GRID Autosport -- Review (PC)

Released: 2014. Developer: Codemasters.

In 2008 Codemasters released their first instalment of the GRID series with Race Driver: Grid. In 2013 they released GRID 2. It took 5 years to develop a sequel to the first Grid yet, in 2014, GRID Autosport has already arrived as a sequel to GRID 2. The fact that it took roughly 1 year to develop, then, makes GRID Autosport feel like a bridge between worlds; something to fill the void until Codemaster’s next big title. It is, after all, the third game of the series on the same hardware. The visuals are roughly the same and the gameplay philosophy remains mostly intact. PC gamers are generally starved of big racing titles (no Forza or Gran Turismo games for them) so Autosport is probably a welcome addition to a sparse library of racing games. Autosport is, however, otherwise unremarkable compared to what went before.

One of the more noticeable and key aspects of modern racing titles is their visual fidelity. Sure, intricate gameplay and depth are also important, but racing titles are – by and large – major showcases of what gaming hardware is capable of. Lush vegetation, highly-detailed tarmac, 3D crowds, detailed trees that flow in the wind, leaves blowing off the tracks, and – of course – the hot waxed beauty of gorgeous supercars all help to encompass racing games as benchmarks of modern technology. Autosport, in this regard, ticks all those boxes and looks incredible. The lush beauty and misty air of the Hockenheimring is excellently contrasted with the sexy and stylish roads of Paris. The variation in tracks and locations helps keep Autosport fresh and varied. The selection of cars is intended to suit different track designs too, with touring cars for professional circuits and tuned street cars for night time city racing. Tearing up the roads of sunny Barcelona in the majestic McLaren F1 never felt better. The overall amount of tracks and cars is impressive, though it is unlikely anyone but the most dedicated will grow to appreciate such depth. Indeed, because Autosport is the third instalment of a series spanning roughly 6 years, the game suffers from diminishing returns.

Autosport offers several driving disciplines, each with its own career progression.

By their very nature racing games find it increasingly difficult to evolve. The core concept of racing – especially in the context of a ‘serious’ racer like GRID – can only ever be expanded upon until realism is reached. All that is left is visual upgrades, new cars and new tracks. The obligatory levelling system and perks can be added to keep-up with modern trends, but it was always going to be challenging for Autosport to innovate when GRID 2 came out just over a year ago. Developers can occasionally revolutionise with great ideas; Autosport was never destined for that fate. This in mind, it is difficult to suggest the visuals and gameplay in Autosport are worth seeing when playing GRID 2 is just as feasible and will yield the same results at a lower cost. Autosport may as well be viewed as an expansion pack. A full RRP expansion pack, it is worth adding. If you hammered GRID 2 and need more tracks and new cars – and have money to burn – then Autosport is ideal. For everyone else, though, Autosport serves as nothing more than an overpriced quick cash-in game for Codemasters to fund their next big title.

The best position to be in as a potential buyer of Autosport is to have not played GRID 2 at all. In that regard, players can appreciate the actual advancements Codemasters did add once upon time. The ‘flashback’ system is still one of the most innovative features of modern racers and helps counter the age-old frustration of losing a 20-minute long race because you crashed right before the finish line. The Forza method of letting players add or remove driving assists is also welcome but, again, is not unique to Autosport. For example, the amount of flashbacks available can be reduced to increase experience gains, or racing lines can be turned on to help newbies ease into this semi-hardcore racer. Races themselves, too, contain mini-objectives to keep the player engaged, with specific rivals to beat and teammate coordination encouraged. Moreover, the fact that a racing game – on the PC of all platforms – contains a split-screen mode is still commendable. Neither innovative nor unique, split-screen gaming is nevertheless an old tradition that should never be abandoned – something Codemasters deserve credit for. All these features, that were once unique and refreshing, are still great additions to any racing title, but their effects in Autosport are diminished. What made previous GRID titles great now makes Autosport functional at best. Solid, but functional. Even so, while Autosport retains all of the best elements of previous titles – and of most other modern racers – the persistent flaws that were present before have still not been dealt with.

The in-car view makes a return.

