#still awesome analysis op i agree with everything!

[aishabellasbigblogofeverything]

I love this meta! I really wish that Rick had expanded on the Aphrodite kids more, the girls and boys. For the girls, it goes without saying that I wish he had portrayed their femininity in a more positive light and didn’t shame them for being feminine, or had even used femininity as a sign of strength rather than a sign of weakness. Drew should have gotten a redemption arc, and Silena should’ve been given more screentime as well and also maybe not died in the Battle of Manhattan. And for the boys, I wish he had expanded more on what being a male child of Aphrodite means, considering so much of the Aphrodite cabin is wrapped up in them being hyperfeminine and the girly girl trope. Their cabin is pink and flowery, their claiming is done by enveloping them in a pink haze and giving them glamorous hair and dresses, they love gossip and fashion, they speak like valley girls, their rite of passage involves breaking hearts, the list goes on. And aside from Mitchell(and also the brief “Aphrodite’s sons and daughters I wasn’t too worried about”), whenever Aphrodite kids are mentioned, they are always girls, so to emphasize their femininity(which is scorned and derided). It’s as if being an Aphrodite kid inherently makes you more feminine than other demigod children(for the most part, at least). It would be nice to see how an Aphrodite boy operates and is seen at camp, and how they’re looked down upon not just because of the general narrative and in-universe disdain for femininity, but because they’re boys who don’t operate according to the strict masculine gender norm of manhood. It all could’ve been so interesting and given us a new and more diverse and profound view of femininity, but nope, Rick just did the “Aphrodite kids are the stock girly girls who are mocked because they’re shallow weak and stupid and not much else” trope and nothing more. It’s sad. Ofc, it’s not a surprise, because the not like other girls trope was strong in that era, and PJO is not unique in the slightest in this regard. But it’s disappointing all the same.

So i was scrolling through the drew tanaka tag as one does and found this post by @curseofdelos that i was like !!!!! about, and i read through it and I was like. Yes, but also… 

So this is my also. I suggest reading the post first as it does very well in explaining the issues with Piper and Drew’s writing and why that’s harmful. 

But I’d like to take it a step further and extrapolate to the bigger picture of cabin 10. 

What about the boys? 

TL;DR: There are a lot of in-text and meta negotiations of masculinity versus femininity that occur in /influence PJO/HOO, and that leaves boys in the Aphrodite Cabin in an awkward limbo. 

Before we get into the nitty gritty, I first want to establish that masculinity is not femininity. Which like, duh, but that means that anything that is not masculine can and will be considered feminine. Point blank, no nuance (There is a literature backing, but I think its a bit too much, so I’ll just put it at the end if you wanna find the article I’m referring to). 

And that’s what Rick is operating on, while you can’t deny it is a spectrum, at the time of writing TLH and such, there was a general societal understanding of masculinity as being macho and strong and rejecting softness for hardcore or whatever. And this positioning is where femininity comes in, and where we can begin to talk about Cabin 10. 

Rick writes Cabin 10 as inherently feminine, thus attaching “beauty” to this narrow idea; best shown through describing the cabin as a Barbie house and Piper's claiming ordeal. It is a place where there is nothing “masculine,” leading to the stereotype of Aphrodite kids not being able to fight, since war is masculine and thus out of their purview. 

This does deconstruct with Silena and then Piper, but the existence of Drew proves that it is still upheld and important enough to the story. 

I do believe that Rick tried to have his “oh you can still be feminine without being hyper feminine!” moment with Piper & Drew’s conflict, however, he failed to give Drew enough agency to make it seem like there was a genuine conflict rather than just “mean girl v girl-next-door.” (again, @curseofdelos explained it very well, go read!). 

Now with the girls out of the way, the boys are kinda… lost in the sauce? The only Aphrodite boy we get is Mitchell and it is very telling that a lot of people hc him as gay… which again is the posturing of masculinity vs femininity and whatever is not masculine is therefore feminine. And being gay is being attracted to masculinity and this feminine etc etc (according to societal norms). The fact that he is the only male Aphrodite kid rep is again, telling and really affirms the inherent femininity of Cabin 10. 

