 |
|
Over the course of this closing console generation, Sony’s PSN has been host to a number of titles that challenged both the general aesthetic of gaming, as well as their basic mechanical concepts. Games like Journey and Flower instantly spring to mind and now enters Rain. Developed by Sony’s JapanStudio, PlayStation C.A.M.P., and Acquire, Rain has clear ambitions to reach the same lofty status as those aforementioned titles, ready to champion the “games are art” argument. IsRain a thunderstorm of an experience, or does it simply come and go with the impact of a morning drizzle? Read our review to find out.
Rain gives players control over a young boy who finds himself lost in the rain. After seeing a young girl, the boy’s inclination is to follow her. As the boy passes through a large door, he is suddenly made invisible and only the constant, driving rainfall brings to light his faintly visible form. Standing under some form of cover, and therefore getting dry, the boy and girl are once again invisible.
Such is the simplistic nature of Rain. The narrative is simple. Boy chases after girl who may need help. The mechanics are even simpler. Get pelted with precipitation and be seen. Run for cover, and hide right out in the open. While many games have benefited from a less-is-more, back-to-basics approach, it simply doesn’t suit this title. Rather, the lack of both narrative and mechanical depth unfortunately has rendered the game as an experience that just feels like there could have and should have been more. In doing so, Rain feels like a game of mostly squandered potential, but admittedly, it isn’t all bad.
 |
|
The core bit that Rain manages to get right, it knocks out of the park. And that is the creation of the game’s mood. The developers managed to achieve this by delivering a tremendous sensory experience. Visually, the game is quite magnificent. The landscape is imposing without being frightening. The world just feels empty and creates a sense of unease rather than fear. The enemy creatures however, are what stand out as the things that go bump in the night. Tension and scares come from encounters with these skeletal looking creatures and it’s too bad that these encounters are so fleeting.
Additionally, the game’s primary antagonist, The Unknown, embodies just the right amount of frightful relentlessness that countless slasher-film villains have conditioned players and kids to fear. Also worth mentioning is the spot-on animation of the two young wanderers. A subtle hand brushing along a tightly hugged wall or a slight stumble while running through a puddle all create a great sense of weight and realism to the character models, and a give some added connection to the player.
The never-ending rain, a forgotten city that feels as though it may swallow the player, and the dream-like musical score all combine to create a feeling that is more melancholy than outright sad. It’s more otherworld-ly than realistically scary. It’s a production design that engrosses the player with ease and truly makes them want to care about the beautifully animated boy and girl. The sights and sounds of this game are the main selling point. All that said, it’s just a shame that this aspect really is the game’s only selling point, as the other portions of the game just don’t pull their own weight.
 |
|
Mechanically, there simply isn’t enough. Calling Rain a stealth platformer wouldn’t be too far off base, and that combination in and of itself can produce intriguing gameplay results but the potential isn’t realized in Rain. This is platforming and stealth at their most basic and players familiar with the mechanic will likely grow restless quickly due to how little the game does with its “visible in the rain/invisible under cover” gameplay. Anytime something new is introduced, like moving cover, it’s generally only ever used to get past an immediate section. New mechanical wrinkles never really build into a full move set. The game gives the player the answer before a puzzle, the player replicates what they’ve just learned, and they move on.
It’s also no help that some portions of gameplay are grossly inconsistent and result in deaths and reloads. The biggest offender being the use of invisible walls. Rainwants to guide the player through a story, so it wants to keep the player chugging along the correct path. Normally this is fine, and many modern games have managed to find ways to do this that aren’t so obviously intrusive to the immersion the game is trying to build. Invisible walls are notorious for their disruption of player immersion, and they are everywhere – Except for when there’s a chance the game could kill the boy during a platforming or chase section, then they are nowhere to be found. These sections can often prove to be more frustrating than fun because it’s inconsistent instead of challenging.
 |
|
Gameplay isn’t the only element that gets lost in the downpour, as the narrative doesn’t do much to help elevate the experience either. The setting is of course stellar, and the premise is timeless. It’s when the game begins to expand on the story that it shows a lack of direction. Many questions arise, and very few get answered satisfactorily. Letting players fill in some blanks is fine, but Rain never quite gets the fulfilling conclusion it needs.
