Before I do that, though, let me briefly discuss their similarities. They are both essentially two dimensional Minecraft, where it looks much more like a platformer than it does an open world. They are both online, of course, but Starbound is a bit different. There aren't single, randomly generated worlds in Starbound. Instead, there are over four hundred quadrillion planets that have been randomly generated, but everybody is kind of thrown into the same 'universe', technically speaking. To my knowledge this means that the star on coordinates X32, Y71 will always yield the same planets whether you're playing single player or online. In that sense, though, the dismay one may have for always playing in the same universe as everybody else is dispelled due to the fact that you are virtually guaranteed to explore planets nobody else in the game has ever even seen before.
This would probably more appropriately be titled 'Starbound vs. Terraria', but I feel one of the best ways to convey ideas and concepts is to compare them to other things. Since I very recently established what Terraria is all about, it would be a waste of time and effort to talk about what Starbound is from scratch, especially when these two games are very similar to each other. Beyond that, one of the reasons I reviewed Terraria the other day was because very recently, the full release of Starbound just hit the market. Now, this game is very similar to Terraria in a lot of ways, with several striking differences. I will preface this review by saying that I am heavily biased in this however. I have put over two hundred hours into Terraria, while I have only played Starbound for about twelve. The things I have experienced in the latter are very limited, so for now I'll simply cover what is different about the two games.
Before I do that, though, let me briefly discuss their similarities. They are both essentially two dimensional Minecraft, where it looks much more like a platformer than it does an open world. They are both online, of course, but Starbound is a bit different. There aren't single, randomly generated worlds in Starbound. Instead, there are over four hundred quadrillion planets that have been randomly generated, but everybody is kind of thrown into the same 'universe', technically speaking. To my knowledge this means that the star on coordinates X32, Y71 will always yield the same planets whether you're playing single player or online. In that sense, though, the dismay one may have for always playing in the same universe as everybody else is dispelled due to the fact that you are virtually guaranteed to explore planets nobody else in the game has ever even seen before. Lately I've been looking around for mindless games I can play while listening to audiobooks and Writing Excuses, and a few days ago the idea of picking up Terraria again was highly appealing to me. It is an extremely well made game, and for those who don't know, it is in essence two dimensional Minecraft with something of a story mode. (There isn't a story, exactly, but the game has far more to 'progress through' than Minecraft does.
Terraria is a fairly simple game. You start off with nothing, so you chop down a tree, build a house, then go out and mine some ore. You make armor out of that ore so that you can brave underground caves and fight off monsters to discover chests with unique items in each. Eventually, you'll be strong enough to summon and fight boss monsters, who drop better and better loot (and many of them unlock harder content upon their demise!) I think by far my favorite game mechanic is the general sense of progression. I like the feeling of going through a game, getting powerful items, then returning to older stuff and being able to repeat that content far more easily. This is one of the core aspects of RPG's, where you level up and grow inherently stronger simply by playing the game. In Terraria, however, it's a little different. There is no leveling system, so one's ability to clear challenging content is determined by skill and previously obtained equipment. In this game specifically, there is also a strong element of randomness. Each world is randomly generated, and while certain things are always in every world, some things are not. One of the best examples is the pyramids one can sometimes find almost completely buried in the generated deserts. These structures are rare, and only around one in ten worlds will have them. They aren't necessary to fully experience and appreciate the game, but things like this make the idea of going back and making a new character a year later far more attractive. I finished The Fellowship of the Ring for the first time last night. I feel stronger for it because I've tried reading it three or four times now, but this time I actually managed to get through the whole thing. It's amazing how pivotal Tolkien's writing was to the fantasy genre, but at this point being nearly eighty years old I would more readily attribute the books to literature than fun reading. I had a hard time getting through the last fifty pages last night! Now, I know a lot about Tolkien, his life, and his universe in general, but I actually do not know much about the plot of The Lord of the Rings. I have seen the first movie several years ago, but I think I even fell asleep half way through. I suspect The Two Towers and The Return of the King will be much easier reads for me because I don't know