“Hey! He’s not the only ‘Aphrodite’ Kid! What about Michael!” And Michael just further proves my point! He’s the son of Venus, and Roman counterparts are considered as more “warlike” than their Greek ones. War being considered masculine and a rejection of femininity, as established earlier w/ Cabin 10 kids not being warriors. Now, Micheal exists as a (hyper) masculine counterpoint to Drew’s (hyper) feminine, making the Roman Venus a direct opposite as the Greek Aphrodite. 

This is actually, kinda commendable in terms of plot, since it helps reinforce the differences between Greek and Roman and how extreme they were. Great storytelling device, bad everything else. 

One more thing I want to touch on is the vilification of femininity, and why it must be rejected in the pjo/hoo. You can only fight if you adopt masculine traits, and therefore not fighting and still surviving means that you are doing something dishonorable like, abusing charmspeak (Drew) or using magic (Circe, Medea, etc) or even spying (Silena). Which is a very masculine idea, of how things should be solved by violence ( i mean, look at violence perpetrated by men compared to women in our society…) I think I’ve said this before, but in Piper’s arc, there needs to be an antagonist to prove how she doesn’t “fit in” at CHB, and create that tension of her either choosing to save her father and betray or continue the quest as is; and that antagonist ended up being Drew, and that makes sense bc Cabin 10 is against what Piper is characterized as, and she just is a rejection of that femininity. 

Anyways, let me not get away from myself. Basically, within the story, there is no real opportunity for the characters to reject gender stereotypes without falling into others. And Rick wrote himself into that hole. 

Literature Referenced: Shippers, Mimi. “Masculinity and Femininity, Theories of.” The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Gender and Sexuality Studies, 2016. Edited by Nancy A. Naples. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[panharmonium]

“now you can still make that happen.”

just a few thoughts prompted by this awesome post by @clotpolesonly, which i did not want to hijack - it is fantastic on its own and does not need my thoughts attached to it.  and you should definitely go read it before you proceed here, because a) it’s great, and b) this particular post of mine is not going to make a lot of sense without it. 

(a preview, for those who haven’t already clicked through: the linked post above is a terrific analysis of why the second part of will’s line “you’re a good man, merlin.  a great man.  and one day you’re going to be servant to a great king” feels a little bizarre in comparison to the rest of his dialogue, and how it seems contradictory to what we’ve learned about will’s character previously.)

i LOVED hearing somebody pull this moment out and question it, because this is a moment that i have also thought about a LOT, and while i personally have ended up in a place where i do understand why will might say something like this in this particular context, i ALSO fully agree that this is the most muddled line he has, characterization-wise, because i don’t think the average viewer is going to sit around thinking about how to fit this slightly unusual moment into will’s established characterization, or even recognize that’s it’s unusual at all; they’re just going to CHANGE will’s established characterization to align with this line.  and what i mean by that is that i'm pretty sure this line is solely responsible for every fic i’ve ever seen where will’s reaction to arthur is portrayed as either a mistake, an overreaction, or anything other than a legitimate, valid concern about merlin’s safety/well-being, and for that reason alone i’d be happy to have it modified.

but despite this (because i HAVE sat around thinking about how to fit this moment into will’s established characterization), i actually do look at this line in a way that makes it feel natural to me in context, and now that somebody else has brought it up, i figured i’d just write my own thoughts down, in case anybody else has ever spent any time thinking about this.  (an unlikely possibility, I realize, given that will only shows up in one episode, but i have given up pretending that i am not super over-invested in this character, so - here i am, once again offering you yet another very long post about a very niche thing.)

so.

first of all, the absolute most important takeaway from the whole “you’re going to be servant to a great king” moment is exactly what OP says (and it’s also exactly the same thing that this particular line is in danger of obscuring, for folks who aren’t thinking carefully about it) - just because will realizes that arthur wasn’t going to let the villagers die without risking his own neck doesn’t mean that will is now riding the arthur pendragon bandwagon.  will doesn’t save arthur because he’s suddenly become arthur’s biggest fan; he saves arthur because it’s the right thing to do.  will doesn’t have time to sit around and think about it and debate with himself like ‘hm i don’t like this guy but merlin thinks he’s ok and the man did risk himself for our village so maybe i should still help him out.’  he just jumps.  instinctively, automatically.  he sees somebody in danger and his unthinking reflex is to get in the way.  it’s just who he is.  he would have done that for anybody who was standing in front of him.

