Different mobility systems accomplish different things. Mirror’s edge has a great mobility system relative to the level design of the game, much like Mario 64 does for those levels, Tribes needs a large hilly landscape to really work out, where Quake/Half Life/unreal tournament has one that works for nearly anything.
Everything well designed in games is a microcosm of the trends that create depth. It’s about how many elements of the system remain relevant and non-redundant.
Also interesting to note is the way that movement mechanics can have synergy with other mechanics, like in the case of FPS games, shooting. Mirror’s Edge, Quake, and Half Life all have very poor synergy with shooting, because they all require you to aim your mouse precisely to move fast, either because mouse movement itself controls your speed, or because you need to look at environmental objects, like walls, or the cursor’s position is affected by the movements. If you want to move fast in these games, you need to make a choice between moving fast or shooting accurately, though you can switch very quickly and in half life/quake’s case, you can make occasional shots without losing speed. Unreal Tournament and Tribes by contrast have very strong synergy between advanced movement and shooting. Unreal Tournament allows you to dodge in 4 directions regardless of your mouse orientation, so you can usually dodge around in the middle of a fight without requiring you to stop aiming. In Tribes, you carry your momentum forwards, leaving you totally free to aim while moving fast. Gunz is another good example of this, with movement controls similar to UT, allowing players to focus their fire on their opponents most of the time, especially true given the weapon of choice is shotgun, which gives you a bit of time between shots to look away for advanced movement purposes. Imagine Quake bunnyhops with UT dodges. Fast elegant cross-map movement with viable dodging during firefights. Someone should make that combination, I’m amazed Toxikk didn’t see the opportunity.
Smash Bros Melee, and especially Project M, have an awesome system of interlocking relationships between their movement techniques. Everything has different levels of commitment, range, speed, utility, leaving a ton of tradeoffs. Project M has a few techniques like reverse aerial rush and B-reverse that fill in some gaps Melee left behind. Though crawling is just plain fucked up, especially on Sheik who has an even lower crouch than in Melee.
I’m hoping to make a video on Mirror’s Edge’s movement system in depth in the near future, that should illustrate a bit of what I’m talking about.
Yes. Absolutely. It’s easy even. Just make a game where you need to do something that highly skilled people have trouble doing consistently multiple times in a row, like pressing a button on a 1 frame window, also releasing it on that frame, like 6 times, spread semi-randomly across a second. This is an extreme example, but it’s not hard to imagine more concrete ones.
On a more practical level, games need scaffolding for players. They need a difficulty curve for practical reasons. You can’t start someone off on the hardest combo trial, you gotta have them build their way up.
This is part of why depth is nice, because in deep games, there are a lot of ways to succeed. This means that if you can’t beat a challenge straight up, you can try it from another angle. Maybe you’re winning neutral a lot, but your punishes are really weak, so you can step that up. Maybe you’re not using your healing items as efficiently as possible. Maybe you’re taking too much damage in your focus to output damage. Should try the route on top versus the bottom, could try pressing the buttons a different way. This allows people to succeed at small things, even if they can’t beat the overall challenge, they can still see that they’re making some kind of progress, and there’s significant variation between each time they attempt.
Even back in the combo trial example, because combo trials don’t really have any depth if you consider them by themselves. They’re a straight up, do this really hard and specific thing, or you fail. If you just hand someone the hardest trial, they’re going to have trouble with even the first cancel or loop. If you work your way up through the trials, then it builds your skill, allowing you to begin tackling the harder ones, or even do better at combo trials in other games.
Probably the real mistake isn’t making something too hard, it’s not placing anything easier around it.
But you know it’s gonna be a ton of adventure game + collectathon bullshit. That was one of the things I hated about psychonauts, the very deliberate telos of everything. You have all these figments you can collect in people’s minds to level up, cool. You have all these arrowheads you can collect to buy items, cool. Then they place barriers in your way that absolutely require these things. You NEED the cobweb duster, because certain cobwebs are completely impassable. You NEED the arrowhead finder, because the cobweb duster is so damn expensive (okay, this one is a bit less of a need). You NEED invisibility to get to Gloria’s dressing room, which means you NEED to collect all these fucking psi cores and figments to level up. It’s like no elements of the game are allowed to overlap in any way, everything that can be done has one strict way of doing it, a key that opens the lock. This means that rather than the collectathon bullshit being something additional, like hey, you unlocked the ability to launch enemies from afar, now you can juggle them with ranged attacks, now you have this crowd control ability, now you can zip forward, things that are nice to have and don’t totally overshadow the existing mechanics, but aren’t strictly necessary, you instead have these abilities that will do this one lock-and-key thing for you that you gotta have or this section is impassable. Screw that shit.