If Rain didn’t exist in the same space as games like Braid, Limbo, or Bastion, perhaps some of the shortcomings could be forgiven. But the fact is that it’s no longer enough for a game to simply get by on its art direction alone. Compelling gameplay and plot, if that’s what the game is shooting for, need to be present as well. That’s not to take anything away from Rain’s uncanny ability to use its aesthetic and the constant rainfall to create a perfectly melancholic mood that few games could. It also manages to deliver a few moments of genuine tension. But the under-cooked mechanics and narrative hold the game back from living up to the potential it seems to have and place all the pressure on the aesthetic to carry the whole game. Unfortunately, that weight proves to be too heavy.
 |
|
It was Rocksteady Studios that first stunned gamers and comic book fans alike when they proved with Batman: Arkham Asylum that not only could a Batman game not be terrible, but offer a genuine chapter in the character’s mythology. With Arkham City that team took their approach into the truly open world genre, with similarly impressive results.
Determined to keep the momentum going, Warner Bros. has placed the series into the hands of WB Games Montreal – a studio founded to help develop the Wii U version of Batman: Arkham City and more specifically to create Batman: Arkham Origins, a prequel setting the stage for the later games. Now that the game has arrived, does Origins succeed in shocking and surprising as well as their predecessors?
In a way, yes. In the space of just two games, Rocksteady managed to take theArkham brand from obscure to industry-leading, heaping an absurd amount of responsibility onto a new team’s shoulders. With that in mind, many fans (including us) assumed WB Games Montreal would succeed if only managing to give playersmore of Rocksteady’s excellence, without actually trying to break new ground. At E3 2013, that was the impression we got.
 |
|
And for the first few hours, that’s largely what Origins delivers. The premise of the eight assassins gathered by Black Mask to take out ‘the Bat’ on Christmas Eve is intriguing enough, but soon takes a back seat to the true purpose of the game: to follow Batman in his second year on the job, coming face-to-face with villains he will come to know like brothers. Villains that Arkham fans have come to know just as well.
Much of the criticism leveled against Origins thus far is based on the fact that while the story may be treading new ground, WB Games Montreal didn’t actually bring much innovation to Rocksteady’s formula. Although that might be true – and indeed, some of the gameplay and level design fall short of Rocksteady’s standard – fans of Arkham City would be hard-pressed to name a mechanic that was in drastic need of overhauling.
And as a sidenote, it seems a tad hypocritical to respond to the news that Arkham Origins would not be developed by Rocksteady with overwhelming skepticism (“how could anyone possibly match what Rocksteady has accomplished?”), and later accuse the developers of not outdoing said predecessors. By our estimation, offering an adventure that feels right at home alongside Asylum andCity is an accomplishment in itself.
 |
|
While Origins lacks the spectacle or cinematic opening of City, players will feel right at home dropped into a pre-Arkham Gotham City (an open game world even larger than Arkham City‘s). As was feared, the premise of a younger, greener Batman doesn’t have any impact on the core combat (Bruce Wayne is as deadly as ever), the developers rely on the atmosphere and secondary characters to remind players that this is not the Batman they know and love. Not yet, anyway.
Setting both the GCPD and Jim Gordon up as Batman’s enemies – since they have yet to realize he’s on the side of good – works to establish the fact that Batman is still learning the ropes, but it’s the writing that helps deliver the message. The decision to replace Kevin Conroy (the long-time voice of Batman) with Roger Craig Smith was hotly debated among fans, but the extra anger and aggression Smith brings to the less-methodical vigilante helps sell the premise.
