Suits is an interesting show. It starts with an interesting premise, appearing to be a slick-version of Law and Order. You are following the suave dealers and lawyers as they navigate there jobs and the high-end law firms.
Into this, you throw Mike. Mike is a genius but can't go to Harvard (and apparently no other law school exists) because he was caught by the headmaster or something. By circumstances, he ends up working in a law firm under Harvey, apparently being the only person who impresses him in interviews with his quick-thinking and intelligence. So they pretend he is a graduate and he is his underling.
However, the show quickly wears out its welcome. By halfway through the season the formula is already quite stale. Mike, for apparently being the only smart person that impresses Harvey, constantly does dumb things and is constantly outsmarted. For someone who is meant to be so smart and having a photographic memory of all the laws, he makes mistakes and errors constantly. And he never does anything to really show he is smart.
Similarly, the formula is a pretty standard show formula. It builds up to a mid-show climax, appears to be resolved, gets a twist, and then has the big resolution. Somewhere in this Mike has speech about being ethical to Harvey, Harvey has a speech about growing up to Mike, and Mike freaks out about his past.
And then there is the incompetent rival in the firm (Luis) who keeps stuffing up and stuffing people with no consequences or come-uppance. If done right, this may be done interesting. However, here it isn't done right and just feels grating.
So yeah. A show with allot of potential. There are 6 seasons, but I lost interest after this one. I won't be seeking out the next seasons to see if improves. This feels like a generic show that squanders all its potential.
2 out of 5 generic lawyer waffles.
Wednesday, 23 August 2017
Monday, 7 August 2017
COMPUTER GAME: ROCKET LEAGUE (2015)
Rocket League is a game where you are driving around in a rocket-powered car. This car can perform jumps, barrel roles and other maneuvers inside an arena. The goal of this is to play a game of football, hitting a ball around until it goes in the other teams goal and scores your team of 3 cars a point.
At its core, Rocket League is simply a fun game. You are driving around, boosting and jumping to get the ball in cars that look crazy. There is a variety of different arena's with obstacles arranged differently (pits, columns, etc.) to challenge you as well as some different game modes. There are no paywalls, with only cosmetic items being available for purchase (although you unlock one every couple of levels). And there is a wide variety of cosmetic levels and bodies. If everyone is of the same skill level, it can be a fun experience.
The downside is when matchmaking pits you against people of different skill levels (or even your friends, if you don't advance equally in skill). This can be frustrating as they do trick shots and keep getting the ball in no-win situations for you (or vice-versa). Also, the servers lately have been filled with games where players appear to be running bots just to get experience.
Overall, this game is definitely good. A more beginner friendly atmosphere and better matchmaking would help it allot. But it does what it sets out to do- be a fun car-sports game that is a good time. It is also a shame that the game has microtransactions (even if they are just cosmetic) considering Steam still sells it for $20US.
3 out of 5 Rocket Waffles in League.
At its core, Rocket League is simply a fun game. You are driving around, boosting and jumping to get the ball in cars that look crazy. There is a variety of different arena's with obstacles arranged differently (pits, columns, etc.) to challenge you as well as some different game modes. There are no paywalls, with only cosmetic items being available for purchase (although you unlock one every couple of levels). And there is a wide variety of cosmetic levels and bodies. If everyone is of the same skill level, it can be a fun experience.
The downside is when matchmaking pits you against people of different skill levels (or even your friends, if you don't advance equally in skill). This can be frustrating as they do trick shots and keep getting the ball in no-win situations for you (or vice-versa). Also, the servers lately have been filled with games where players appear to be running bots just to get experience.
Overall, this game is definitely good. A more beginner friendly atmosphere and better matchmaking would help it allot. But it does what it sets out to do- be a fun car-sports game that is a good time. It is also a shame that the game has microtransactions (even if they are just cosmetic) considering Steam still sells it for $20US.
3 out of 5 Rocket Waffles in League.
Wednesday, 26 July 2017
VIDEO GAME REVIEW: SUPERHOT (2016)
I recently received a steam key for Superhot as part of the Kickstarter for the board game. I have recently spent a little bit of time with it and have mostly found it to be fun although it is occasionally frustrating.