Upon this review of the game Autosport has been out for a few weeks or so. Yet, despite that, there are numerous issues surrounding the game from corrupted save files to bizarre online shenanigans. One glitch sees AI drivers failing to set-off from the starting grid which leaves players stranded on a never-ending result’s screen, ultimately unable to complete the online custom cup/events competition. Furthermore, the online balancing of players and cars is massively out of sync, with new players almost always racing against players with more skill and better cars. Lower levelled players cannot access car upgrades until they are at the required level and have enough money to purchase such upgrades, therefore they are typically at a huge disadvantage when Autosport matches them against higher ranked players. Meanwhile, GRID 2’s damage indicators return to show players how good or bad you race in relation to smashing their doors in, but clearly this system was not deemed radical enough. Indeed, Autosport now charges players in-game cash for damage caused. The problem with this approach is that, typically, crashes happen as a result of general gameplay; players can end up paying out huge costs even if they race fairly. In all, the online component of Autosport feels rushed and underdeveloped. Worse still, weeks have passed since Autosport’s release yet there appears to be no news of patches or fixes for these annoying bugs and imbalances.

There are more general flaws, too. For one thing, the career mode still requires far too much grinding unless you are able to race without any assists turned on (in which case, good for you). There is still no licensed (or any) music to listen to when racing (engine sounds are great but the option of music would be nice). The difficulty leap between medium AI drivers and hard AI drivers is ridiculous – there is no middle-ground between too easy and too hard. Furthermore, the gameplay still feels like it does not properly reward the best driver; someone can crash and bounce off walls but as long as they have a faster car they can still win. The latter issue was more pronounced in GRID 2 and is noticeably better in Autosport, but the game still lacks the finesse and grace required to elevate it to the pantheon of truly great racing titles.

The game looks great, but has not advanced beyond what GRID 2 had already established.

What keeps GRID Autosport in (mostly) high esteem is the fact that not many mainstream driving games exist on the PC. Had Autosport to contend with Forza Motorsport, Gran Turismo or Driveclub then its inability to evolve or fix existing issues would probably be all the more worse. As it is, Project CARS or the next Need for Speed appear to be its only potential rivals in the coming years. Regardless, the insistence of a full retail price for an otherwise glorified expansion pack is something Autosport can rightly be criticised for, with or without competition. A single year’s development cycle was never going to amount to much beyond what GRID 2 already offered – that much is abundantly clear to anyone who plays Autosport for more than an hour. The content is, indeed, fine but does little to inspire amazement. The cars and tracks look and play well, and there is enough to do until the grinding gets too much, but the retaining of existing flaws from previous instalments, as well as a near-abandonment of its online functionality, leaves Autosport as a rather disappointing, if somewhat functional distraction until Codemasters’ next big racing title arrives.

6/10

The Chronicle

Hi all.

So I am writing another post to outline the name change of my blog and update the reasons why it exists.

Firstly, Inta Wild was just a daft name I used because of its uniqueness and because, truly, I do not think I had any real belief that the blog would ever ascent beyond the ramblings of myself in-front of an entire audience of, well, myself. Of course, the blog still has not risen beyond a place for me to write about stuff that nobody else particularly cares about, but Inta Wild was/is just a painfully stupid and non-useful name for my 'site. Croft's Chronicle is, to be honest, hardly much better, but it was the only title I could conjure-up without stealing the name of someone else's website. Maybe I'll change it again should inspiration strike. I would also like to have the page header look smoother and blend with the orange background but the picture formatting on Google's blog kit-set is piss poor, to say the least. It'll have to do, for now.

Secondly, the reason Croft's Chronicle exists is for more-or-less the same reasons as it did before. It is merely an online space for me to vent my views and opinions whilst also archiving my written work. When I first created this blog I was intended to use it purely for leisure, but now - as a student of history at Teesside University - I would like it to serve as an online portfolio of my writing abilities. It can serve as a catalogue of my time as a novice writer before college and university and, also, as evidence of how those institutions have improved my writing and research skills as I move into my third and final year at university. In short, then, Croft's Chronicle is a chronicle of my written works; a place for those interested to see what I can offer. Otherwise, the blog will also continue to be a place for me to talk drivel and to have fun.

And that, as they say, is that.

"Remember to never cross the road until the little man turns green" - Sergeant Moue, Broken Sword and the Shadow of the Templars

Why Mass Effect 3 typifies everything wrong in gaming

Old News is Good News

This was a post I had written around when Mass Effect 3 came out, but never published. Not sure why. Anyway, here it is.