will has not suddenly turned into an arthur stan just because arthur did one okay thing.  will still witnesses arthur aggressively interrogating merlin about sorcery, and, like OP says, will still lies.  he still doesn’t trust arthur, not with merlin’s life.  he still doesn’t think camelot is a good place for merlin.  and he still doesn’t think merlin’s “friendship” with arthur is real or safe or healthy or anything equal to what merlin deserves.

so the question then becomes - why on earth does will say what he says???

you’re a good man, merlin.  a great man.  and one day you’re going to be servant to a great king.  now you can still make that happen.

(i’ll be honest, before i get into this - i think OP is right.  i don’t think the writers really thought about it this hard.  i think it probably was, in fact, just meant to be our customary reaffirmation that arthur is cool and merlin is on the right path, even though that fact looks kind of...questionable by any logical assessment of the situation.)

HOWEVER, i am stubborn, and i’m personally committed to making as much of the show’s canon work for me as possible, so back when i was doing a bunch of characterization work on will last year, i thought about this line a lot.  because the linked post above is RIGHT; it doesn’t fit, at first glance, and it would be easy to draw the wrong conclusion from it, if you weren’t paying attention.

and ultimately, after i thought about it for a long time, i ended up in a place where i felt like i understood where this line was coming from, and i no longer felt that it was necessarily out of character (though again, let’s be real - you shouldn’t have to do that much thinking about something to figure out how it could fit with someone’s characterization.  the writers could have been a bit clearer.)

but anyway, that said - the following is how i conceive of that bit, if it helps anybody feel better about that scene.  this isn’t the only way to think about it, by any means, or the “correct” way (as i said earlier, i do think it’s completely reasonable to say “this wasn’t a super well-thought out line” and discard it).  this is just the interpretation that feels most natural to me.

i think, ultimately, what helps me understand this line is acknowledging that will, in this scene, is giving merlin a gift.  by lying for merlin, will protects the Big Secret from being discovered, but when he does so, he’s giving merlin back more than just his physical safety.  he’s giving merlin the freedom to pursue all of the things that will himself was so adamantly against for the entirety of this episode, all of the things that will repeatedly told merlin it wasn’t good for him to want.  his lie saves merlin’s life, yes, but it also ensures that merlin can return to camelot, continue to work as arthur’s servant, go back to the very life that will himself thinks is stunningly unworthy for merlin, but which merlin, for some inexplicable, unfathomable reason, feels is bafflingly important.

will gives merlin a gift, in this scene, despite his own misgivings.  and when he says “one day you’re going to be servant to a great king,” that is a gift of another kind: trust.  merlin is the one who first described arthur with those particular words, up in the hedgerow, when he and will were arguing with each other.  “one day arthur will be a great king, but he needs my help.”  and what will is doing here, by using those words, isn’t so much him declaring his own support for arthur as a ruler; it’s him saying to merlin, “i heard you.  i listened to you.  i don’t know why you’re so convinced of this, and i know we were having a row, but i was still listening to you.  i trust you.”  

will says this to merlin, in his last few moments, even though will himself isn’t sure about arthur, or camelot, or any of it.  it doesn’t matter that will isn’t sure.  will doesn’t want to dole out more warnings right now.  he doesn’t want the last thing merlin hears from him to be another admonishment, another critique, another “you don’t know what you’re doing and this is going to blow up in your face.”  will wants the last thing merlin hears from him to be i want you to have what you want, even if i don’t understand why you want it.  i'm giving you what you asked for, just because you asked for it.  i’m choosing to trust you. 