The main game is a first person shooter where 1 hit will kill you (and 1 hit will mostly kill the enemies as well). The main hook of the game is the art style, which is featureless polygons. The other hook is that time only moves when you move (which includes looking around). You go through a series of levels and a meta-story about playing a hacked game while you do this.
The game is fun in that each level is like a mini-puzzle with weapons and enemies lying around. The mechanic of time only moving when you do lets you assess situations and takes a normally frantic game type (first person shooter) and makes it nearly turn-based.
However, the frustrating part is that it is a puzzle and it does still rely on reflex. On some of the larger levels, it can get quite tedious to go through the same first slow-moving part of the level before you puzzle out a solution. This is particularly true if you are completing a difficult section of the level and than a stray bullet catches you, meaning your pinpoint timing has to be repeated.
Most the levels, however, are too short and fast paced for this to be a worry. Overall, I found Superhot to be a very enjoyable game which has a novel take on the first person shooter genre. It is definitely worth checking out.
4 out of 5 smoking-hot waffles
The main game is a first person shooter where 1 hit will kill you (and 1 hit will mostly kill the enemies as well). The main hook of the game is the art style, which is featureless polygons. The other hook is that time only moves when you move (which includes looking around). You go through a series of levels and a meta-story about playing a hacked game while you do this.
The game is fun in that each level is like a mini-puzzle with weapons and enemies lying around. The mechanic of time only moving when you do lets you assess situations and takes a normally frantic game type (first person shooter) and makes it nearly turn-based.
However, the frustrating part is that it is a puzzle and it does still rely on reflex. On some of the larger levels, it can get quite tedious to go through the same first slow-moving part of the level before you puzzle out a solution. This is particularly true if you are completing a difficult section of the level and than a stray bullet catches you, meaning your pinpoint timing has to be repeated.
Most the levels, however, are too short and fast paced for this to be a worry. Overall, I found Superhot to be a very enjoyable game which has a novel take on the first person shooter genre. It is definitely worth checking out.
4 out of 5 smoking-hot waffles
Wednesday, 19 July 2017
MOVIE REVIEW: SPIDERMAN HOMECOMING (2017)
Spiderman: Homecoming is a Spiderman film set in the Marvel Universe. In case you missed the promotional posters, Iron Man is present in the movie. Or if the posters are anything to go by, it may be Iron Man starring Spiderman.
Those fears are unfounded. Spiderman is very much his own movie. Tony Stark is there as a mentor to Peter Parker and someone he is trying to impress as he tries to go through life after Civil War. This story really focuses on Peter Parker and having to juggle responsibilities, including doing the right thing with his powers even if it hurts him.
Tom Holland plays a really good Spiderman. He is younger looking and more naive-sounding than Tobey MacGuire, and they own that by casting him as younger. The rest of the supporting cast is kind-of a miss. Liz (the love interest) is one dimensional, there new Flash (an Indian nerd who resents Peter's intellect) doesn't really have any pay-off, and Ned (the computer geek friend) is also grating. Michelle is the only hit out of them and probably the only one they should give a big part to in the next movie.
Where this movie really shines are the villains. It seems that they finally put a bit of time investment into establishing the villains and there motivations. It also helped that they brought the villains motivations back from taking over the world/killing the president/etc. which worked well in Civil War. Here, the Vulture specifically wants to stay below the radar of the big guys (because Vulture can fly; Iron Man can fly and has Tank Missiles) and so it leads him to mostly selling salvaged weapons and heisting them without people finding out.
All in all, this movie is a definite hit. The hero is good, the villains are good and the action is good. One complaint is allot of the big action beats are ruined by the trailers so it would've been good to have a bigger sense of wonder and the supporting cast doesn't really hit as well as it should (which, for a movie that spends allot of time with Peter Parker in school, should be a bit better). Despite that, it is a very hearty recommendation.
4 out of 5 web-swinging waffles
Those fears are unfounded. Spiderman is very much his own movie. Tony Stark is there as a mentor to Peter Parker and someone he is trying to impress as he tries to go through life after Civil War. This story really focuses on Peter Parker and having to juggle responsibilities, including doing the right thing with his powers even if it hurts him.
Tom Holland plays a really good Spiderman. He is younger looking and more naive-sounding than Tobey MacGuire, and they own that by casting him as younger. The rest of the supporting cast is kind-of a miss. Liz (the love interest) is one dimensional, there new Flash (an Indian nerd who resents Peter's intellect) doesn't really have any pay-off, and Ned (the computer geek friend) is also grating. Michelle is the only hit out of them and probably the only one they should give a big part to in the next movie.