This is old writing I dug up from a long time ago, posted only to twitlonger. I mentioned in my other Shadow of the Colossus post on here how I had sworn I wrote something but couldn’t find it. Here it is:
Ico was completely lame and Shadow of the Colossus had a way better more interactive formula. Ico was lame because it was static. Ico’s gameplay challenge was primarily based on solving puzzles, fighting shadows, and escorting Yorda. Shadow of the Colossus’s primary challenge came from the scaling of the colossi, and exploring the world to find the colossi.
In Ico, Yorda is used as a key to open doors, so all puzzles require that she must make it to the next door. The primary hurdle with the puzzles is getting an AI companion to pass by various barriers when they have less movement capabilities than you do, only being able to climb up short ledges. So you must work to create paths the AI can traverse to get them to the next door. The solving of puzzles, rather than requiring actual logistics is more frequently a process of having Ico climb to the next point of interest along a relatively linear path and activating the thing that moves the game along, then dragging Yorda through to the next area. In a very zelda-like fashion, progression is defined largely through activating things rather than actually having to solve interactive systems, like portal, braid, or trine. Predictably every single puzzle consists of leaving yorda, navigating the environment, and activating something to let Yorda progress past a road block.
The other point of conflict is fighting shadows. Shadows are constantly attacking Yorda and Ico, and attempt to kidnap Yorda, dragging her into a portal. If this is successful, the game is lost. In most sections of the game, the shadows can be ignored by running past them. In others you are actually forced to fight the shadows, which is a complete slog. You only really have one attack, done by pressing square. when a shadow hits you, you get knocked down and have to sit through a lengthly getting up animation. In general, fighting shadows is not fun, it’s completely tedious. You thwack at them with your one attack, and they have tons and tons of health, having to be knocked down multiple times to actually defeat them. This isn’t dangerous nearly so much as it is dull and grindy. The enemies don’t have a lot of health to force you to attack right and efficiently to take them down, they have a lot of health to draw out the process of fighting them. The worst part is that in some sections you are forced to fight them and are not allowed to progress until they are all defeated, in which case they are made annoying by skittering off into corners and avoiding you as frequently as they attack. This is especially irritating in the late part of the game where you obtain a sword that can destroy shadows in one hit and they avoid you.
The biggest trouble with Ico is that the game has absolutely no flexibility. There is one way to solve every puzzle, there is one path to the next area, there is one attack that you spam. The game has a much larger focus on the environment and the idea of characters holding hands than any of its actual gameplay. I dare say that the concept of design for the game is outright unsalvagable, because no combination of the game’s existing mechanics or new mechanics could really serve to make the game interesting short of changing it into an action game. The game is gratuitous with its scenic vistas to the detriment of the game itself. It loves unskippable filler content. The AI that controls Yorda is unresponsive and has to be yelled at to get it to move anywhere by itself in any reasonable amount of time. The entire game gets no better than this. The level design doesn’t improve, the puzzles don’t get harder, the enemies don’t vary,
Speedruns are rarely an indicator of the quality of a game, because different pressures and dynamics generally apply, but they can frequently be a good tell. This is the Ico speedrun:
This speedrun is pretty notable among speedruns just because of how closely it follows the game’s original route. Minor tricks like jumping instead of running are employed in many areas, but largely, every single player to ever play this game will repeat the exact same actions as this speedrunner, only with more fumbling around trying to figure out the topography of their environment. This speedrun is a complete testament to the inflexibility of the game and the dullness of trying to play it. Ico isn’t a game based on interaction with your environment, it is a game based on participation with the route they want you to take.
And here’s the turnaround, Shadow of the Colossus is the opposite, a legend stepping out of the shadow of failure. In Shadow of the Colossus the primary gameplay segments are exploring the world on horseback, and scaling colossi to stab their weakpoints, killing them. You start every colossus hunt at a temple in the center of the world, use Agro, your horse to ride to the next Colossus, and do battle with it before starting over.