will has already said everything he needs to say about arthur.  he’s already told merlin what he thinks of this whole camelot situation.  but sometimes, when you love somebody, you have to take your hands off the wheel.  will tells merlin “one day you’re going to be servant to a great king” (repeating something merlin specifically said to him, something merlin said in the middle of a heated argument, something merlin prefaced with “i don’t expect you to understand”), because will is telling him “i heard you when you told me this, even if you didn’t think i was listening.”  he’s telling merlin “i have faith in you, even if i don’t have faith in him.”  it’s him relinquishing control over the situation. 

will has absolutely no reason to trust arthur.  he doesn’t trust arthur, truly.  he says what he says for merlin.  it’s something he offers to merlin, as a gift.  it’s part of their reconciliation.  it’s why merlin immediately follows will’s now you can still make that happen with “thanks to you.”  merlin acknowledges everything will is giving him, in that moment, brushing past the mention of arthur like it’s not even there, immediately re-centering will in the discussion.  “thanks to you.”  you did this for me.  you’re giving this to me.  

“one day you’re going to be servant to a great king.”  just this line, itself, is a gift.  for will to say that to merlin - it’s a gift.  it’s an acknowledgment that merlin’s convictions are worthy, even if will doesn’t understand them.  it’s will apologizing for saying that merlin doesn’t know what’s best for his own life, it’s will handing merlin the reins, it’s will saying i don’t trust him on his own merits; i trust you.  i’m trusting what you told me.  i trust you to know what you need, so i’m going to give you everything you want, even if i don’t know why you want it.

and i do think that this is absolutely, 100% influenced by the timing.  in a different situation, will wouldn’t have backed down like that.  he would have continued to give merlin grief, to ask hard questions, to criticize, to say “why are you being like this; you can do better than this; why are you making bad choices; why are you settling for so much less than you deserve?”

but will is dying, and i don’t think he wants to leave merlin on that note.  merlin has already lived his entire life almost completely unsupported by the people around him, mistrusted by his neighbors, hunted by the ruling powers of multiple nations, prevented from pursuing any answers that might have helped him accept himself, always mired down in a bog of self-doubt.  will can’t bring himself to leave merlin that same way.  he doesn’t want to leave merlin with more ‘i don’t trust you and i don’t support you and i don’t think you should do the things you think you need to do,’ even if it’s offered in the spirit of “i just want the best for you.”  he can’t bring himself to do that.  so instead he makes a concession, for merlin’s sake, and chooses to offer merlin complete, radical trust, in spite of his own doubts.

it’s...this is a trust fall.  this is will saying i trust you to drive this car, even though it looks like you’re about to drive us off a cliff.  and merlin, for his part, knows full well that will probably would have pushed harder, under different circumstances, but he also recognizes will’s concession for the gift that it is.  he understands that will’s personal opinions may not have changed, but that will is saying ‘i believe in you, despite everything.’  he understands that will is stepping off a bridge with nothing but merlin’s word to assure him that the drop is survivable.

i do still think it’s totally reasonable to feel like this is an unusual thing for will to say, for sure.  but for me, personally, when i look at it this way, i see it as fully in-character, because the core thing about will, for me, is that he consistently does things that go against his own interests in order to help merlin.  coming back to fight a battle he knows can’t be won, saving arthur’s life, pretending to be a sorcerer - his decisions consistently make his own life worse and merlin’s life better.  the things he does are always done for merlin’s sake, at his own expense.  

and sometimes - like in this scene - i think the things he says are said for merlin’s sake, too.  

merlin and will both know each other too well for merlin to really think that will is jumping on the arthur train.  merlin knows exactly what will is really trying to say.  he knows it’s a parting gift.  he understands that it’s just will’s way of saying, “i’m leaving and i want you to know i love you this much, to jump when you jump, even though i personally think the drop is deadly.  that’s how much i trust you.  that’s how much i believe in you.”

merlin understands, and will feels understood.  they leave arthur and camelot behind, after that exchange.  they’ve both said everything they need to say about it.  they’ve put that argument to bed, in the best way they can manage, with the time they have available to them.  will has made his feelings about arthur and camelot clear, and now he’s also made it clear that he trusts merlin to know what’s right.  whether or not that proves to be true, later, isn’t relevant - only merlin can make decisions about where his life is going, after all, and will acknowledges that fact, here, at the end, as a gift to his only friend.  he might have taken a different tack if he weren’t dying, yeah.  but since he is, he decides that merlin deserves to walk away from this moment with at least the small comfort of knowing that will, when the chips were down, chose to trust merlin implicitly.

that’s the only reason why arthur’s future as “a great king” even comes up in that conversation.  the rest of that scene is just about merlin and will, and how much they care for each other.  

and for two people who never had anybody else, that’s just as it should be.