The story of Origins may not call on the youth of Wayne as much as the marketing has led fans to hope, the horror with which Gotham citizens first look upon ‘the Bat,’ and a memorable exchange between Wayne and his trusted servant Alfred are experiences Batman fans rarely see, but will surely enjoy.
 |
|
When Rocksteady perfected their combat/counter system with Arkham City, they created one of the best third-person combat systems to date (that has since been adopted by many other franchises). WB Games Montreal hasn’t reinvented that wheel, so players craving something designed to be more challenging – not simply satisfying – may find the combat loops increasingly rote.
The developers offer a change of pace by way of their boss encounters, which puts the studio’s hand-picked group of assassins to work. Unfortunately, not every assassin is given the same amount of screen time, and their individual treatments will range from inspired and enjoyable to forgettable, depending on the player.
On the plus side, the developers spoke at length about wanting to make the divisions between boss battles and the core gameplay less noticeable – a goal they have certainly achieved. WB Games has by no means reinvented the idea of a boss fight, but have cast aside many contrived requirements (or at least disguised them better). The result: players defeat difficult enemies in a way that Batman conceivably would, in comics, animation or live-action.
 |
|
But no discussion of Batman can ever be had without mentioning Joker in the same breath – a fact the creative leads of the project clearly understand. Skepticism over whether or not voice actor Troy Baker could capture the character was put to rest when Baker demonstrated his skill in public, and Origins doesn’t truly hit its pace until Joker joins the fray. We’ll let players decide if that’s due to the character’s strength, or Baker’s performance.
Telling the tale of Batman and Joker’s first meeting is a task even great writers would refuse, so the decision to tackle it head on – given the amount of pressure already placed on Origins – is admirable. The fact that it’s done so well is truly shocking. The game’s writers don’t attempt to simply explain how the two crossed paths, but explain the borderline-obsessive relationship the two share by the events of Arkham City.
Baker’s performance and the execution of that storyline is not only a massive nod to fans, but a means to display the team’s love for Batman’s comic book mythology, Alan Moore’s “The Killing Joke” chief among them.
 |
|
It becomes clear at times that the developers may not realize which elements of their game are the strongest, forcing players to pay lip service to other elements to continue the parts of the game that are actually well-designed (a criticism becoming more and more prevalent). And in the massive open world of Gotham City- which, like its predecessors, still feels devoid of actual life – that issue can be problematic.
Since the game’s story takes time to get moving, the wealth of side-content and optional missions could seriously stall the pacing in the game’s early stages. The central storyline does offer some new takes on ‘the world’s greatest detective’ using his intellect as well as his fists, but with a plot meant to establish, not necessarily thrill, the pacing does struggle where the previous Arkham games did not.
Again, fans may not mind, since the chance to see the birth of Batman and Joker’s rivalry well-told is incentive enough. But in the case of Origins, players who are easily irritated should consider sticking to the main missions, and returning to side-content upon completion.
With complements to the core gameplay, and by maintaining the story and style standards of Rocksteady’s greats, Batman: Arkham Origins offers a worthwhile beginning to an acclaimed trilogy. And most importantly, a faithful adaptation of the comic icon.
 |
|
They say familiarity breeds contempt, and Activision’s Call of Duty franchise is nothing, if not familiar. With a new round chambered every 12 months, the series continues to exist on the cusp of total over-exposure, while at the same time raking in massive amounts of cash and critical plaudits on an annual basis.
With the latest entry in the franchise, titled Call of Duty: Ghosts debuting earlier today, Activision‘s embargo on reviews has finally been lifted – so just what did the critical community at large make of this all-new outing? (opinions on the game’s Xbox One version will be revealed closer to its November 22nd release).
