immersive and enjoyable.

In addition, this feature delivers commentary speaking on the highlights of his career. It’s almost as if the game’s paying homage to a dead man who’s still blitzing the track. Nevertheless, gaining some insight on his passion for the sport was interesting. Unlike Forza’s Jeremy Clark who’s oblivious to the fact that he’s outstayed his welcome, rest assure, Loeb doesn’t narrate your menus or bore you to sleep. It’s exclusive to the mode itself and is one of it’s only redeeming features. While all this is great the game itself holds an incredible amount of Deja Vu with an ever-lingering feeling of “I’ve done this all before”.

There’s no doubting the enjoyability and the distinctive touch the studio has given in making the game unique, but in a similar manner to recent first-person-shooters it feels like it’s trying its hardest to bore players to death. There are a few noticeable exceptions but the majority appear to be nothing more than refined regurgitations of the last, give or take a few lighting effects. It’s fine for newcomers and a norm for enthusiasts. One noticeable aspect is Loeb’s favouritism for Citroën. Other manufacturers are available but the game is highly set on delivering the Loeb experience.

"It can’t be stressed enough as to just how claustrophobic the experience can become when it feels as though you’ve had your head duck-taped to the steering wheel in one car, only to be super-glued to the rear-passenger seat in another. "

Thankfully, the range of motors available do span the ages and each one feels authentic. Rally is an intense sport and while the game does well in managing its difficulty, I don’t expect newcomers to feel intimidated nor frustrated. It’s simple enough yet detailed for enthusiasts. As one would imagine, car tuning does hold a fair amount of depth for those willing to invest the time and there’s also an “Advanced Settings” menu to take things further.

The extent to which they’re incorporated is gratifying and proves noticeable during gameplay. While the game has every gear-shift, braking and surface transition feeling authentic, I sense the enthusiasts may be the only ones able to notice. I’d even go as far as saying DiRT Rally is more convincing and this stems from the lack of feedback I obtained from the handling model. In terms of the game’s environments and locations the variety is decent. Whether you’re smooth cruising across the tarmac mountains of San Romolo or skimming the harsh, snowy tracks of Monte Carlo, the locations on offer always deliver challenge.

As stated previously, the game caters to new-comers primarily through the means of preset difficulties and driver assists. But this doesn’t mean the game won’t bruise you when least expected, as the environmental terrain and weathering features go hand-in-hand with player feedback and vehicular control. Now, while the game is for the most part an enjoyable experience it’s not without issues, some quite major.

With such a mighty degree of emphasis and authenticity on delivering such an immersive and simulative experience, where’s the field-of-view slider? While it’s traditional for console games not to include visual and performance options, most recent games as well as upcoming ones do.

It can’t be stressed enough as to just how claustrophobic the experience can become when it feels as though you’ve had your head duck-taped to the steering wheel in one car, only to be super-glued to the rear-passenger seat in another. It’s disorienting and frustrating. The title claims to appeal to the “hardcore” yet, two of the three platforms it’s shipped on fail to incorporate such a basic feature. The game isn’t exactly visually stunning, therefore can’t be technically demanding.

"Visually, it’s best described as “It’ll do”, so I at least expected it to abide by the standards of technical performance."

Which leads to my final point: This is simulation-based rally and that’s great too see but, there was one thing above all that completely hampered my experience. Seen by many as a subject of debate, my ignorance grants me elitism. Thirty frames per second is by no means playable when you consider the fact that anything below it becomes a nausea inducing slideshow. Especially for a racer.

Targeting the lowest common denominator in which people have forced to become accustom to is setting yourself up for failure, evidently. What’s worse? rear-view mirrors update at half the rate as the rest of the game…do the math.

Visually, it’s best described as “It’ll do”, so I at least expected it to abide by the standards of technical performance. PC owners, relax, drool over Fraps until your heart’s content. Did I mention there’s an extraordinary amount of pop-in with vegetation and trees? While some of the tracks faired okay and everything was rendered as it well, should’ve been, other tracks seemed to be random even if they weren’t as detailed or dense. In certain instances it seemed as though someone had crept onto the track and planted magic beans, leaving me to outrun a horde of wild beanstalks.