[terryblount]

Wolfenstein: Youngblood Review

Let me begin this review by saying the following: I play video games in order to be entertained (well…it’s also my job, but anyway). I don’t care about politics, agendas, races, sexes or whatever else that has nothing to do with gaming. Gaming is my hobby, and I am happy I can do this professionally. Having said that, my goal is to let you know whether a game is worth your hard-earned money or not. With this out of the way, let’s continue.

Discussing Wolfenstein Games

My last video review was on Wolfenstein: The Old Blood, back in 2015. While The New Order along with The Old Blood amused me, I wasn’t really a fan of The New Colossus. The game had very lengthy cutscenes, which felt unnecessary in a game where you should be shooting Nazis from start to finish. The New Colossus also wandered away from the more serious tone of the prior two games and tried to be funny but sometimes failed.

In case you don’t know, these rebooted Wolfenstein games have had rather serious tones, especially when compared to other FPS titles like DOOM, Serious Sam, or of course Duke Nukem. So with Youngblood they’ve greatly expanded the humor, which can be both bad and good. They’ve also went to great lengths to make this game feel almost completely different, which is also bad and good and makes me both happy and sad.

From the development side, it’s very noticeable that Arkane Studios (Dishonored, Prey) also worked on this game, along with MachineGames (the creators of the previous three Wolfenstein games). At first I thought the inclusion of a studio like Arkane could be awesome, but I became concerned when watching some gameplay videos. It turns out my fears were right. Maybe the two studios couldn’t mesh their different styles, or maybe something else happened, but Youngblood is a big mess.

I think the screenshot says it all.

Story Time & The ‘Terror Twins’

You play as one of the twin daughters of William Joseph (BJ) and Anya Oliwa Blazkowicz, named Jessie (Jes) and Zofia (Soph). It’s been twenty years since BJ killed Hitler and liberated the world from Nazis. Now, in the 1980s, for unknown reasons BJ has disappeared and the twins embark on an allegedly epic adventure to find ‘papa’ Blazkowicz, leading you to Nazi occupied Paris.

Jes and ‘papa’ Blazkowicz, enjoying a little bit of hunting.

The story mostly makes no sense and has little depth or sophistication. However, since this is a brainless first person shooter, I really don’t mind. It’s clear from the start the game is not trying to be serious, anyway.

I will confess I didn’t expect to like the new protagonists after playing so many times as BJ. For me, though, they are awesome. They’re fearless like papa but also funny, dorky, and sort of nuts. For instance, there’s an early cutscene where the twins attempt to kill a Nazi for the first time, which is hilarious and disgusting at the same time. Most of the dialogues between them are pretty funny, even if the writing is not that great overall, which is a plus for me.

First blood for the youngbloods!

“We were born to kill Nazis.” –Jes trying to convince the resistance leader to help them.

Now don’t get me wrong with my praise for the twins. I still love playing as BJ and I really like him, but he’s a very grim guy. So if I have to choose between serious or fun, I will always choose fun, even if I am not used to playing as female characters in first person games. I’m pretty sure that even the Doomguy agrees with me since we are talking about his “aunts.” At least these twins are way better than the Far Cry: New Dawn twins.

Soph and ‘mama’ Blazkowicz, enjoying a little bit of fighting/training.

Graphics, Performance, & Controls

Youngblood looks good, and the game engine (id Tech 6) works like a charm. The performance is remarkable, and I had basically zero problems with the game. I had some minor random stutters, but I am not completely sure it was the game’s fault. Either way it’s nothing to be concerned about. I only wish you could disable motion blur and weapons effects completely. I hate motion blur and some of the weapon effects fogged my vision. For more details on the subject you can read John’s performance analysis.