For a more in-depth appraisal of the title, check out these choice reviews:
NOTE – The following reviews contain opinions pertaining to both current and next-gen editions of Call of Duty: Ghosts. Though mechanically identical (aside from one-or-two multiplayer mode size-caps on older hardware), the latter category does boast the better overall visuals, with particular attention being paid to the game’s 8th-gen texture work.
IGN (Scott Lowe):
“Call of Duty: Ghosts isn’t a reinvention of the franchise, but proves there’s still room for innovation within its existing formula. Though at the risk of overcomplicating things at times, its robust multiplayer gameplay, surprisingly fun co-op modes, and lengthy, challenging, and varied campaign makes Ghosts one of the best Call of Duty games to date.”
Score: 8.8/10
-
Joystiq (Xav de Matos):
“Call of Duty: Ghosts is a solid installment, but it lacks creativity and innovation. Its new engine already looks dated in the face of the competition, and it eschews many of the solid concepts seen in Black Ops 2. […]Expanding on Treyarch’s accomplishments could have elevated Call of Duty: Ghosts, but Infinity Ward largely returns to ideas it has been tweaking since the original Modern Warfare. Infinity Ward has always forged its own path, but its formulaic design document has become worn. It’s a good book, but it’s time to turn a new page.”
Score: 3.5/5
-
 |
|
Polygon (Russ Frushtik):
“Call of Duty: Ghosts is mired in a distinct lack of ambition. Outside of the stellar Extinction mode, Ghosts follows more often than it leads, bringing with it familiar missions, modes and experiences. Ghosts feels like an accountant’s sequel, with just enough content to justify a new installment. It just never goes beyond that.”
Score: 6.5/10
-
Eurogamer (Dan Whitehead):
“Ghosts, in and of itself, is a fine game. It ticks all the boxes and then blows the boxes up in glorious 1080p resolution (on PS4 at least). Those who only ever play COD will be more than happy with it, but those who have grown weary of the series will see more of their ambivalence justified this time around. Infinity Ward had a chance here to throw down the gauntlet for the next hardware generation, to set the new standard, to show that this hugely popular, much derided behemoth can dance to a different tune. It’s chosen to play a Greatest Hits package instead.”
Score: 7/10
-
Videogamer (Steven Burns):
“Outside of multiplayer, the campaign is a po-faced, nonsensical rehash of greatest hits long past. Extinction (Left 4 Dead meets Zombies) is a lot of fun, and Squads feels like a well-marketed shell for Black Ops‘ Combat Training mode. Multiplayer is still the star then, but it’s diminishing with every return, its addictiveness tempered by over-familiarity.”
Score: 7/10
-
 |
|
Giant Bomb (Jeff Gerstmann):
“Ghosts offers the same style of video game combat that Call of Duty has had since 2007. The core of it is still engaging and can be very thrilling, if you’re receptive to this type of action. In fact, it’s still my favorite online multiplayer shooter. But the bells and whistles surrounding the game are muted and missing, leaving behind that same core without giving you enough new and exciting reasons to come back. Even with the improved graphics to be had on next-generation consoles, I’d rather play Black Ops II.”
Score: 3/5
-
CVG (Nick Cowen):
“There is an overwhelming sense of familiarity one gets from playing Call Of Duty: Ghosts and that’s probably because an iteration of this series drops every year without truly reinventing the wheel. Its formula is a world-record-breaking recipe for success. It’s fun, sure, but it’s not groundbreaking. But then, for the purposes of its audience, does it need to be?”
Score: 7/10
-
Destructoid (Jim Sterling):
“Call of Duty may have picked up a reputation as one of the laziest, most callously developed cash cows in the business, but I’ve always believed that reputation was undeserved. Call of Duty: Ghosts, however, with its slapdash campaign and unambitious multiplayer, contains enough factory-standard cynicism to earn itself plenty of scorn. Nothing Ghosts does is especially bad, but nothing Ghosts does is worth paying any attention to. It exists to exist, a stopgap bit of filler spat out as the industry transitions from one generation of consoles to another.”