The comparisons to be had against DiRT Rally are justified. Both titles release on identical platforms during a similar time, people will be playing one or the other, not both. So where does this leave Sebastien Loeb Rally? Well, given a hypothetical situation where the casual player who buys five games a year seeks recommendation, let’s be honest. DiRT Rally is hands-down superior, but Sebastien Loeb Rally emphasizes a world rally champion.

“Which ever one’s cheaper, mate”.

This game was reviewed on the PlayStation4.

While each of its racing competitors are great within their own rights, they seem to be holding a juggling act between being a technical showcase for pushing PCs and stress-testing consoles as well as proving themselves to be a truly refreshing experience, both of which will always remain in the eyes of the beholder. Enter DiRT Rally, it knows exactly what it is and doesn’t pretend or promote itself otherwise. It focuses on one thing: The core rally experience, something of which it manages to deliver throughout its intricate driving mechanics, astonishing sound design and various set-pieces.

"While it may not have the aesthetic flare of games such as Forza or Need For Speed, it’s by no means a slouch. Initial advertisements may not have placed enough attention on the game’s visuals, but as we’ve seen with previous CodeMasters titles: great visuals are expected and received."

So how does the game fare in bringing choice to the race track? Well, its not bad. There’s enough locations and environments on-hand that will allow players to become familiar with the tracks should they favor one over the other, and there’s plenty to choose from should they wish to try something new due to the many choices in terrain and environmental settings. Sweden, Germany, Monaco, Wales, Greece, the list goes on. All of which contain the appropriate weather patterns in reference to their real-world locations. The mists of Monaco will reap havoc on your vision, the blistering gravels and stones of Greece will have no mercy on your body-work, and then there’s Wales…well it’s muddy and wet just like real-life.

It’s also worth mentioning that CodeMasters has promised to support the game long-term by adding free updates consisting of vehicles, game modes and locations just in case there wasn’t enough locations already. Keyword here: Free. If there’s one thing in particular that has to be said about the game’s level design, it’s that it’s authentically disgusting. Sluggish and dull. From the icy, black mush torturing the body of your vehicle, to the sharp and gritty pebbles of Germany’s off-road trenches.

It’s within the game’s level design where the small things are easily appreciated and go hand-in-hand with the realistic deformation and functioning of the player’s vehicle. Scraping trees, slamming into rocks, skidding out of control due to the surface of terrain battling against your every move while you attempt to stabilize your car. It’s also within these aspects where the game’s visual department opens up its doors. While it may not have the aesthetic flare of games such as Forza or Need For Speed, it’s by no means a slouch. Initial advertisements may not have placed enough attention on the game’s visuals, but as we’ve seen with previous CodeMasters titles: great visuals are expected and received.

"The career mode is where players are most likely to spend a great deal of their time as it’s both rewarding and encouraging to player progression, which adheres to the familiar route of race to earn money, spend money to buy cars."

However, as mentioned previously it’s within the small details of the game where appreciation is due. Aspects such as the cracks in a damaged window reflecting light, rubble and dirt staining the windscreen, as well as the smearing of ice across the body of the player’s vehicle. There’s so much within the game’s visual design that allows it to stand-out among its competitors due to the fact it’s a rally game, all of which contribute to making a great deal of sense in reference to the driving experience it manages to deliver. DiRT Rally is the type of game which you show to your mates and say, “Yeah, you knobs! With your Driving Club and your Project Cars and your drizzly rain effects. DiRT Rally has rain, snow, mud and ice. ‘Ave at it!”

None of these locations would be worthwhile if there wasn’t a driving force for motivation, no pun intended. The game offers up a career-based championship mode consisting of traditional rally, hill climb, and rally cross. Completing these championship events and reaching a certain driver’s rank will result in an FIA world rally cross championship being available to participate in. While offline modes consist of largely the same things, this is custom to the player’s preferences giving it an entirely unique experience unshackled by the progression system from the game’s main career.  League events for example, allow the player to create and join PVP events which should have rallying enthusiasts taking to this with passion.