Where this movie really shines are the villains. It seems that they finally put a bit of time investment into establishing the villains and there motivations. It also helped that they brought the villains motivations back from taking over the world/killing the president/etc. which worked well in Civil War. Here, the Vulture specifically wants to stay below the radar of the big guys (because Vulture can fly; Iron Man can fly and has Tank Missiles) and so it leads him to mostly selling salvaged weapons and heisting them without people finding out.
All in all, this movie is a definite hit. The hero is good, the villains are good and the action is good. One complaint is allot of the big action beats are ruined by the trailers so it would've been good to have a bigger sense of wonder and the supporting cast doesn't really hit as well as it should (which, for a movie that spends allot of time with Peter Parker in school, should be a bit better). Despite that, it is a very hearty recommendation.
4 out of 5 web-swinging waffles
Wednesday, 5 July 2017
BOARD GAME REVIEW: CHAMPIONS OF MIDGARD
Champions of Midgard is a game published by Grey Fox Games that has had no shortage of love. Featuring glowing reviews from the Dice Tower and featured on an episode of Tabletop, it grabbed my interest when it was described by Wil Wheaton as a mix of Lords of Waterdeep and Stone Age. These are both games I really like and, add to that the new expansions that are available for it, I decided to see how it would compare.
In Champions of Midgard, you are trying to earn the most glory over 8 rounds. Glory is earned by building up the village (resources), defeating monsters and fulfilling destiny (or goal) cards. This is done by a combination of worker placement and dice-based combat resolution against monsters threatening your village. The game feels quite tight, with only 8 rounds and normally only 3-4 workers per round meaning you have to focus on what you are doing.
Because Champions of Midgard feels so tight, allot can be dependent on the dice roles (especially when fighting the bigger monsters). The more you want to mitigate them, the more actions you need to spend to earn re-roll tokens. This is probably the biggest detractor from the game, as you can fluff key dice roles (even if you re-roll them) meaning you have lost out on allot of resources.
This is a shame because allot of the other mechanisms are quite nice. The way blame for not defending the village is assigned is what all semi-co op games should aspire too when trying to determine lose conditions (i.e. just punish the people not helping). The worker placement and collecting of dice resources feels nearly copied from Lords of Waterdeep, which isn't a bad thing (why shouldn't designs feel iterative) and collecting resources to send out for raiding feels quite thematic.
However, Stone Age has the advantage of not having each individual roll feel as critical and having the ability to stock up on tools and cards to mitigate this. Lords of Waterdeep is a very tactical game (except for those stupid Mandatory Quest Cards, which should just be reworked into negative points if uncompleted) where you aren't leaving huge scoring opportunities to chance. Compared to these, Champions of Midgard may be average to good, but won't often be a game I would choose to play above these or a bunch of other worker placement games such as Russian Railroads or Ancient World.
On a side note, it appears that the Valhalla expansion addresses most of my main issues with this game so perhaps that will elevate the game into the regular rotation for me.
2.5 out of 5 non-horned Waffles
In Champions of Midgard, you are trying to earn the most glory over 8 rounds. Glory is earned by building up the village (resources), defeating monsters and fulfilling destiny (or goal) cards. This is done by a combination of worker placement and dice-based combat resolution against monsters threatening your village. The game feels quite tight, with only 8 rounds and normally only 3-4 workers per round meaning you have to focus on what you are doing.
Because Champions of Midgard feels so tight, allot can be dependent on the dice roles (especially when fighting the bigger monsters). The more you want to mitigate them, the more actions you need to spend to earn re-roll tokens. This is probably the biggest detractor from the game, as you can fluff key dice roles (even if you re-roll them) meaning you have lost out on allot of resources.
This is a shame because allot of the other mechanisms are quite nice. The way blame for not defending the village is assigned is what all semi-co op games should aspire too when trying to determine lose conditions (i.e. just punish the people not helping). The worker placement and collecting of dice resources feels nearly copied from Lords of Waterdeep, which isn't a bad thing (why shouldn't designs feel iterative) and collecting resources to send out for raiding feels quite thematic.