Score: 5/10
-
 |
|
Digital Spy (Liam Martin):
“Possibly to accommodate current and next-gen consoles, Call of Duty: Ghosts doesn’t feel like a huge step forward for the franchise. Instead, it offers a refined single and multiplayer experience, which ultimately provide more ways than ever to enjoy the action. Despite an overriding feeling of familiarity, Ghosts is another excellent entry in the Call of Duty series.”
Score: 4/5
-
Gamesradar (Lorenzo Veloria):
“All in all, Call of Duty: Ghosts takes the FPS formula established by its predecessors and doesn’t innovate. Instead, it just adds more. […] There are no memorable characters to hang on to, no jaw dropping twists–just more of what you’ve already seen before. The seller here is the multiplayer. The ability to completely customize your soldiers, the polished gameplay, and a few entertaining additions will keep you coming back to gun down your friends for hours on end. Just don’t expect to be blown away.”
Score: 4/5
-
Gamespot (Shaun McInnis):
“From an exuberant campaign full of spectacle and variety to the way Extinction’s unpredictable aliens force you to use those targeting skills in entirely new ways, Ghosts strikes an excellent balance between the familiar and the novel. This is a game that’s keenly aware of the series’ strengths, but doesn’t find itself beholden to them. No matter what standard you apply, Call of Duty: Ghosts is a terrific first-person shooter.”
Score: 8/10
-
 |
|
EGM (Ray Carsillo):
“When compared to the Call of Duty games that have come before it, Ghosts has a few problems, primarily in regards to innovation and moving the franchise forward. There’s no denying this. There’s also no denying, however, that the game’s still really damn fun to play—and even with [its] issues, Infinity Ward has proven they can still hold the line, no matter the pressure.”
Score: 7.5/10
-
OPM UK (Phil Iwaniuk):
“There’s a lot of highly polished content in Ghosts, and although it’s disappointing to see that it doesn’t truly embrace next-gen possibilities, I can’t lambaste it because I’d be denying the loveable bombast it doles out in wild, indiscriminate sprays. […] Ghosts’ multiplayer has seen wholesale changes that put most annual sports titles to shame, and the result is arresting and noob-friendly, if not revolutionary.”
Score: 8/10
-
OXM UK (Aoife Wilson):
“Call of Duty is, and has always been, a series about instant gratification. It’s fast food gaming at its most refined, a continual adrenaline rush that never thinks beyond the next kill. Ghosts maintains that heady, intoxicating momentum of shoot, kill, win, reward – but pales at the thought of taking the franchise in any interesting new directions.”
Score: 8/10
 |
|
Black Ops was the first Treyarch-developed Call of Duty title that really made a statement of its own. Up until that point, Treyarch had been the neglected stepchild to Infinity Ward‘s beloved A+ all-star – who was enjoying the spoils of a modern war. However, now that gamers have been given a taste of what Treyarch can cook up when given the reigns to Activision’s prized franchise, and carte blanche to tell their own story, that puts significant more weight on their subsequent iteration:Black Ops 2.
The game itself is touted as a follow-up to the Alex Mason and Frank Woodsadventures of the first game, but it is also much more than that – this is the firstCall of Duty to be set (partially) in the future. It also may be the last Call of Dutygame that has some semblance of continuity – one that features recognizable characters and continues an ongoing plot. Needless to say, Black Ops 2 needed to step out from big brother’s shadow – try to differentiate itself from the pack-within-the-pack, and more importantly deliver another worthy entry in the flagship franchise.