The career mode is where players are most likely to spend a great deal of their time as it’s both rewarding and encouraging to player progression, which adheres to the familiar route of race to earn money, spend money to buy cars. Depending on the player’s experience with rally-based racing games, this may prove to be a pain or a blessing. Upon entering the rally championship players will find a selection of racing tiers to participate in, all with a varied selection of motors to feast your eyes upon. Feasting your eyes is the best way of describing this since this initial stage in the game is but a tease. 1970s, 80s, Group A and B categories, modern rally and so on, there’s certainly enough cars and classes to give the game some strength.

"The game’s physics model is quite outstanding. This is by no means a lesson in rally driving nor should it be labelled the ARMA 3 of racing games, it’s just something worth paying attention to."

The problem that resides in this system is that there’s only one tier to actually participate within and just two vehicles to choose from given the player’s starting budget. Had the game given choice as to which vehicle tier the players may actually prefer and race through within a non-specific order, then the enjoyment would’ve been much more improved.

Given the fact that we’ve been treated to over fifteen racing games in the past two years, myself personally holding Project CARS with the most amount of praise, distinction is a must in order to stand-out against the competition. While DiRT Rally does this better than most by being the only title focusing on one specific genre of racing, I would’ve appreciated the aspect of choice and freedom that Project CARS offers from the get-go while successfully leaving enough room for progression-based gameplay. Nevertheless, it’s not game-breaking and it still remains a solid racer as it does well to encourage the player to push onward with the game.

So how does the game race? In the most simplest form of explanation: As expected. If it wasn’t clear from the title of the game, this is rally. The game does well to cater for beginners but at its core it’s geared towards the enthusiasts. As briefly touched upon, weather effects and environmental terrain do have an affect on how the player drives and will disrupt the functioning of their vehicle should they refuse to learn the difference between its various off-road surfaces. With that being said, the game’s physics model is quite outstanding. This is by no means a lesson in rally driving nor should it be labelled the ARMA 3 of racing games, it’s just something worth paying attention to.

"Whether you are shifting gears or revving the engine, everything from the surface beneath your tires to the sound of the snow brushing up against the bonnet of your car is truly pristine."

What’s unique about the game’s handling model is the way it interacts with the simulation-based nature of gameplay. As the player progresses throughout the game’s career mode a management system will be in place which allows them to hire engineers, upgrade specifics of their vehicles, and tune each of their cars for very specific racing needs. This is featured primarily within the game’s team management system where things are taken that much further with a feature-set, demonstrating the capabilities and perks of each engineer. Some may be tailored towards one specific aspect of a vehicle such as the suspension system or braking mechanism, while others may fare better towards steering and handling or gears and transmission.

As the game allows the player to set driving presets based on their needs, the game also gives way to vehicle repairs at certain points during championship races. The tuning system occupies time and money and depending on what the player decides to apply repairs to, some engineers will do so more effectively than others. During these brief pauses of gameplay players are also informed of the details for upcoming tracks. Aspects such as track length, altitude difference, and variation in terrain are all taken into account. This brings about a great feeling of immersion and is well implemented. Adding to this feeling of immersion but more so in relation to actually racing is the game’s sound design. Every aspect within the game’s use of sound is well-crafted and intricately detailed.

Whether you are shifting gears or revving the engine, everything from the surface beneath your tires to the sound of the snow brushing up against the bonnet of your car is truly pristine. What Dave Sullivan and the rest of the team over at CodeMasters has created with DiRT Rally is essentially on par with that which makes EA’s Battlefield such a stand-out title amongst the competition within its own genre.

"There’s plenty to tinker with within the game’s graphical options and just like prior games it’s fairly straightforward. Anti-aliasing, textures, lighting, ambient occlusion, resolution and so on."