The biggest point against Shadow of the Colossus is the process of locating each one. In the sunlight you can hold up your sword to direct you to the next colossus, and Agro is helpful in getting you from place to place. Getting to each colossus frequently means riding to a location, and climbing a little to get to the actual arena. To help make exploration of the overworld more interesting, there are rewards for players who explore outside of just going straight to every colossus in the form of fruit and lizards. Fruit found will increase Wander’s health, and Lizards shot will increase Wander’s strength. Shooting lizards is tricky because they run away quickly and are small, making them hard to aim at. They can also be slashed or trampled by Agro, but this is more difficult. Between these, the open world is less filler and more worthwhile to the game, also offering greater freedom to explore freeform than Ico’s castle.
The real meat of Shadow of the Colossus however are the Colossi themselves. The game doesn’t waste time with smaller enemies, the Colossi are the embodiment of the game’s strongest system, climbing. The colossi moving underneath Wander’s grip and the addition of the grip gauge are what create the greatest tension in the game, requiring the player both to figure out a way forward, and pace themselves carefully so as not to fall off. Successfully defeating a colossus involves a careful game of evaluating when the colossus will shake or move, where to climb to next, if jumps are necessary, where the next weak point is, and how long to risk charging each stab for maximum damage. Along the way you must find footholds and places to rest to restore your stamina. Every facet of the colossi design is about putting your climbing skills to the test. Each colossi has a different physical structure that can be climbed, many have arenas that need to be climbed, multiple and changing weak points exist to make you climb all over the boss and to keep you engaged in climbing rather than staying in one place. They shake to make it so climbing wrong is punished and you have to carefully manage your stamina meter. Each boss has different movement behaviors that open up new avenues to climb or new ways to climb. Defeating each boss is much more than just following a static route to a static destination.
The big thing about Shadow of the Colossus is also its flexibility in killing the colossi. It’s possible to whistle to attract colossi attention, it’s possible to jump around on top of the colossi, it’s possible to see opportunities and run over for them and risk getting thrown off. It’s possible to do all these things because Shadow of the Colossus has such a robust simulation of bodies in motion. The bonus unlock items help highlight this in of how each of them can create unique interactions with the colossi. The colossi have senses of sight and sound and an AI to themselves and manipulating that AI can be useful in defeating each colossus.
In contrast to Ico’s speedrun, here is Shadow of the Colossus’s. Throughout every colossus there are tons of tricks used to win each fight, special jumps from flinging yourself off the colossus, moving around during cutscenes to break sequence. Most of these tricks are well and beyond a normal playthrough, not really something that you can totally judge the game on, but the fact that they exist is in part a testament to the robustness of Shadow of the Colossus’s system. There are many different ways to tackle each boss, and every player will have their own experience finding how to fell each Colossus because it is such a wide system of possible interactions. Also important is that it is a system that directly challenges the player to work out strategies for beating it. It is not just do what I tell you to, it is figure out ways to beat this. The Colossus quakes underneath you and between the tools you have, you must make it do what you want. The system isn’t participatory, it is based directly on interaction. Not on repeat back to me, but on you playing notes and the game playing back, on being able to change how you play rather than just do the same thing with less mistakes. It’s not about having fancy tricks, it’s about the game being designed in such an open way that people can solve things for themselves or make their own tricks, make their own way forward.
This is the difference between a good game and a bad game.
Why do stealth games end up being so slow frequently?
Frequently stealth games have multiple speeds you can move at, like running, walking, crouching, and crawling. The idea is that the fastest movement speed will actively attract enemy attention, and the slowest will prevent enemies from noticing unless they look directly at you. Frequently crouching, such as in Dishonored and Deus Ex Human Revolution, will completely squelch your footstep sounds.
The trouble I have with this is, a ton of stealth games end up being about moving slow as balls most of the time, assuming you’re actually playing stealthy, until you memorize the level layouts and find fast ways to move through them. And who likes moving slowly?
The tradeoff here is really obvious, moving slowly makes you less noticeable, and incapable of being perceived without direct vision, at the cost that you’re staying within view for longer periods of time, tempting fate that a guard might turn around and stare at you.
The downside is, how often is this really played with in any way? How many guards have you seen that just face one direction, so you have to crawl on your belly to get close to them?