However, Stone Age has the advantage of not having each individual roll feel as critical and having the ability to stock up on tools and cards to mitigate this. Lords of Waterdeep is a very tactical game (except for those stupid Mandatory Quest Cards, which should just be reworked into negative points if uncompleted) where you aren't leaving huge scoring opportunities to chance. Compared to these, Champions of Midgard may be average to good, but won't often be a game I would choose to play above these or a bunch of other worker placement games such as Russian Railroads or Ancient World.
On a side note, it appears that the Valhalla expansion addresses most of my main issues with this game so perhaps that will elevate the game into the regular rotation for me.
2.5 out of 5 non-horned Waffles
Wednesday, 14 June 2017
BOARD GAME REVIEW: MYSTERIUM
Mysterium is an English reprint of a game about a bunch of psychics trying to read visions sent to them from a ghost. It is a fully co-operative game, with one player as a ghost and the others looking at cards passed out by him.
The aim of the game is for each psychic to guess who in the past they are psychically connected to, and then which one of them murdered the ghost. It is a bit like Cluedo, but the ghost controls the information from a hand of 7 beautifully illustrated abstract-style cards.
This game is a really fun social game that has a low barrier to entry in terms of rules and knowledge/past game experience. However, it looks nice and can draw people in from the artwork. That and it is always a blast to figure out things or have a surprising guess be correct.
The downsides of this game is the final guessing round. It feels far too random and lucky for all the effort spent to get there. I have no solutions off the top of my head. Of course the other problem is that it may be too light for people who like heavier games.
In the end, Mysterium is just allot of fun. The assymetric roles, the beautiful cards and the solid mechanisms make a really good time. The climax leaves a bit to be desired, but you can't fault the rest of the game.
4 out of 5 spooky waffles.
The aim of the game is for each psychic to guess who in the past they are psychically connected to, and then which one of them murdered the ghost. It is a bit like Cluedo, but the ghost controls the information from a hand of 7 beautifully illustrated abstract-style cards.
This game is a really fun social game that has a low barrier to entry in terms of rules and knowledge/past game experience. However, it looks nice and can draw people in from the artwork. That and it is always a blast to figure out things or have a surprising guess be correct.
The downsides of this game is the final guessing round. It feels far too random and lucky for all the effort spent to get there. I have no solutions off the top of my head. Of course the other problem is that it may be too light for people who like heavier games.
In the end, Mysterium is just allot of fun. The assymetric roles, the beautiful cards and the solid mechanisms make a really good time. The climax leaves a bit to be desired, but you can't fault the rest of the game.
4 out of 5 spooky waffles.
Thursday, 1 June 2017
MOVIE REVIEW: APPLESEED ALPHA (2017)
Appleseed Alpha is an animated movie set is a post-apocalyptic future. In it, there is a women and a former cyborg soldier who hire themselves out as mercenaries. However, on their last mission, something goes wrong and they end up protecting another girl and her cyborg protector. These new survivors may just hold the fate of the world in their hands.
Appleseed Alpha's story is not interesting. It is highly predictable, leaning very heavily on the tropes of the past and not bothering to change any of them. The innocent girl who bonds with them. The disgruntled soldier. The loveable former thug who repents. The death to raise the stakes after a final speech.
And that would be okay if there were other things the movie offered. Instead, what we have are female characters in plenty of poses and cleavage drawn for the male gaze. Even if this were not the case, the action scenes and environments are quite bland and uninspiring.
So in the end, I can't really recommend Appleseed Alpha. It is competent but boring. Considering that this is meant to be for entertainment, competent is simply not good enough.
1.5 out of 5 Apple Waffles
Appleseed Alpha's story is not interesting. It is highly predictable, leaning very heavily on the tropes of the past and not bothering to change any of them. The innocent girl who bonds with them. The disgruntled soldier. The loveable former thug who repents. The death to raise the stakes after a final speech.
And that would be okay if there were other things the movie offered. Instead, what we have are female characters in plenty of poses and cleavage drawn for the male gaze. Even if this were not the case, the action scenes and environments are quite bland and uninspiring.
So in the end, I can't really recommend Appleseed Alpha. It is competent but boring. Considering that this is meant to be for entertainment, competent is simply not good enough.
1.5 out of 5 Apple Waffles
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)