As my experience with the game was done so on the PC, it’s almost a given for me to deliver some insight as to how well the game performs. Much like previous entries from CodeMasters the game runs great as expected and is highly tailorable for a variety of systems. There’s plenty to tinker with within the game’s graphical options and just like prior games it’s fairly straightforward. Anti-aliasing, textures, lighting, ambient occlusion, resolution and so on. There’s enough to play with, scaling is exceptional across many different resolutions and there’s a built-in benchmark to test system performance.

Running the game at max settings and testing at three different resolutions, the results on average were as followed: 57fps at 4k, 80fps at 1440p, and bordering over 100fps at 1080p. While my rig consists of an overclocked i5 3570k, 8GB of RAM, Windows 10 and a Overclocked GTX Titan Black, the initial feedback the game has received throughout the Steam community is positive in regards to their respective systems. If there’s anything “bad” that can be said about DiRT Rally it would have to be something incline to nitpicking.

"The only real problem I actually had with the game is one that’s almost standard to most modern games and if not, then it should be going forward: Photo Mode."

While the choice of vehicles during the starting point of the game’s championship mode may have stunned the first thirty minutes of the game for me personally, this is subjective as some will hate it and others may take to it. The only real problem I actually had with the game is one that’s almost standard to most modern games and if not, then it should be going forward: Photo Mode. CodeMasters has created a beautiful game here, it’s just a shame I can’t snap photos outside of Steam’s screenshot system which I would then add to my Instagram collection. Call it vein, call it appreciation for the game, but DiRT Rally deserves a photo mode. Consider this an enticement, CodeMasters.

This game was reviewed on the PC.

It’s within the game’s formula of being a twin-stick shooter where it sets itself apart from latter, as well as other games of such a commonly used narrative. While the intentions here are mediocre at best, the story is passable since the player’s attention should be entirely focused on its gameplay. Where the game chooses to utilize cut-scenes for specific moments within the game, they are kept to a brief minimum, hoping to place the player back into the action as soon as possible. Given the game’s lack of concentration to its characters and story, this is something I can appreciate.

" While the intentions here are mediocre at best, the story is passable since the player’s attention should be entirely focused on its gameplay."

Right from the beginning of the game there’s a selection of four characters to choose from, and as the player makes their way throughout the game additional characters will be available, each providing new ways of play thanks to their class-based skills. Where Cactus for example comes armed with an assault rifle and a flamethrower, others such as Lemon, Coral, and Holly come equipped with lasers, shotguns, missile launchers and so on. One thing in particular that I found to be enjoyable within these selection of weapons lies within its supercharge mechanic.

Also known as Mega Weapons, it’s function is an obvious one: Destroy your foe, your weapons gets buffed, unleash chaos. Simple yet effective. Had the game not made use of this, I feel it’s safe to say that things would have become rather stale. It has to be said that although my connection to these characters felt limited at best, they should carry enough personality to keep players amused and engaged throughout their experience with the game. Something along the lines of a children’s television show produced by the likes of Cartoon Network is where these characters hold reminiscence.

With that being said, it carries a slight familiar charm to that of Platinum Games’ The Wonderful 101, along with similar gameplay mechanics of Sierra Entertainment’s Geometry Wars 3. Where the former gets away with enough diverse gameplay and exciting action sequences, and the latter to that of a competitive nature with a killer aesthetic design, this game doesn’t quite manage to reach such varied levels of entertainment. Gameplay takes an approach that’s geared towards those who enjoy competition and difficulty. Providing the player with what is essentially two distinct health bars, the first corresponds to the character’s battery pack, which in turn represents the character’s life.

"With that being said, it carries a slight familiar charm to that of Platinum Games’ The Wonderful 101, along with similar gameplay mechanics of Sierra Entertainment’s Geometry Wars 3."

As this battery pack continuously depletes over the duration of gameplay time, the player must remain on top of their game and replenish its sources by defeating enemies. The second being provided to the player is one that I consider to be rather pointless to say the least. Representing the character’s health status, this is where enemies inflict their damage. Should the player be deprived of their health, they can simply mash away at the buttons and respawn to full regeneration, so long as their battery pack contains enough charge. As the game’s progression system works via a series of hubs, each with their own set of levels to take part in, each of these levels contain stages which play-out as a series of horde modes.