How can we fix this? Have guards turn around more often, maybe give them a little spider sense, feel the player’s gaze on their back. And importantly, establish some kind of tell before they do it so the player knows to get the hell out.
What about a game that reversed this? What if you needed to go fast in order to stay invisible? And the slower you go, the more noticeable you are. Dunno how it would all work out, probably based on the player moving so fast that they trip over something, lose all their speed and get caught, but hey, might be worth a shot. That or skipping the movement speed = noise thing altogether.
Alternatively increase the gamespeed, so the slowest form of movement is faster, but still proportionally slower. Adjust enemies so reaction time is still balanced.
This is probably something worth playing around with.
What elements make a great stealth game?
Good level design, good enemy spotting AI, good investigation AI, good distraction mechanics, good chasing AI, good movement mechanics.
Without good level design, you can’t move around enemies. You can’t really have a stealth game in a single hallway. Also if you don’t have chokepoints and good patrol patterns, then it’s either too easy or too rote.
The way enemies spot you, and the reaction they have to it is important. You gotta have some tolerance zones where they sort of detect you, otherwise everything is over when you enter their vision cone. I think dishonored broke this down in a neat way with eyes, head turn, body turn, though failed at investigation and sub-alert states.
Investigation is important for the distraction aspect. It’s also the primary interplay between the player and the enemies. It’s where the enemies try to actually find you, based on where they think you are, or other factors. Thief 1 & 2 did the best job of this in my opinion, I still remember a tense encounter in thief 1 of trying to avoid a guard in a pitch black room with a tiled floor. He couldn’t see me, but he kept moving around, getting close to me, and I had to keep moving aside on the loud floor, which clued him in on my positioning even more, but I’d get out of the way, and he’d lose me briefly before the cycle repeated.
Distraction mechanics prey on the enemy’s sense of vision or hearing, they’re able to help you pull enemies away from choke points, or get them off your back if they’re about to find you. They can be close range or far range. They can draw enemies directly to you, or pull them to a different point, and they induce risk because enemies then try to find you afterwards. MGS3 and MGSV are kind of the kings of this in my opinion.
Good chasing AI is part of what keeps the game fun when everything gets fucked up. Good AI here will try to close off exits, chase the player directly, get into position ahead of the player, or other such routines. Pac-man ghosts are good for understanding this type of principle, http://gameinternals.com/post/2072558330/understanding-pac-man-ghost-behavior and Monaco generally excels at this type of stealth, practically being built around it.
Good movement mechanics fit in any game, in the case of stealth games, movement is both a matter of traversal, and tradeoffs between visibility, noise, and speed. Some of the most interesting here would be Dishonored, though blink kind of broke the stealth unfortunately, MGS3, MGSV, and Mark of the Ninja (especially this one).
What elements of the souls series gameplay do you like?
I love winding up attacks early as enemies walk up to me so they’ll hit enemies right when they reach me and interrupt them trying to attack me. I love walking out of range of enemy attacks and hitting them when they miss. I love moving around enemy’s attacks to hit them from the sides. I love using strong attacks to hit enemies from outside their range as they attack. I love weaving between multiple enemies and slowly whittling them down. I love running past enemies and zig zagging to avoid their blows. I love learning and memorizing enemy movesets. I love locking enemies in hitstun at critical points. I love using the terrain to crowd control enemies, separating some off from the others, or standing in a place where I can temporarily hit them without them hitting me. I love stepping into enemy ranges to lure out attacks. I love dodging at the last instant to get through attacks. I love pushing enemies off cliffs. I love managing stamina to get in more slashes while the enemy becomes vulnerable. I love releasing my shield or pausing my attacks to get some stamina back at risk to life and limb.
The thing about dark souls is that enemy attacks are reactable, and so are the player attacks, they’re on a similar timescale, but the game is still fair because the enemies are reactable and your defensive options are instant. Whereas other action games like Bayonetta, DMC, Zelda, etc, have player attacks that are unreactable (significantly faster than enemy attacks). So attacking in dark souls is this commitment, and you need to evaluate when and where that type of commitment is safe, and you’re given enough information to determine that.
These are all things that the combat system of Dark Souls accomplishes that are individually really satisfying, and together, fucking excellent.
Okay, I played this game like 3 times, having to restart for various reasons. A ton of dialogue is recycled between different dialogue choices, with minor minor differences. This is especially noticeable with Therese and Jeanette.