To do so competently would first require a single player campaign that is as fresh as it is engaging, which Black Ops 2 for the most part delivers. The story itself picks up in the year 2025 with Alex Mason’s son David leading his own elite task force, JSOC. David is hot on the trail of a terrorist named Raul Menendez, who has some particularly close ties to his father and his uncle Frank Woods.
 |
|
What transpires from there is a story that jumps between missions featuring the elder Mason and Woods in the ’70s and ’80s, as they hunt down Menendez, and David Mason hunting him in the future. However, unlike past Call of Duty titles, player choice weighs heavily on the proceedings, and helps influence ultimately how the entire game plays out. The idea of branching storylines has been done to death, but the way Black Ops 2 delivers them is actually quite smart and encourages replayability. For the most part players will be oblivious to the game’s various pathways, only being notified by a post-mission recap. At times it does boil down to shoot the guy or don’t shoot him, but a lot of the decisions are much more subtle than that.
Failing a mission objective even factors into the story with the introduction of theStrike Force Missions. Players will control a squad of soldiers and unmanned drones and attempt to complete a specific objective, be it securing a waypoint, defending a convoy, or executing a high value target. At any point, players can directly control any member of their squad, including the drones, or can bark out specific orders in ‘Overwatch’ mode. Unfortunately, relying on the team-based AI is a losing battle, and players are better served completing each objective themselves. What at first appeared to be a fun, RTS-inspired diversion is actually a weak addition with little to no bearing on the overarching story.
 |
|
Black Ops 2‘s is the most focused campaign the Call of Duty series has seen in quite some time, and it unfolds in such a way that each pay-off and major moment, of which there are plenty, packs a solid punch. Some might find it lacks the typical overabundance of bombast, but Treyarch’s iterations have always favored story over action. The campaign is by no means boring, in fact the near future settings and weapons are actually inventive and fun, it’s just a little tamer than gamers might be expecting.
However, even if the campaign had been a total waste, there was still the all-important multiplayer for Black Ops 2 to rely on – a section of the Call of Dutyexperience that keeps the disc in the tray for months on end. Many of the firstBlack Ops‘ signature touches have returned, like the party games and diving to prone, but for the most part, the multiplayer is as familiar as it’s ever been. Many of the game’s 14 maps (15 if you count Nuketown 2025) are smartly designed with their own near future flair. The requisite, fan-favorite modes – Deathmatch, Domination, and CTF – have also returned, along with a new one called Hardpoint, which functions similar to the Headquarters.
The real changes come in the multiplayer’s new point-based loadout system. Rather than give players a specific amount of slots and asking them to decide between various types of grenades, perks, and guns, Black Ops 2 provides players with 10 points, and lets them dictate how best to use them. Want to carry a gun with three attachments? That’s possible, but it will cost you 4 points (1 for the gun, and 3 for the attachments).
 |
|
Conversely, players who want to double stack each level of perk can do so, but that means they are unlikely to accommodate two weapons and two types of grenades. There are still some basic rules to the system, but, for the most part, the customization is left up to the players. It’s not a revolutionary addition, but the mix-and-match nature of it puts a fresh spin on preparing for battle.
Scorestreaks, a replacement for Killstreaks, are the other big change for Black Ops 2. Rather than reward players based on kills, Scorestreaks use the points earned from those kills as a way to earn rewards. However, since the streaks are based on points and not kills, that means any action with an inherent value, in addition to kills, also counts towards a streak.
Scorestreaks don’t fundamentally change the formula of the multiplayer, but they do allow objective or team-focused players to unlock rewards as well. Those rewards, however, typically come at a much higher price, with even the base-level UAV being valued at 350 points (more than 3 kills). As a result, players will find matches that are more focused on gunplay and less about avoiding a Scorestreak reward every five seconds.
 |
|
While the changes are still pretty small in the grand scheme of things, Black Ops 2‘s multiplayer is exactly what gamers expect and love: more of the same with some slight variations. To expect anything revolutionary suggests a fundamental misunderstanding of Call of Duty‘s mass appeal. The experience is still as solid as it’s ever been; it’s just not a major leap forward.