Clearing out each of these levels grants access to each of the game’s many boss battles, who then grant further access to the next hub world. As mentioned previously, the game plays out as a top-down twin-stick shooter, and while it’s satisfying to play with a mouse and keyboard, the nature of the game recommends you play with a controller from the comfort of your sofa. It’s not by any means mandatory, but as indicated by the local-cooperative choice of one to four players, the developer’s intentions seem rather clear.

"Should the player be deprived of their health, they can simply mash away at the buttons and respawn to full regeneration, so long as their battery pack contains enough charge."

Although the game’s combat mechanics are solid and provide a fair amount of diversity given the core mechanics of the game being a twin-stick shooter, one thing in particular I wasn’t to keen on was the game’s visual restriction in level design. While the game is by no means bland, it would do well in mixing up its level design in the way how things are played. It’s worth keeping in mind that the core mechanic of gameplay functions as a horde-based, twin-stick shooter, but the inclusion of an on-rails, bullet-hell sequence would’ve been a welcomed addition.

Similarity is too much of a common theme, as the similarities that exist within each level becomes one that’s expected upon entering the upcoming stage. Given the environment of the game is bound to that of a spaceship it would have been nice to see alternative stages, as opposed to just elevators, boarding platforms, and hallways. The game’s aesthetic design is best described as cartoonish science-fiction dipped in a shiny metallic rainbow.

Where the game manages to make use of these limiting environments is done so in a technique that’s actually quite clever. As the player battles against hordes of enemy robots which thankfully are quite varied, the battle stage constantly rotates, shifts, and transforms adding a new sense of space without actually transitioning to a new area. This visual overhaul is appreciated as it attempts to disrupt and diversify the player’s traversal, therefore providing challenge which the player must adapt to. It’s here where the similarities to Geometry Wars 3 prove strong, something of an explosive dance floor that thankfully puts a restriction on the use of dubstep.

"The game’s aesthetic design is best described as cartoonish science-fiction dipped in a shiny metallic rainbow."

Think Geometry Wars with bobble heads. With that being said, the game’s soundtrack is pleasing to listen to. Audio design is of an arcade nature, keeping in line with the tone of the game, which can also be listened to from the game’s main menu. Outside of the game’s campaign mode which in itself does provide enough satisfactory replay value, there’s also a community-based skill mode by the name of Daily Drive, and a challenge-based horde mode known as Infinity Drive, both of which are designed to push players to their limits, applying the pressure and stretching their endurance.

Should the game receive downloadable content within the near future, more of the same would be very much appreciated. Assault Android Cactus is a fun and challenging game, striking the right balance between difficulty and enjoyment. Solid in its gameplay and pleasing on the eyes, it’s great to play solo but it’s clearly at its best when played with additional players. This is where the game hits its high-points and will undoubtedly hold relevance in the time which follows its release.

This game was reviewed on the PC.

If you want to know about the game’s plot and what is happening in the dark London Underground, I suggest checking out our original review of the game here. This review will focus on whether developers have made any improvements in gameplay mechanics and visuals.

"As evident by the lack of graphical settings within the options menu, PC gamers will find themselves greatly starved. Field-of-view, resolution, and Vsync are just about the only aspects of the game that let you know which version you’re playing."

In what is supposedly taking place in modern-day London, the player takes the role of a random survivor in the city and lead is on a spree of errands across the corpse-engulfed city by an unknown assailant on a radio. I did find it strange how all of the escalators seemed to have disappeared in what “appears” to be the London Underground. It’s this lack of authenticity that places this re-release in such a sad state of affairs, and has me wondering as to how well the studio actually pays attention in recreating real-world locations.

Now while it’s fair to counter this perspective just by saying “Assassin’s Creed”, it then makes me question how much effort went into the development of ZOMBI, or better yet, what went wrong? Given the three year time-span of the original’s release, the missed opportunity to adjust the game’s visual qualities to that of a more modern game is a severe disappointment.