I really like the backstory to VTM, but the game is crap overall. The fighting is crap. The dialogue choices are crap. The stealth is crap. The fighting is like, it changes what attacks are performed based on which direction is held, and somehow that affects whether enemies block, I think. In general just mash the attack button and directions and you’ll be fine. As the game progresses you need to fight more and more.
You need to run around back and forth a lot for all sorts of boring reasons. It’s built on the source engine, so there’s bunny hopping. I’m not very good at bunnyhopping, you can apparently go twice as fast that way.
It’s a pain to figure out which way to go some times, some areas have some cute set pieces like the ocean house hotel, whatever place does the mannequin trick, and a couple others.
There’s a bunch of useless skills, because whoever made the game wasn’t very careful. There’s also a bunch of bugs because it was probably rushed. The animations are silly as all hell.
I got to almost the end, and got stuck by a bugged door that refused to open because I didn’t install the fan patch. Installing the patch at that point didn’t fix it and I wasn’t seriously replaying the whole thing again.
There isn’t much to comment on, I don’t think there’s much to defend. It doesn’t seem to succeed even at the things people typically laud the game for. The interactive things at least. Though I guess it’s kind of faithful to the universe in terms of writing and content.
You’ve been asked numerous times about JRPGs, so time for something different: what are your favorite *W*RPGs (if any)?
Dark Souls.
Uh, none. I don’t really like any of them. I guess Mass Effect 2 sort of wins by default? Maybe Deus Ex? Least hated? Actually I liked Fable 1 way back when I was younger. Don’t know if I’d think the same now.
I’ve played at least some of Mass Effect 1 and 2 (beat), Dragon Age Origins (only started), deus ex, dxhr, Elder Scrolls 3 (started), 4 (beat), and 5 (started), Fallout 3 (started), Borderlands 1 (beat) and 2, Diablo 2 (beat), System Shock 2 (started), Planescape Torment (started), Fable: The Lost Chapters (beat), Risen 1 (beat) and 2 (started), Guild Wars, Jade Empire (started), Gothic 3(started), Dungeon Siege, Vampire the Masquerade Bloodlines (almost beat), Witcher 2 and 3, and Dark Messiah (beat).
Wait, yeah, Dark Messiah wins, if you count it. It’s kinda borderline.
If I had to sum them up, I think WRPGs have weak action gameplay, they’re a bit too bound to the concept of the character growing stronger rather than the player. The Witcher series improved at this over time, but in my opinion never really succeeded. Some attempted to investigate non-violent gameplay, pacifism, but it came down to just knowing the right dialogue options and sometimes having a skill level high enough, which doesn’t involve much interesting choice or dynamic. Either you can skip this fight or you don’t.
I think if Japanese RPGs are about the joy of growing stronger (grinding), Western ones are about the joy of personal expression (stat investing, character customization, or story choices). Both usually fail in my book, because neither try to really push interesting choices with short term consequences. They’re both caught up too much in the tradition their systems were born out of. Both were presumably inspired by dungeons and dragons and other tabletop RPGs in different ways originally, and since then have followed the tradition of the digital RPGs that came before them rather than really trying to make interesting combat systems, either from scratch (dark messiah), copying arcadey games (zelda, Ys), or using the format they had (SMT).
To me, stat systems like that are supplementary, they augment what you have rather than creating value in of themselves. They don’t have very strong short term consequences or much implication on short term consequence choices, so they’re not very challenging to work with. Sure, it’s cool to work out a new build, it’s cool to grow stronger and find stuff that was originally hard much easier, but both of those things are so far removed from the world of short term consequences, they’re almost outside the game.
It’s repeating the same thing over and over again until you finally win. You don’t really have much choice in how you do it, you just gotta repeat until the inputs themselves are drilled into your head. The short level length exacerbates this, despite making the game easier, because the sections of repetition are really tightly packed together, so it’s extremely obvious that you’re doing the same thing over and over again. I’m not a fan of this style of difficulty.
Hotline Miami is closely comparable, but its application of randomness and subtle shifts in enemy patterns based on minute changes in timing allow for playthroughs of a given floor to play out very differently from one another, where everything in super meat boy is deterministic and very similar across repeated playthroughs. There’s a lot more possible variation in Hotline Miami, a lot more ways to approach any given problem (except the bosses, which they were sensible enough to not include in the sequel), where in super meat boy there are very few.