Since the original Mass Effect arrived on the 360, gamers and media alike have conveniently ignored what BioWare are capable of and almost-universally gushed over a mediocre third-person shooter with RPG-light elements. Of course, anyone who has played the brilliant Knights of the Old Republic for any length of time can immediately deduce that Mass Effect was not of the same quality, in any regard. Bad, clichéd writing, laughable dialogue, and combat that can - and is - bettered by guff like Syphon Filter on the PS1 leads to a space experience, quite frankly, not worth having. The awful B-movie dialogue, sloppy pacing, and general throwaway cinematic experience remained intact for the sequel, but the actual game side improved in Mass Effect 2; combat was tighter, glitches less frequent, graphics were cleaned up, and side-content was actually worth completing for fun, rather than for the necessity to achieve 100% completion.

A lot has seems to have changed since Mass Effect 2 and the recent release of Mass Effect 3. Sure, day-one DLC and pre-order incentives were around - and employed - by EA for Mass Effect 2, but with the third game the whole concept of the aptly named 'ripping-consumers-off-as-much-as-possible' is in full swing. There has been a common news story doing the rounds saying how your Mass Effect 3 experience is not 100% content filled unless you are willing to fork out £200+ for all the extra DLC deals, pre-orders and such. Of course, day-one DLC exists already on the disc, and requires a small download (see: unlock key) to access, but this is seemingly fine and dandy in today's gaming society. A few gamers complain, but are eventually drowned out by the mindless festering cretins that populate this medium - as long as you can have sex with blue aliens (as long as it's not male gay sex; heaven forbid!), shoot robots while you clumsily move from cover-to-cover, and convince yourself the story isn't grade A horse manure, then all is good for gamers.

Cutting-edge and deep narrative in full swing during Mass Effect here.

But all this is just a standard affair for gaming developers/publishers these days. Every other week Capcom are doing their best to ensure as much content is ripped from their discs, then released as extra premium content to stuff their wallets further (with little protest from the media, obviously). However, with Mass Effect 3 BioWare and EA have gone on further. Ignoring the ridiculousness of people actually taking Mass Effect's narrative seriously, the ability to deliberately input a fake ending in the knowledge that fans will clamour and - more importantly - pay for a 'proper' ending is a sound strategy to employ. Immoral, and utterly utterly fucked-up, but sound.

Amusingly, if something like this happened in the film industry, or with music, or TV, the sheer absurdity of it would render the makers of such content a laughing stock and - most likely - bankrupt within a working week. Hey, here's a new season of Mad Men! We'll give you 4 episodes as usual, but if you want to see the rest you'll need to pre-order the DVD from Amazon for episode 5, and Play for episode 6. Also, the season finale is bullshit, but if you give us an extra £15 we'll happily fix that for you and release a small premium update to give you the proper ending! (Note: I believe the 'ending' DLC for Mass Effect 3 was free upon release, but my argument about charging for everything else remains valid. In fact, if I were a betting man I would suggest that my prediction of a 'paid-for DLC ending' is not far off, especially from the likes of EA. Maybe a possible avenue for Mass Effect 4?)

I mean, really? Are gamers that idiotic? Really? I wish I didn't part-take in this hobby so much. I wish I could disassociate myself with this gaming trend. But alas, I still love gaming. More fool me.

Gone Home -- Review (PC)

Released: 2013. Developer: The Fullbright Company.

It is becoming increasingly easier to look at contemporary gaming at face value and bemoan the lack of inspiration. Indeed, the apparent obsession with ‘Triple-A’ titles – with shooting, with killing, and most other elements that are usual relevant within Halo or Call of Duty – does little to endear gaming to a larger audience (beyond young males, in any case). However, no matter how bad things look, no matter how many violent shooters are premiered at each year’s E3, there are always games out there that can restore our faith. There will always be games that remind us of why this medium can continue to inspire and excel without being constrained by big publisher requirements. Gone Home is one such title.

Because Gone Home is an indie title it does not need to adhere to the ‘guaranteed sales success’ formula of larger games. Of course, Gone Home is not unique in this regard; indie gaming is probably the strongest it has ever been for a long period. However, Gone Home is worth particular attention because of its unique draw, and the way in which it executes this unique element through the narrative and gameplay structure.

Your journey begins here.

Essentially, Gone Home can be broken down into a game about audio-logs, letters, notes or anything else of that nature that you would typically collect in other games. The Last of Us leaves scribbled notes scattered throughout the world to add context to Joel and Ellie’s adventures. BioShock, meanwhile, utilises audio-based devices that relay character’s thoughts through vocal expression. A large portion of games employ these ‘extras’ in attempts to add further layers to the environment and atmosphere experienced by the player. Where The Last of Us or BioShock centre around exploration, puzzles and combat, and relegate letters and audio logs to extras, Gone Home instead shuns the conventions of combat or mechanical puzzles to focus primarily on letters and notes.