As evident by the lack of graphical settings within the options menu, PC gamers will find themselves greatly starved. Field-of-view, resolution, and Vsync are just about the only aspects of the game that let you know which version you’re playing. But since the original assets of the game remain largely identical to its last-generation original, you’d be half-pressed to notice any minimal changes that the game actually offers. To provide a little perspective on how the game holds up to current releases…in short, it doesn’t. While the fun-factor may differ from player-to-player, the technical achievements found it Madfinger Games’ Dead Trigger, easily outweigh those that have been incorporated into ZOMBI.

"Had the developers incorporated additional content along with the graphical overhaul that it’s clearly screaming out for, then it’s existence on the current platforms would’ve felt a lot more justified. This is where Rockstar truly excelled with the remastered version of Grand Theft Auto 5 on PS4, Xbox One and PC."

Taking into account Dead Trigger’s exclusivity to mobile platforms, the performance headroom that has been given to ZOMBI makes it all the more embarrassing to just how vexing it actually is. Among the linear dark hallways of the many train stations and the barricaded streets of Covent Garden that do little to nothing, except to serve as a “Gamey” mechanic that delivers upon that dreaded subliminal message of “You can’t go past this point in the level”, ZOMBI is by all its inherent namesake; dead.

Had the developers incorporated additional content along with the graphical overhaul that it’s clearly screaming out for, then it’s existence on the current platforms would’ve felt a lot more justified. This is where Rockstar truly excelled with the remastered version of Grand Theft Auto 5 on PS4, Xbox One and PC.

Like every other game that makes use of zombies, acquiring a gun is relatively easy when the world has come to an end. The game also contains some interesting jump scares, and if you ignore the fact that it supposedly takes place in London then it does serve as an intense, claustrophobic stumble through the dark and forsaken streets, that’s been littered with the reanimated. This is where the game actually holds strength, it’s grim, it’s gritty, and the tone of the game is present throughout each and street corner and alleyway.

"The only redeeming quality to this resurrection of the game is a 60Hz refresh rate, but even then it is still extremely difficult to recommend since there’s nothing that appears to be improved or even justified for a re-release."

The mood and atmosphere that the game attempts to deliver is infact a great one, the problem however, is that everything feels like a tease. Like a baby in a cot that’s struggling to reach the mobile on high but continues to laugh away regardless, much of the scarce enjoyment that exists within its gameplay seem to root from the technical limitations of its original platform. This begs the question that many PC gamers have been rioting against for a great number of years: What’s with the console ports?

When you have high-end hardware that in many cases can cost as much as a small car, that easily outmatches that which is present inside their console brethren, then the complaints for underutilized hardware and performance being flushed down the drain, clearly stand strong. ZOMBI is an underwhelming port that boasts no real difference from its original incarnation. There’s nothing visually within the game other than a bump in resolution, that makes this is worthy cause of purchase over Nintendo’s.

Textures may be higher but as to how much the player actually notices it or even cares is something I wouldn’t care to wager on. The only redeeming quality to this resurrection of the game is a 60Hz refresh rate, but even then it is still extremely difficult to recommend since there’s nothing that appears to be improved or even justified for a re-release.

This game was reviewed on the PC.

The game hosts six modes of play for their player to participate in: Skate park, Spots Mode, Rad Mode, Daily Grind, Combo Rush, and Career Mode, the latter of which is where the player will most likely spend the majority of their time. OlliOlli 2 is a game that focuses on two major things: delivering challenge and requiring the player’s utmost attention. Although each mode of play differs in their own unique ways,such as daily challenges and leaderboards, completing specific-set challenges, and competing online or locally, the goal of each one remains largely the same: building combos.

"OlliOlli 2 is a game that focuses on two major things: delivering challenge and requiring the player’s utmost attention."

Playing across a 2D side-scrolling plane, OlliOlli 2 is fast, real fast. As the game’s control scheme is heavily focused on the player’s timing and precision in pulling of tricks, chaining them together and then landing safely, which actually requires the player’s input to do so. OlliOlli 2 presents a degree of difficulty that’s fairly reminiscent of older games; 90s platformers to be more precise.