Zombies, Treyarch’s one big addition to the Call of Duty universe, has also returned with some much-needed, but mostly unsuccessful, additions. The Survival mode is still there, whereby a group of up to four fights to survive in a predetermined play space, but it’s the game’s Tranzit and Grief modes that hope to steal the show. Grief is the first stages of a competitive multiplayer for Zombies, but its lack of direct “competition” keeps it from being all that memorable.
Tranzit, on the other hand, connects all four of the Survival mode’s maps via a transport system to give the illusion of an open-world experience without clearly outlining appreciable progress or providing a clear set of goals. Zombies has been crying out for a more engrossing mode, but unfortunately Tranzit is not it. Gamers who live for this third mode will even find that the Survival maps aren’t nearly as detailed, nor do they allow for as much expansion as in past years. It’s a serviceable evolution of the formula, but it still needs some work.
 |
|
Black Ops 2, like nearly every Call of Duty since Modern Warfare, gets the job done, and does so without missing a beat in single or multiplayer. It’s branching storylines and engrossing narrative are unique additions to the franchise, but the campaign does lack the requisite high-octane experience many gamers expect. This is also the best sounding entry in the franchise thus far, but visually it’s only an incremental improvement. Multiplayer is as refined as it’s ever been, and the 10-point and Scorestreak systems give it a distinct quality, even if it’s essentially the same experience. Zombies, on the other hand, regressed to a lesser state as a result of some bold additions by Treyarch – attempts to mimic Left 4 Dead andDead Island.
Treyarch needed to make their mark with Black Ops 2 and by many accounts they did. Falling in line with expectations is easy for an annual franchise like Call of Duty, but the fact that Treyarch introduced some bold choices into the mix suggests they aren’t willing to play second fiddle any longer.
Have you had a chance to check out Call of Duty: Black Ops 2? What do you think of the game so far? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
 |
|
Beyond: Two Souls is the latest gaming “experiment” from David Cage’s Quantic Dream studio that, not unlike his previous endeavor Heavy Rain, hits with the promise of revolutionizing video game storytelling. However, while Heavy Rain was a fairy straightforward story, Beyond is anything but. Granted, without Heavy Rain‘s lead, Beyond wouldn’t even be possible, but this is the more accomplished game of the two.
While most will use the term ‘game’ when describing Beyond, it’s more of an interactive story. But that story is one of the most ambitious, nuanced, and complex narratives ever featured in a video game. Told through non-linear vignettes (think Tarantino-style storytelling), Beyond follows the character of Jodie Holmes (Ellen Page) from infancy to fully-fledged adulthood. Of course, Holmes’ experiences are not like that of your average girl, and it all has to do with her “special friend” named Aiden.
Although it is never clearly spelled out who or what Aiden is, we know that he is an entity that is psychically linked to Jodie. Jodie’s connection and interaction to Aiden make up the basis for her entire story, which explores everything from supernatural dimensions to CIA corruption to Native American mysticism. And while the game tackles larger, Hollywood blockbuster-style events, it also takes things to a personal level as Jodie tries to fit in and find love despite her status as an outcast. There are a lot of layers to the narrative; it’s as much a personal journey as it is a horror story, and is better left unspoiled.
 |
|
Cage’s story alone makes Beyond: Two Souls worth recommending, as it strives for a scope unlike anything seen in a game before. There’s a maturity to Beyond‘s narrative in that it takes Jodie to some very dark places, and gives the player agency in her decisions. There is no good path or bad path in this game either, sometimes the player is presented with horrific or troubling choices and it is up to them to choose what solution is “best.” So, while the game feels restrictive in some aspects, particularly in gameplay opportunities, the various ways in which the story can unfold is very freeing.
That being said, the story’s scope occasionally works against it, as the player will find themselves questioning the purpose of particular storylines and the necessity for the inevitable places the narrative goes. No matter how personally affecting certain sequences are, there are still moments that feel a little out of place, almost as if they are there simply for shock value. But, as a whole, it’s hard not to be impressed with what the team at Quantic Dream was able to pull off.
