 |
|
Feb 16th, 2017 at 22:38:14 - The Last Of Us (PC) |
My next binge of The Last of Us was edge-of-the-seat action-packed as I had to avoid militarized groups and make a break out of the city. On the way out, the game introduced two new characters that tagged along, Sam and Henry. The two brothers were friendly and willing to help Ellie and Joel out of the city. Making our way to the final bridge included plenty of dodging and hiding from many patrolling soldiers. My already poor-ability with a controller and non-sneaking tendencies led me to many retries of the various levels since I kept getting caught and triggering every enemy in the level to swarm me. I much prefer combat that doesn’t include sneaking around and silently killing people. Let me rush in gun-hoe with my battle cry.
Frustrations and sneaking aside, the scene where the group breaks onto the bridge was a particular moment of morality. Henry, Sam, and Ellie were able to get through a segment of the barricade while Joel was stuck behind. Henry instantly decided to leave Joel (me) behind, apologizing profusely. He didn’t want to risk his own life along with Sam’s in an attempt to save Joel. Henry decided on utilitarianism. Henry believed that leaving Joel behind would mean the greater good for the group. Ellie, on the other hand, decided to jump down with Joel. She was expressing Kantianism because she believed her outcome would be better with Joel instead of the group as a whole. Ellie was taking in the human element, and decided that the categorical imperative (not leaving behind another human being) was the most ethical choice for her. If the categorical imperative implies that if the universal law of leaving someone behind was in place, then no one would save each other, and that did not sit well with Ellie.
It was cool to see that her choice ended up being a good one, since everyone ended up re-uniting and saved. While it did leave Joel pretty pissed at Henry for leaving him, Henry ended up following Kantianism like Ellie by saving Joel in the river. This session of gaming is making me realize that The Last of Us likes to disprove utilitarianism.
read comments (1)  - add a comment  - read this GameLog  |
|
Feb 15th, 2017 at 17:11:04 - The Last Of Us (PC) |
For the last few weeks I’ve been playing The Last of Us for the first time ever. I’ve heard nothing but fond regards about the game and after having so many recommendations to play it, I finally sat down for a binge. The opening sequencer for the game is both intense and heartbreaking. I was instantly impressed by the motion capture and voice acting of the characters. The graphics are insanely detailed and the atmosphere of the game is forebodingly realistic.
I instantly liked the character of Tess, since she’s a strong female character and a helpful NPC companion. I enjoyed how the game balanced intense sequences with relaxing ones. The level design was also on-point as it seamlessly directed me throughout the map and never once did I bump into a loading screen (thank you interesting cut-scenes). While there aren’t many moral choices to make in the game as in the Walking Dead, the game still plays out morally difficult situations.
The toughest one so far was leaving Tess. She had been bitten during a dangerous journey to the capital. During an intense moment right before a squad of soldiers moved in on the characters, Tess decided to stay behind to give Joel and Ellie time to run. Joel insisted on her to join them, but she was set on her decision since she knew becoming a zombie was inevitable. Tess had chosen to go down fighting instead of killing herself beforehand or asking Joel to do so. I usually hate it when games use the woman-sacrificing-herself trope, but I felt the game handled it tastefully. Tess wasn’t begging for her life to be taken (as is the case for most of the tropes) and instead took her life into her own hands in a practical way. I was also glad that I didn’t have to kill her myself, because that would’ve been very distasteful for me. While I was sad that Tess wasn’t able to live long, I was relieved that the moral issue was handled respectfully.
add a comment - read this GameLog |
|
Jan 22nd, 2017 at 21:58:46 - Life is Strange (PC) |
Life is Strange: Episode 4
All aboard the feels train! Life is Strange picks up after the chilling cliff hanger of episode 3. The first half of gameplay took its time and allowed the player to carefully soak in the somber details. The subject matter is heavy and for that, the slow pacing fits perfectly. This chapter shows the reality of terminal living. I loved how it approached euthanasia, which is a subject I’m passionate about. Having such a controversial issue in a game highlights the intricacies of it far more than statistics or papers could.
At the midpoint of the chapter, the game introduces the most difficult decision yet. I like how Dontnod Entertainment does a great job building up the decisions and characters. By episode 4 I’m thoroughly invested in the characters and stressing more and more about what to choose at each checkpoint.
After the segments of high-emotion were over, the game progressed in exploring the arching mystery of missing Rachel. I felt levels of dread begin to rise as Chloe and Max began putting together the evidence collected throughout the previous chapters and discovering new ones. As the game progresses, more disturbing evidence begins to surface.
Episode 4 peaks as the tensions double when a dark room is discovered and the Vortex club party takes place. Ethics of teenage alcohol/drug use, torture, and art become the major themes at the end of the episode. With an insane ending and a mind-boggling reveal, I feel mixtures of shock and anger with Life is Strange. Albeit the crave to know how it all ends in the final next chapter is too strong to stop…
read comments (1) - add a comment - read this GameLog |
|
Jan 20th, 2017 at 10:45:51 - Life is Strange (PC) |
Life is Strange: Episode 3
Chaos Theory starts out in Max’s dorm room again, but this time at night. I’m able to explore Blackwell Academy in the shadows with a flashlight, which creates a different feel on a familiar environment. This episode is rich with passing the Bechtel Test, as Max talks to many women (with names) about things (other than men). Before Max even gets to Chloe, I have the option to have conversations with side characters, which deepens their character.
Once Max is with Chloe, teen rebellion gears into full force. I relate with Max when she’s hesitant on breaking into the school, and nervous about getting caught. I liked the contrast between the two friends since most of the time teen rebellion is portrayed as a duo agreement. I appreciate how Max isn’t a hell raiser like Chloe.
Digging for files and swimming in a pool are unique challenges that I enjoyed playing. The segment of Max and Chloe at Chloe’s house is nostalgic of the first episode. Tense conversations with the family lead to even tenser situations at the diner. Revelations with a connection with Frank and an emotional scene with Chloe makes me anticipate a big reveal.
When Max discovers a crazy ability with photographs and time traveling, the ethics of altering a timeline becomes the focus. I liked how the game explored the age-old question of, “If you could go back, what would you change?” The consequences that follow from the player changing the timeline left for a jaw-dropping cliff hanger. The ending left me reacting as I do for my favorite television show’s season finale. The storm build up from the previous two episodes has finally released its lightning…
add a comment - read this GameLog |
|
|
 |
| Raven's GameLogs |
|
Raven has been with GameLog for 7 years, 10 months, and 2 days |
view feed xml
|
| Entries written to date: 9 |
|