What’s great about this level of challenge is that none of it feels unfair or broken in anyway. As the design of its gameplay naturally encourages the player to move faster and faster as the game pushes forward while requiring the player to remain in control, any fault that the player may unfortunately undergo is strictly down to them failing to pay attention and responding when appropriate.

This does well in reinforcing motivation to try again and become better, especially within the game’s career mode as it’s essentially a requirement due to the game’s objectives, that must be completed in order to progress to the next level. It’s also worth noting that as with all games that place a heavy-focus around challenges and objective based-game modes, the game does increase in difficulty as the player makes their way throughout each level.

"OlliOlli 2 presents a degree of difficulty that fairly reminiscent of older games; 90s platformers to be more precise."

Taking a pixel art approach to its aesthetics, OlliOlli 2 presents something of a temptation whereby, I’d like to screenshot the most alluring level and frame it in the hallway with a panoramic aspect ratio, and feel no shame by my peers as to why I have something so ridiculously nerdy and unconventional on display. The game utilizes bold, vibrant, and neon colours with just the right amount of detail to show of its incredible level design and artistic freedom.

Ranging from many different backgrounds such as city sidewalks to theme parks, and ancient desert ruins to futuristic robotic landscapes, there’s a strong feeling of creativity flowing through each and every level that the player skates through. Combined with such an attractive and visually pleasing design, the game’s soundtrack is one that I’d gladly give my recommendation to. Which is actually plausible since it’s available for download on both iTunes and Google play. Many times when I lacked the concentration to play, I would accept the many fails and falls I would endure during gameplay, just to listen to something that was both moving and peaceful.

There’s two things in particular with OlliOlli 2 that I found to be the most captivating aspects of the game, both of which serve as a magnificent throwback to the 90s era. The first of which is the ungovernable and lawless attitude of the culture that surrounds skateboarding. Throughout the mid-90s and up until now, many skateboarding games have come and gone and while some have attempted to do new things in-terms of gameplay mechanics, the vast majority have been iterations of the infamous Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater series.

"The sense of difficulty is prevalent throughout every ramp, hill and grind rail within the levels of the game."

The second that comes to mind is the aspect of challenge that separated the boys from the men, amongst the frustrating yet enjoyable 2D side-scrollers that ruled the early 90s. While Super Mario is clearly the first that the majority of us would think of, those such as MegaMan, Ninja Gaiden, Battletoads, Castlevania and dare I say it…Sonic The Hedgehog all succeeded in delivering an immense amount of challenge. Where some placed a higher emphasis on tight platforming and dealing with enemy attacks, others added an element of speed that would either accelerate the players adrenaline or unfortunately damage the playability of the actual game: Sonic The Hedgehog.

OlliOlli 2 is reminiscent with all of the above as it places a strong emphasis on the player having to keep up their speed and maintaining momentum in order to make sure its platforming is achievable. Blending this well with an interesting control scheme whereby the player has to press and hold different button configurations, so that every single movement their character will make is in-line with how well-perfected their tricks and landings actually are. The sense of difficulty is prevalent throughout every ramp, hill and grind rail within the levels of the game.

"OlliOlli 2 is the illusion of simple that’s worth the appreciation for everything it sets out to do and so gracefully accomplishes."

Although the on-screen button layout is strangely displayed in reverse and recommends to be played with a controller, the game can be played with a mouse and keyboard, and the former of which is nothing to cry home about. Since none actually came to mind, the only real problem that I can actually see with the game is something I had to scrap long and hard for from the bottom of the barrel, examining the game through a looking glass of lies. How would a possible sequel manage to take things further and prove to be more enjoyable than what’s been delivered upon here? Roll7, surprise me.

Brutal? No. Punishing? Not in the slightest. Difficult and demanding that drives you to play on and master everything it has to offer, while consistently throwing out new objectives and combo-chains while playing an exciting soundtrack that will have you pausing the game ten minutes in, so you can go off and purchase it? Yes. OlliOlli 2 is the illusion of simple that’s worth the appreciation for everything it sets out to do and so gracefully accomplishes.

This game was reviewed on the PC.