Even though Jodie is at the center of the story, it is Aiden who makes Beyondstand out from Heavy Rain, mechanically. As a spiritual force inextricably linked to Jodie, Aiden is like a second player character (he can also be controlled by a second gamer). He’s her protector, her friend, and most importantly he’s the mechanic through which the player will solve a large portion of the game’s “puzzles.”
 |
|
While Jodie herself has some agency in the world of Beyond, that will only get the player so far. In order to progress further the player will have to take control of Aiden in order to do any number of tasks. Say, for example, there’s a locked door in Jodie’s way – a fairly simple obstacle. By taking control of Aiden, the player can move through to the other side of the door and force the lock open by pulling back on both joysticks and letting go. Similarly, Aiden can be used to take control of NPCs, to manipulate electronic objects for Jodie’s benefit, or to punish those people, or other supernatural beings, that are trying to do Jodie harm.
So, while Heavy Rain gave the player control over a single character, and a very small framework in which to work, Beyond adds a new layer with Aiden. That isn’t to say the answers to each puzzle or obstacle are particularly hard to discover, or require complicated button inputs, but switching to a supernatural being to manipulate the world is still a clever mechanic.
Of particular note are sequences where Aiden is called upon not to help Jodie solve a problem, but to protect her. Having direct control of Aiden as he thrashes furniture about and at people is immensely satisfying… within the context of the story, of course. It’s almost as if, for a brief moment, the player becomes Carrie at the prom, and they are free to be as malicious and spiteful as they like. It’s moments like that which typify the brilliance of Beyond: Two Souls as an interactive experience.
 |
|
When compared to Heavy Rain, Beyond is an improvement in every appreciable way. From the scope of the story to the strength of the visuals, this is an ambitious project that must have pushed the PS3 to its limits. Facial animation in particular is stellar in the game, especially in the eyes. Players won’t just believe that Jodie Holmes is a real character, but that Ellen Page is playing her. Page’s performance, as well as Willem Dafoe‘s, is the new benchmark for outstanding mo-cap, and she deserves all the accolades that are almost assuredly headed her way.
For as much as Beyond takes a lot from Heavy Rain‘s lead, it never tries to simply get by, but instead pushes the ideas explored by its predecessor to their logical ends. The game looks better, plays better, its story is more ambitious and layered, and most importantly the acting is of the highest caliber. When it comes to shortcomings, the game does not skimp on the performances, both those captured and those rendered.
But, there are shortcomings in Beyond: Two Souls. For starters, there will be questions of whether or not Beyond is a game or an interactive movie. Yes, this time around players have a lot more direct control over Jodie and her actions, but there are still plenty of moments where the player is simply flicking the joystick or holding a button. As well, there are things to poke and prod in each varied environment, but typically there is a clear-cut solution to every puzzle. In other words, although the player controls Aiden there are only specific items he can interact with. That’s something gamers must accept going into Beyond, but some will be turned off by the experience because of that.
 |
|
As well, the minimalistic approach to control prompts – namely a single white or blue dot to signal interactive objects – sometimes works against the game, and makes it hard to discern what exactly the player should do. The same goes for the reaction-based actions (i.e. dodging, kicking, punching, etc.), which sometimes don’t adequately communicate the correct action.
As a whole, though, Beyond: Two Souls is without question one of the most ambitious undertakings of this generation – an interactive experience with a massive scope, tremendous mo-cap performances, and a story that, while a little convoluted in places, competently encompasses several decades of a girl’s very complex life. Controlling Jodie and Aiden makes for a unique combination of mechanics and puzzle-solving, but the limitations of what the player can and can’t do will feel restrictive to some. However, those who embrace the experience will find that everything has a purpose in the end, and that Jodie’s journey is a satisfying one.
Will you be checking out Beyond: Two Souls? What about the game has you most intrigued? Let us know in the comments below.