what happens. Here is all the knowledge I have of things that occur after FotR (spoilers obviously): Sam and Frodo find and capture Gollum, forcing him to be their guide to Mount Doom. There are at least two large scale battles, and one of them is (I think) at Minas Tirith. Merry and Pippin find meet the Treefolk and they go fight in one of the battles maybe? Gandalf comes back as Gandalf the White. Saruman the White does die. Boromir dies, but since he does so in the first movie but does not in the first book, I'm not sure if it will just happen later in the book or if he won't actually die. The Nazgul come back, and the Witch King gets stabbed because "I am no man". Lastly, Frodo gets to Mount Doom and doesn't have the heart to destroy the Ring, so Sam does instead. Also Gollum gets thrown in, too. Beyond that information, I don't know what is going to happen for the next two books, but lets talk about the actual vices and virtues of the first book. The two things I hate most about Tolkien's writing are the fact that every single thing in the universe has at least two (but usually three or four) different names. The Great River, for example, is referred to as Anduin, the Langflood, Wilderland, and The Great River, and all of these names are used interchangeably. This problem is worsened by the fact that several landmarks with several different names are being thrown out to and fro and it can be quite difficult to follow along. Second, everything in this world is handed to the heroes on a silver platter, and everything in the world is ludicrously powerful. Mithril is an obvious example, since its used in every fantasy book. When the Company is leaving Lothlórien, the Elves give them each magic cloaks that not only blend in with every single color they are to tread across, but also are pretty much water proof and will keep them warm no matter what. The only thing the cloaks can't do is double as armor. They also give them super cakes. One can fill you up for an entire day of hard labor, they taste absolutely delicious, and they practically don't spoil. If you were playing Dungeons & Dragons, it doesn't matter how much the people of any one town love you, this stuff will be expensive. You can't even really afford a new sword at level one, let alone magic super cloaks. My point is that in this universe, everything is handed to the company, whereas I'd say in modern fiction, the characters have to work a lot harder for what needs to be done. I understand that virtually all of my criticism lies in the fact that these books are quite old, and this is basically the source of all fantasy cliches, but it leads to somewhat boring reading. I personally am not particularly enjoying the experience, but hopefully it will get better. I do like the tale of Middle-earth and the sense of wonder that the universe draws you into, but the writing is archaic and it makes achieving that sense of wonder much harder. As I said, though, since I don't really know what happens next I'm sure I will enjoy them much more. I know that things only get more difficult for everyone, and no more silver platter gifts will be handed out to them. Also I have no idea at what point Gandalf comes back, so that will be exciting. We'll see. Very few games that I've played have had the charm that Battleblock Theater has. It has so much sheer silliness that it tops basically all other games I've ever played in terms of comedy. Some friends and family of mine play some stupid silly games, or even watch people on YouTube play those same games. A lot of the time the most enjoyment I get out of those games is the ludicrous stuff that happens that just lends itself well to entertainment. Battleblock Theater is the epitome of that experience. The entire game is just ludicrous fun. The game itself is basically a co-op puzzle platformer (you can play it alone, but its designed to be played with friends). You and a friend have to work together to get through dozens of levels that are full of razer blades, lazer beams, and cats. It's a lot of fun because you can mess with your friend as you play. You can shoot him as he tries to time that difficult jump perfectly, or jump onto his head, or throw him into a pit of acid. It's silly, but the mechanics of the game are actually incredibly well designed. It's sort of like Super Meat Boy except more forgiving and you have to play with a friend for maximum enjoyment. Here's the part where I usually talk about how great the story is, except in this game its nothing special. It's silly and weird, which of course fits the bill, but that's not really where the value is in it. The best part about the story is the narrator. During all the cutscenes he is narrating what is happening with the story as he uses puppets to also describe what is happening, and pretty much everything the narrator says is hilarious. He also says things while you're playing the game. For example, one of my favorites is this quote, which is prompted when you start a time trial: "Can you get the best time? I can, and have. A billion times over! I'm also a pathological liar. Or am I? I am. What's going on? Do you know? I don't. What?" Basically, every aspect of this game fits together like a puzzle. Every game has a distinct 'feel' to it, and this game captures it and punches you in the face with it over and over until you've lost all your teeth. You pretty much know what to expect after watching the trailer (which you should definitely go see). The visual aspects of this game are all silly but they make their own sort of sense. The story is silly, but its cohesive. The narrator is silly, but that's basically his entire character. I, personally, have only really experienced the story mode of this game. It takes longer to get through than you would expect (There's nearly one hundred different levels, which is insane to me). A lot of what I've seen in media, however, is the 'arena' mode. This is where you and three other people play on maps to achieve goals against one another. I haven't played it, so I can't say much about it, but it's probably still a lot of fun. So if this game sounds interesting, I recommend going and checking out the intro about Hatty Hattington and the S.S. Friend Ship. It's about three minutes long and as I said it describes what the game is going to be about quite well. Also, "It's a secret!" Pretty much every gamer I have ever known has played World of Warcraft at some point. At its peak, the game had over twelve million subscribers. If every player in 2010 got up and formed a new country, it would have had a larger population than nearly two thirds of the rest of the world (not to mention the fact that the rest of the countries populations would decrease by a total of over twelve million). Statistically, though, over one hundred million people have played World of Warcraft (and by those numbers this theoretical 'WoW' country would probably be in the top ten most populated nations in the world.) These numbers are enormous, and while some games can boast higher numbers (over twenty-seven million people play League of Legends every day), remember that World of Warcraft wasn't (and isn't) free. It requires a monthly subscription, which is a huge deterrent for its player count. Basically it meant that at its peak of twelve million monthly players, Blizzard Entertainment was raking in over one hundred and eighty million dollars every month at that time. So, I don't think it comes as any surprise that a 'Warcraft' movie was hinted at for years upon years. I remember going to BlizzCon every year back then and thinking "Maybe they'll finally announce the movie this year!" and always being disappointed. But eventually, as I think it was inevitable, it did come. The movie, Warcraft, is roughly based on the story in the game of the same title. The movie adaptation is quite a few steps different from the original story, but I'm not surprised that sacrifices had to have been made to change the medium so drastically. I, unfortunately, have never played any of the Warcraft trilogy, so I am only vaguely aware of the lore based on what I've been told from my brothers who have, and from the lore in the MMORPG, World of Warcraft. I think at this point so few people are familiar with the actual story that its best to look not at how different it is from its origin but to the quality of the movie in a vacuum. (This could be the most arguable thing I've ever said on this blog, but bear with me.) I know a lot of people didn't like the movie. I think the general consensus is that the movie is 'alright'. The subplots are juggled back and forth like mad, and it can be extremely difficult to try to follow along (especially if you're not familiar with any lore). It has a lot going on and about a dozen characters are thrown at the audience twenty minutes in. But, I personally probably like this movie more than the average person would. Its special effects are on point (I haven't heard any negative critiques about that specific aspect) and all of the characters involved are more or less believable. The orcs have an obviously different society from the humans, and I think that comes across very clearly in the film. My biggest problem with it is the fact that I preferred the orcs side of the story. I was always a little disappointed when it cut back to the humans because their characters were just a lot less interesting. Overall, I think this movie sets a good foundation for the future. I don't mind if the movies aren't exactly true to the lore. The Marvel Cinematic Universe is a thing, after all. They aren't following the comics entirely, and its still working quite well. So we'll see where it goes. The movie was alright, but its greatest aspects weren't in the story. I think the next one will be better because it won't have to spend nearly as much time establishing the characters and whatnot. I was telling a friend of mine yesterday how much it bothered me that I don't know the first thing about coding. My knowledge of math, English, science, and everything everybody needs to know is usually pretty solid. But, as both a writer and an improvisational actor, it isn't enough. Those occupations require one to know a moderate amount of everything. I couldn't write about a nerd, or play one in a scene, without knowing (or at least sounding like I know) how to code. So, that friend recommended a website to me. I'll link it at the bottom, but essentially they are free lessons on how to write in the more essential coding languages. The lessons obviously start very basic, and in fact the script I was working with didn't really even start to look like code until I had been going through the lessons for an hour or two. So far I've got the basic workings down, and right now I'm still working on how to write more complicated functions. I've made an "adventure game" (which was actually