The player takes the role of Katie Greenbriar, a young American woman who is returning to her family home after travelling around Europe. The house is empty when Katie arrives and so she must explore the mansion to figure out where everyone is and what has transpired. In this respect, a mere crumpled note discarded in a bin is effectively Gone Home’s bread and butter. Reading month-old correspondence between Katie’s mother and her workplace is your main purpose, for there is no combat and no puzzles here.

Each room presents new information to progress the narrative.
Such information can take the form of notes, discarded letters, and other objects.

A routine quickly develops after you acclimatise to Gone Home’s structure. You will open a door to an unexplored room, search for a light-switch, and begin scrutinising the surroundings. Almost every item and physical thing can be interacted with, no matter how mundane or completely pointless it may seem. Draws, cupboards and fridges can be opened and shut; pens, cans, cups and books can be lifted and thrown; you can also put tapes into cassette players or listen to vinyls played on record players. Such depth is appreciated but the game never manages to achieve that feeling of the home as having being lived in, mostly due to its rigid videogame ascetic. Furthermore, the calculated placing of notes and relevant items was always going to look beyond the realms of plausibility due to the nature of the game. It is much easier to organically place notes and objects in games where they serve as extra context setters. Gone Home, though, necessitates that the player must see and interact with relevant materials and so their placement is more awkward. This awkwardness certainly shows throughout.

Gone Home is set in the 1990s, and in that regard it feels wholly authentic. From the grunge-rock music Katie’s sister, Samantha, listens to on her cassettes, to the lack of mobile phones and reliance on using typewriters for sending letters, the aura of the ‘90s is exact. Of course, being set in such a period also allows the developers – The Fullbright Company – to remove the obvious solutions access to the internet would otherwise provide, should such an event occur today. Weirdly, the lack of internet provides an eerie sense of freedom, but also fear, another theme the game undoubtedly revels in. The rooms are mostly dark before you switch the lights on and the mansion itself is very old; the floorboards regularly creak while the thunderstorm outside ensures you remain constantly anxious. The atmosphere is, in this regard, well developed.

Gone Home relies on charm and '90s trends to add colour to its setting.

Of course, all of the developer’s efforts put into the design and layout of the mansion, the amount of notes, books and letters, and the atmospheric tension would be for nothing if the central narrative itself was weak. Indeed, the very design of Gone Home constitutes that the story must be of good quality or else the whole game falls flat. You would be, essentially, playing a game about reading fictional notes and opening virtual cupboards for no other reason than gameplay. If that were the case then Gone Home would be a huge waste of 2 hours and a chore to play. Fortunately, the layer of care and attention put into the narrative along with some excellent writing ensures that the experience is worth it. The writing successfully sets out a gripping and believable story, one with characters that you grow to care about despite the notion that you might never meet them, and one that deals with mature issues in a way that other games would – and do – cause embarrassment over. Furthermore, the voice acting ensures that the writing is effectively delivered with the voice actress for Samantha being particularly superb. Samantha’s voice can be heard when you discover relevant letters, notes or objects. The genuine emotion in her voice and delivery of her lines makes each extract a treasure to behold. Hearing the next chunk of Samantha’s diary serves as the core incentive of Gone Home’s progression; her dialogue is poignant enough to ensure most will play to the end. The Fullbright Company also ensure that each written piece of information oozes with levels of believability and charm: Samantha’s school essays with little doodles, formal letters with business logos and professional wording for dad’s work correspondence, and fancy joined-up writing with flower-laced borders on a letters from a friend of mom’s.

Gone Home is a game about reading notes and piecing together a large jigsaw. It is ultimately successful in this aim through a gripping narrative and an undeniable layer of charm and passion evident within the game’s many notes, letters and diary entries. A mechanical and rigid ascetic – which lends itself to Gone Home’s chosen engine – somewhat dampens the allure of the game, as do instances of design that are not natural or believable. Nobody would ever leave notes of relevance scattered in such a manner that they could only be discovered in a certain sequence (unless they were being facetious!), and let us not even get started on combination locks. Regardless, as a game about collecting letters, notes and physical objects – as its primary driving force – Gone Home could have been a disaster. Good writing, superb voice acting, and excellent attention-to-detail, however, ensure that Gone Home stays long in the mind even after reaching the ending credits.

8/10