Levels in Super Meat Boy are very deliberately constructed to limit possibility space, much like Kaizo Mario style levels. This does make them harder, but it also makes them boring. Super Meat Boy is probably my definitive example of why difficulty or challenge alone does not make a good game. It was what spurred one of my early thoughts that it’s really easy to make a hard game, but a lot harder to make an interesting or “challenging” one. Now I would say a lot harder to make a deep one.
Yes, it is about the challenge, but deep games give you a lot of ways to approach a challenge, they have different measures of small successes to allow you to continue to push forward in some small way while getting closer to the big success rather than just ram your head against the wall making no progress on this one thing required to progress. This prevents frustration with the game, and usually provides avenues where more skilled players can find challenges up to their standards. They’re harder to build, but more rewarding to engage with, retaining more attention from players.
Though, I think Super Meat Boy was a financial success, it sold at least 1.5 million copies, so who really knows?
It’s fun. The weapons are really accurate even if you don’t focus them, the combination of the grappling hooks and infinite parachutes feels really excellent, blowing up stuff attracting the military works pretty well, makes any spot on the map potentially a fight zone.
The story missions are generally rather linear and boring in comparison to free roam destruction. The faction missions are a bit better. Both do an alright job of breaking up the repetition of just going around the map and blowing stuff up, which isn’t very organized or focused, but story missions require a certain amount of chaos before you can do them. The trend kind of ends up being that you’re stuck grinding before the next story mission, which itself is more limiting in many cases and less fun than the open world stuff, but I at least feel the need to get to it, because that’s what progression is defined by. It would be nice if they tried a bit harder to give the player more open ended quests as just things that were going on across the world, rather than segregating them into their own mode. Especially because you can visit anywhere on the map, including mission locations, early and fuck them up in advance, making the missions easier. You might as well have the missions be more based around locations than becoming on-rails segments temporarily, it would all fit together better.
A number of the missions are pretty cool, like the one where you take down the missiles as they launch, or the island that’s a ripoff of lost, then you get components that are annoying like driving sections where you have to follow a single path and your vehicle controls like ass and the car is liable to blow up after getting shot too much.
Downsides are the limited number of weapons you can carry at once, really prevent use of the more exotic weapons and sometimes I was constantly running out of ammo.
Also the map is really big and travel to new locations can take a lot of time. You can only fast travel to places you’ve already been, so you need to invest a fair amount of time into going around the map so you can fast travel it later. Also it feels a bit more annoying than I think it should be to grab all the vehicle, weapon, and armor parts. On top of that you have cash stashes and faction collectibles all spread out across this massive massive map. This is completely filler, much like a ton of the smaller things you can blow up to get chaos are filler. If they didn’t have the heat mechanic bringing the military down on you all the time, then it would be completely uninteresting.
Running out of C4 and grenades sucks, because those are the primary things you use to blow up structures, however I think JC3’s decision to just make those unlimited was a poor decision, given that they’re some of your strongest tools. If they aren’t limited in some way, then you have no problem using them all the time on enemies. At that point you might as well scrap the ammo economy completely.
I feel like the C4 and Grenade shortages could be solved as a level design problem, or by having enemy drops, rather than just giving the player infinite.
Like overall I like the game because the movement is great, the shooting is pretty great, and the missions are generally pretty good too even though I harshed on them a bit. I feel like a ton of the game is built up as filler however rather than focusing the key aspects that make it interesting. You’re practically expected to sweep every area destroying every little thing, while picking up all the collectibles too and passing through large sweeps of land where there’s nothing inbetween the discoverable points. Having a completion counter that gives a bonus reward when you hit 100% is even more painful. Keeping the objectives more limited, or having a threshold where you automatically accomplish everything once you’ve done enough in an area would be a lot more tolerable. I think the design goal was really to drive up the play time by all means necessary, rather than consider whether the boring parts overstayed their welcome or not.
Other things that would help would be a bit more enemy variety. The ninjas are nice, but they’re introduced late in a story mission and I think they only show up in story missions (wiki check says yes). Otherwise most enemies are just footsoldiers with hitscan weapons.
Also I was apparently only 2 missions off from completing the main story. Damn. Might need to finish that.
Probably the most enjoyable open world game I’ve played, despite the faults.
Celia Wagar's CritPoints 