just a few text blurbs based on if/then statements), and the next lesson is for me to make a Rock, Paper, Scissors game. While it is fun and interesting to create, there's a lot of information that needs to go into your brain in order to make that happen, so I'm not really enjoying it. The thing that I like the most about learning Javascript is the enjoyment I get from knowledge. As an actor, I could probably fool somebody at this point into thinking I know how to code by using the correct words in the right places (though of course this won't fool anyone that actually knows what they're doing) but it satisfies me. I like learning for its own sake, but it needs to yield measurable results. I like learning because it means I gain the ability to take something and use it in a way I couldn't have before, and I've crossed that threshold several times already. The worst part about learning coding (especially self-taught, as I'm doing) is that when something goes wrong it can be very difficult to tell why things went wrong. The website I'm using does a good job of reminding me of simple errors, but its frustrating with coding because if one single character is out of place anywhere in the line of text, the whole thing doesn't work right, because the computer can't adapt to infer what the information means, it just reads it literally and returns what you gave it. This translates to me staring at a wall of text for five minutes reading my code over and over again trying to find what I did wrong only to figure out I left out a simple semicolon somewhere, or just made a typo. The computer doesn't tell you why what you did is wrong or where you messed up. It's like on a math test when the professor gives you a zero on a problem when you come to the wrong answer even though the only thing you did was drop a negative sign. Technically, yes, the answer is wrong because the values aren't equivalent, but the reasoning is still (mostly) correct. Tough luck. I feel like once I put several more hours into learning this I could actually start to do my own thing without help, and maybe then I can enjoy the actual coding part, but for now the only fun I get out of it is learning how the things work in the first place. https://www.codecademy.com/ One awesome and relatively 'small' game that's come out recently (and is still only growing in popularity) is Rocket League. You may or may not have heard of it. If you haven't, here it is. Here's the whole game: Rocket Car Soccer. If you think that's stupid, well let me tell you something. You're probably the enemy of fun because that is the best thing ever. Who doesn't want to drive around on an enormous field headbutting an enormous soccer ball into victory? Fun haters, that's who. This game is actually really well made, and everything in it panned out pretty perfectly in my books. The game is actually really simple. You and some other people aim to get the ball in the other team's goal, they try to stop you. There's quite a lot of strategy that goes into it as the people you're playing against get better and better. The angle in which you hit the ball dictates which direction it goes, for one, but even if everybody in the game sucks its still just as much fun. For a competitive game, I find it more relaxing than basically anything else I play, mostly because of how simple it is. I'll try my best, sure, but I'm not very good and if I don't lead my team to victory, oh well. At least I know the thing that's stopping me from getting better is sheer practice as opposed to learning "tips and tricks" like in everything else. (Admittedly, there are things like that in Rocket League, but I'd say you learn a lot of the nuances of the mechanics just through playing.) You can play against bots if you don't like competitive things, too. The AI is pretty sophisticated. I'm about as good as the second best difficulty of bots, if not a bit worse. As far as fast paced games like this go, I'd say its hard to program something better than a human. Second, you can play how you want. There's online play, of course, but if you're playing to try really hard you can also play a ranked set up. Your team size can be anywhere from one to four, so any number of friends can pick this up. (For numbers higher than five, you can make a custom game and fight each other.) What's more, as you play you unlock things like car models, decals, rims, even paint style. (You start out with all of the 'colors', meaning you can pick any shade of orange or blue you want, but paint style dictates how that paint looks on the car). After playing a few dozen games you can start really customizing your car, which is pretty neat. Sadly all of the customization is all cosmetic, but it's still pretty cool. Lastly, this game is not only on pretty much every platform, but its also updated regularly. Last time I played there were several new game modes I didn't know existed, like basketball. I'd say this game's charm is that virtually everyone can have fun playing it, regardless of how good they are or what their gaming experience is. The key is to play against and with teams of similar skill, which can very well mean AI! Either way, I recommend picking it up, especially if you know people that play it. The books Sabriel, Lirael, and Abhorsen (or The Old Kingdom, anywhere other than North America) written by Garth Nix was recommended to me by a friend. It was, generally speaking, a decent