Half an hour into the game and I already don’t like these guys.

“We ain’t killed no Nazis .”

–Soph reminding her sister that they haven’t killed any Nazis.

The game controls just fine. I didn’t notice any kind of forced acceleration or smoothing. You can change the FOV (field of view), but unfortunately you cannot disable or even lower the atrocious head bobbing. I usually don’t mind it, but in this case it gave me headaches and the strong need of a good dose of Dramamine. The UI and menus are fine, even if the menus are totally designed for consoles.

Sound & Voice Acting

I love the short elevator cut-scenes and the 80’s music in the elevators. During gameplay the sounds are fine, but I couldn’t fall in love with the gun sounds. The voice acting is pretty good overall, with the twins voice acting being great. So the audio design is acceptable but nothing special.

Shooting Nazis In The Jugular

So let’s get down to business: gameplay. Sorry guys, but the game doesn’t play well. I know they tried to mix it up with new ideas, but they failed. After the introduction you reach the Paris catacombs, where the base of operations is located. From there you can restock ammunition, health, and armor.

“I only hunt Nazis Jes, not animals.” –Soph

Also in the base of operations you can talk to different NPCs (non player characters) and receive new side missions. Paris is divided into different areas you can fast travel to once you’ve unlocked the areas. Keep in mind that the game does not tell you which missions are main or side ones, which is weird.

More microtransactions?! Awesome, I love microtransactions, especially in single player games. Oh right, I almost forgot there is also co-op…

All areas are crawling with enemies, and you can engage them stealthily or go full-frontal. Of course you can also avoid them, though some areas are harder to sneak by unnoticed. Most obnoxiously, whether you clear out an area of enemies or not, all the enemies will respawn when you return, Far Cry 2 style. What a bullshit.

It’s especially terrible because you will be forced to return to many of the same areas in various missions, so you will have to redo everything from the beginning. Thankfully there are several different paths, which allow you to avoid most enemies. The world building is very familiar to Dishonored 2, likely because Arkane Studios was involved in the development.

“How the fuck should I know?” –Jes after being asked if they can make it, right before they jump without a parachute from an enemy zeppelin.

As for navigating the world using a map, the game doesn’t have a classic map. Instead you get an overview map just like in Dishonored 2, thus making path-finding really hard most of the time. The mini-map doesn’t really help either. Sometimes it took me five minutes to clear an area and twice that to find my way out. Thankfully you can fast travel from anywhere back to the base of operations, but everything will respawn, as noted already.

Weapons, Leveling Up & Some Other RPG Crap

Even though the shooting mechanics are pretty solid and most weapons feel unique with upgrades and attachments, I didn’t enjoy the weapons (even with all the upgrades and attachments). That’s probably because all enemies including the playable characters have levels. You read that right. Youngblood is yet another FPS to include RPG elements, just like Far Cry: New Dawn did recently.

Why is this leveling stuff in here? I really don’t get it, seriously. Making all human enemies bullet sponges only works in specific games. Even The Division 2 realized the problem with this type of design. I get they want to make the game lengthier and grindier, but it’s a god damn lazy and stupid game design.

How on earth did they manage to get these pictures? I will admit though, they look terrorific!

There are also two kinds of ammunition and some guns will do less damage to specific enemies. So you always have to check the enemy health bar to see what kind of ammunition is needed in order to achieve maximum damage. It feels like a chore, plain and simple. I find it completely unnecessary, particularly in a game where there are no limitations on how many guns you can carry.

“Just like daddy taught us.” –Jes after she and her sister wipe a whole enemy squad.

Since there is a level up system you also have skills available for purchase. None of these skills are anything original or even interesting. They even included lame skills like ‘extra health’ and ‘extra armor.’ Jesus… what the hell happened? You can unlock some melee skills that will make the game a joke. It’s way faster and easier to go and stab everyone in the face instead of shooting them, seriously.

Micro-transactions & Greed

To make things even worse, you can also buy stuff with real money. Yes, microtransactions are part of the game, with payable upgrades, skins, and boosters. Can you finish the game without paying for anything? Definitely, but that’s not the point. Even if these are “cosmetic” only, the whole practice is unethical, scummy and greedy as fuck. Screw microtransactions and shame on all publishers who push tactics as such. Also who cares for skins in a first person shooter?

Where the hell is all the blood? The gore is seriously messed up in this game.

Other Weird Game Issues

The game has weird blood effect logic relating to your armor suit. This is the same armor BJ used to wear, and it made sense when no bullets would penetrate it until the last shots, which then produced blood effects. In Youngblood when you get shot, you see blood squirts all the time, as if you’re armor suit doesn’t even work. It’s like some developer forgot to toggle off the effect.

“Yeah, that was a trip to creep city.” –Soph after being asked by Jes if she had “the talk” with their mom.

The dismemberment and gore system is also messed up, being almost completely random. Sometimes you can unload a whole clip into an enemy without damaging his body. Other times you shoot just once and open a hole in his chest. It really gets on my nerves when selling points of a game don’t work as intended, like RAGE 2 (another Bethesda-published game) having problems with blood and bullet decals. At least two months later they fixed it (in reality they fucked it even more). Thank you Bethesda…

Here the blood works as intended. What the hell?! Seriously, I have no idea what is going with Bethesda’s games lately.

AI & Stealth

The enemy AI is horrible, just awful. Enemies walk past you while you are in ‘cloak’ mode, but they can still tilt their heads and look straight at you while they keep on walking in a different direction. It’s hilarious and creepy, especially the first time you see it. Stealth is toned down compared to the previous games, even if you have the ‘cloak’ ability available from the beginning.

“Slick as a whistle, as daddy used to say.” –One of the twins right after they complete their mission objective.

The AI of your sister is actually not bad and she rarely blows your cover. Of course you will still do most of the killing, but she will assist when she can. One thing she doesn’t seem able to do is to use cover and melee. Actually, the cover system is awesome, ripped straight out of Medal of Honor (2010), where you can lean to every direction instead of being limited to left or right.

If the twins had a wish, it would be to bring him back to life, so they could kill him again.

Glorious Finishers?!

I used to enjoy finishers in the Wolfenstein games but not anymore. The animations are far too few and many don’t connect properly. They feel floaty. Sometimes the combat finishers don’t even work. When they do work and you manage to disarm the enemy, there is some fun to to be had with choosing to automatically play out the finisher or rapidly shoot to empty a whole magazine into an enemy. The later choice can be extremely satisfying, but it’s still not enough to make much of a difference in this disaster of a game, which brings us to our conclusion.

That’s what you get when you block other people’s shots.

R.I.P. Wolfenstein

Even if the game has some small parts that are actually good, the rest of it is just dreadful. This game might actually be the death of the series and no twin badass sisters can save it from doom. Honestly don’t even bother, especially if you are planning to play solo. Now if you like FPS games with RPG elements and you don’t care about the things I mentioned, then you will probably enjoy this game. I obviously didn’t.

“To capitaine Blazkowicz, cheers!”

-Juju, just Juju, enough said.

Ohhh. Come on, bucko. Don’t you want a… balloon?

I didn’t even finish the game because the last boss is actually SpongeBob himself. Seriously, the last fight lasts for ages, only because you have to shoot the boss a crap ton of times. If you don’t care about spoilers you can watch this video (FYI the video starts at the final phase), or any video as a matter of fact and see for yourselves. The amount of time you need to spend to take him down it’s absurd and plain dull, which can honestly summarize the whole game experience.

The Blazkowicz twins

Great performance

Cover System

Map design

Forgettable side characters

Absence of regular map

Bullet spongy enemies

Uninspired boss fights

Dull fetch side quests

Microtransactions

Enemy respawn

Boring skills

Terrible AI

No pause

DRM

Computer Specs: CPU: i5 4440, GPU: Palit 1660Ti OC 6GB, RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws X 16GB HDD: Crucial 275GB MX300, OS: Win7, 1080p

Playtime: 10+ hours total.

The post Wolfenstein: Youngblood Review appeared first on DSOGaming.

Wolfenstein: Youngblood Review published first on https://touchgen.tumblr.com/