series, but I was specifically recommended it because of the way the magic works. Though there will soon technically be five books in this series, the third book tied a knot around its preceding books and ended it in a nice little trilogy. Because of that, I don't think I'll be picking any of the other ones up (See yesterday's post: Life -- Options and Boredom). So, I'll talk about this trilogy as a stand-alone series. First, this series is what I would consider a Young Adult fantasy. There are two nations, separated by a huge wall that is nigh impassable except under very specific circumstances. One one side, The Old Kingdom, the rules are governed largely around what is known as The Charter, the magic system. Here Charter mages (the good guys) are pretty much always hunting the users of Free Magic (basically the same magic, but unrestrained. The evil guys.) Free Magic users usually use their corruption for necromancy, as in bringing back zombies for their evil will. There is a monarchy, and the magic doesn't allow for technology here. South of that, across the wall, is Ancelstierre. This nation is sort of like nineteenth century America, I would say. They have technology such as cars, guns, planes, etc. The people here are pretty much us. They don't have magic and don't believe in all the nonsense they hear happening on the other side of the Wall. So the plot is very linear, the characters are sort of cookie-cutter, and there is quite a lot of 'telling' as opposed to 'showing'. (Ex: Lirael knew the man wanted to run.) I do find fault in all of this, but they are the sort of things a younger audience would forgive more easily than an older one would, so I let it slide. Basically everything happens as expected, but that doesn't automatically make it bad. The thing I liked most about the series doesn't actually have anything to do with the writing or the books. Mostly, I enjoyed the world that this was set in. The premise of these two vastly different nations interested me, and the river of Death as it is depicted in the books is awesome. I liked getting the sense that everything in the Old Kingdom had an ancient and grand purpose. The Wall wasn't made just because those two nations were at war. The Wall was made for a reason. The line of Abhorsens are for a reason. In fact the entire Charter was made for a reason. You sort of get that sense in the first book, and while I actually didn't like the first book (I kind of hated the protagonist) the series redeemed itself by the end of the trilogy. I'd recommend the series to a younger audience. Anyone who likes fantasy and death would really enjoy it. It has zombies in it, yes, but stating that fact gives off a very misleading impression. This isn't a zombie apocalypse. I would pitch it more accurately as a fantasy series where the magic manifests itself very closely with death. It's not an amazing series, but a young reader would probably get a lot out of it. So, I wrote this with the impression that all of my criticisms for this game went without saying. Apparently, though, this game is highly regarded as superior to Mario Kart Wii. There could be information I'm glossing over, but I think this is a load of crap, and here's why. I've been playing Mario Kart for quite a while. I didn't play Mario Kart 64, since by the time I was functional enough to enjoy it we had had Double Dash, but I played quite a bit of Double Dash, Mario Kart Wii, and finally Mario Kart 8. I didn't play the handhelds purely because I didn't have access to them. I played Mario Kart Wii so much I had probably around sixty percent of the expert staff ghosts beaten. It doesn't sound impressive unless you really know how difficult some of those times were to beat! As a side note, I never really played online on any Mario Kart game. I spent a lot of my time on Mario Kart Wii and Mario Kart 8 getting the highest possible ratings on the single player aspects of the game. So with the introduction of anti gravity and a few new items, I was pretty excited for Mario Kart 8! I was completely, utterly, thoroughly disappointed. Virtually every change they've made to this game was a step in the wrong direction. First, there are pretty much only two new things I liked about Mario Kart 8. The first is that I will admit the anti-gravity courses does make for some interesting gameplay. It's sad that it doesn't feel any different from normal driving, but the maps definitely get more interesting when you can make the tracks defy physics. It was a great idea that I think could have been implemented better, but doesn't suck. Second I like the idea of 200cc, where everything is going almost uncontrollably fast. I haven't played on this setting very much, but obviously you don't have to play at this speed if you don't want to. Still, I think giving more freedom of choice to players so that they can manipulate variables how they want makes it more fun. That's all the good I have to say for this game, though. They took out a lot and changed too much for me to enjoy it. First, in order to implement the anti-gravity and make everything its own game, they made dozens of new maps. It sounds cool, but in the past (like in Mario Kart Wii) half of the courses were retro maps that were in older games. In fact, almost all of my favorite tracks in Mario Kart Wii were tracks that were in older games. It makes it so you can play on the thing you remember and love with new twists (like new items or whatever). In Mario Kart 8, though, all of these new maps were changed. Some are reminiscent at best, which means I simply don't like any of those maps because they feel like mockeries of what could have been. I find this odd, because they spent so much extra work making something new when less content in the past worked! Next, the game itself is a lot simpler. Most Mario Kart courses in the past had shortcuts you could take that would slow you down if you didn't have the proper item (i.e. mushrooms) to boost past it. This game doesn't have a whole lot of that, meaning getting those mushrooms when you're losing sucks because it could easily be something that could help you out more. You can't use that mushroom to skip part of the level and catch up anymore. As far as simplicity goes, too, I liked the differences between karts and bikes. They feel and drift different, but in this newest installment they are largely the same. In Mario Kart Wii, you can drift more on a kart (getting first blue and then red flames for a nice boost). In a bike, you can only drift for the blue flames, meaning ostensibly that you can't benefit from boosting as much as karts can, but bikes can also do wheelies, which makes them go faster at the cost of being able to turn. This means that they would make up for their speed on turns by going fast on straightaways. This is all removed in Mario Kart 8. Also, coins? Why was that a necessary addition to a racing game?? Lastly, Battle Mode was my favorite part about playing with friends. Jumping into arena shaped maps and actually trying to attack each other was way more fun than racing in previous games. It was mostly one of us would simply be the best at racing, so there was no point in trying to compete. But in Mario Kart 8, there are no arena maps. When you go into Battle Mode, you simply go onto one of the real tracks and battle there. This doesn't work nearly as well because its no longer an arena. I actually don't understand this choice of development at all, when they could have simply thrown in the arena maps they used in the past if they didn't want to make new ones. I could be biased because I remember how good I was at Mario Kart Wii and hold this new one to an impossible standard. A Night of Blacker Darkness is probably the strangest book I've read so far this year. I would say it's difficult to describe, but it's not. It's very easy to describe. I would say it is more accurate to call it difficult to imagine. It's a stand alone novel by Dan Wells, whose work I've reviewed in the past. This, I would say, is the single best thing I've read by him. His series are good, but none of his books have been individually as good as this one. In fact I read this one twice. It's not very long. And of course, as always I won't be spoiling anything directly. I'll be talking about the vibe it gives off, so if you're one of those people that really want to be completely in the dark when experiencing something, don't keep reading. Then again, if you are one of those people you probably wouldn't even read past the title, where it says "Review". Moving onward... In short, this book is a 'secret history' comedy. It's set in nineteenth century England, and the main character is attempting to use forgery to cheat his way into a vast fortune. It doesn't go according to plan, so to speak, and he ends up being mistaken for a vampire and has to try to put everything together as things start to fall apart. One great thing this book accomplishes well is what I would call a misdirected plot twist. It sets up the story in such a way that you think "A-Ha! This is what you're going to surprise us with," and then the book says "Oh, you thought this was the answer? Logical conclusion, yes, most people would think that. Except you're completely wrong." Those aren't direct quotes, but you get the idea. But the best part about this book is that its the only book I've ever read that is so flawlessly filled with British humor. A lot of it is back and forth banter augmented with logical fallacies, along with absurdly convoluted structural arguments that it isn't even worth trying to piece together to forge sense out of. This is a Gothic tale about dark spooky nights, yet I wouldn't hesitate to shelve it with regular comedies. Most historical fiction I read has an impossible time trying to grasp at my interest. I'm not quite sure what it is, but most of the historical works I've read are quite simply boring. I couldn't care less about the fictional childhood of Henry VI. Perhaps one of the main reasons for this is that a lot of the stuff I've read deals a lot with family ties and commitments, which are things I simply don't find interesting. They are certainly not things I would put at the forefront of any story. But A Night of Blacker Darkness isn't about family (kind of). Well, technically that's the main plot, but its sort of also not the main plot. It's a bit difficult to explain without spoiling anything, so I won't try to. Tangents aside, if a Gothic vampire novel comprised entirely of British humor sounds like an interesting book to you, I'd highly recommend it. It isn't part of a series and prior knowledge of the history of that time period isn't necessary, but it certainly enhances the experience. |
A Daily Dose of DerailmentHey, my name is Kollin Cooley. Writer, improv actor and teacher, and college student. Archive
September 2016
Categories |