Friday, 22 May 2015

The Witcher 3: First Impressions

I’ve sunk nearly 10 hours into The Witcher 3, so I thought I’d post some initial impressions before the full review which, given the size of the game, will likely take some time. I played through the Tutorial/Prologue areas in this time, so these impressions will be based on a somewhat limited slice of the full game.

Let’s begin with technical performance. Prior to release, early benchmarks suggested I might have a troublesome time with The Witcher 3, even with a GTX780 not quite as cutting edge today compared to the new 900 range, but I expected it to hold its own. And I’m pleased to say that those early benchmarks weren’t entirely accurate. That’s not to say that performance isn’t in need of improvement – it surely is! But in its current state, though not as good as perhaps it could/should be, performance is consistently solid.

I initially attempted to run the game with everything set to maximum – even that fancy ‘Hairworks’ thing – and was able to get around 20-30 FPS, although it would frequently drop below this during fast paced battles or when traversing the exterior environments. So, not ideal. I then began to drop settings, tweaking various sliders and turning off unwanted effects (such as motion blur) until I had a rock solid 60FPS. I was able to achieve this on a mixture of Medium/High, although it did make the game look noticeably worse. So I tweaked some more, eventually settling upon an acceptable balance of pretty/performance which gave me a solid and consistent 45-50 FPS.

 
And The Witcher 3 is certainly a very pretty game. There are moments when, if the lighting is right due to the time of day or weather, the game can look absolutely stunning. Still shots don’t do this game justice – it’s a game you really have to see in motion to appreciate how gorgeous it can be. However, just as there are times when TW3 can astonish with its visuals, there are times when it looks, well…a little dated, and in some ways, not even as good as TW2 (the water in particular is rather flat and unimpressive). Of course, it’s important to remember that TW2 did not share such a vast scale. On the whole, TW3 is a fantastic looking game.

But the graphics are only a part of building what is an incredibly detailed and immersive world to explore. Keep in mind, I’ve only played through the initial Prologue area, but this smaller, more limited environment was meticulously crafted. These early core/side missions which serve to introduce the player to the world/creatures/story and more importantly – gameplay mechanics – are brilliantly paced and structured.

I don’t know how things will pan out once I enter the ‘main’ open world area, but I appreciated how the game sensibly didn’t overwhelm the player with dozens of needless or worthless side content – it kept the core story in focus throughout. This was one of my main concerns with TW3 going open world – would it result in a lot of unnecessary padding and fetch style quests? So far, I’m pleased to say that’s not been the case at all.

 
But what about the actual gameplay? Combat feels like a slightly refined/tweaked version of TW2 system, but with more emphasis on mobility. It took some adjustment, but I do like it, although I’m not sure about some design choices regarding how the game utilises potions or bombs – not so much in combat, but in preparation. But it’s too early to form any firm judgement until I’ve progressed further and unlocked more skills. What I will say is that the default ‘normal’ difficulty isn’t worth your time. You really want to play on Hard for the best/most balanced experience. And if you really want to punish/challenge yourself, there’s an extreme difficulty which should just be titled ‘Don’t Get Hit’.

In terms of stability, I haven’t had a single crash in my time with the game, and I’ve not seen a single bug – aside from maybe an enemy or two getting ‘stuck’ on a tree or rock – but that’s more of an AI issue. Is there anything I’m not too fond of right now? Well, movement animations are a bit wonky, especially when climbing/jumping. I get the need to make Geralt more mobile in this open environment, but it’s all a bit awkward and silly looking watching him leap on the spot, or weirdly ‘surf’ down a hillside. I also really dislike the underwater swimming controls, which are just annoying and often result in me swimming in the wrong direction. Maybe I just need more time to get used to them.

Okay, I should probably wrap this up. There’s more I could say, more I could criticise or praise, but I’ll save that for the review. And as I said, I’ve only gone through the initial areas – there’s a lot more to come. But if you’re wondering – no, TW3 didn’t exactly blow me away, not in the way I hoped it would. That said, I did sit playing it solidly for about 10 eye bleeding hours after it released, and I had to drag myself away from it to knock out this post, so it’s obviously doing something right.

Sunday, 17 May 2015

Now Playing: DayZ

More than a year has passed since I last set foot into DayZ. Although I enjoyed my initial time with the game, I soon lost interest after little in the way of stable or noteworthy improvements to performance or game mechanics, and without any major content updates. So I was quite optimistic about returning, hoping that, even though the game remains in Early Access, the core experience would be refined and expanded by fresh content.

You can imagine my disappointment when I discovered that DayZ, in its current state, is hardly any better than it was over a year ago. In fact, it’s hard to see what, if any, progress has been made. In terms of performance, DayZ remains a shoddy mess, stuttering along at an inconsistent 40-60 FPS. It also somehow looks worse than I remember, even though I cranked up a few more settings.

With regards to server/connection stability, this also hasn’t really improved, and based on what I’ve experienced, I think it’s even more unstable. In the handful of hours I played, I had more disconnects and server time outs than I did in all of the previous twenty or so I put into the title last year.

I’m sure quite a bit of new content has been added in my absence, primarily new items and survival mechanics, but I really don’t see the point of adding more types of hats or ways to cook food if the game remains fundamentally broken when it comes to one of its core features. It’s that ‘Z’ part of DayZ. Yeah, the zombies. Remember those?

 
After more than another year of development, the zombies remain a broken mess. In a f**king zombie survival game, the zombies, which should be a key element, are quite simply pathetic. The only good thing I can say about the zombies is that they no longer appear to clip through the floor of buildings. But the zombies remain few in number and are now even less threatening. They seem completely oblivious to your presence unless you run straight up to them and jump up and down like a prat.

I’m pleased to say that melee weapons other than fire axes are now more effective at putting a zombie down, but hit detection for melee is still bloody awful leading to comical ‘fights’ as you repeatedly bludgeon a zombie and depending on where it decides you’ve hit, it can take anywhere from 3 to 12 hits to drop. Oh, and whilst the zombies no longer appear to clip through the scenery (or I just didn’t see it, but it wouldn’t surprise me if they still did), they can and do damage you by attacking through a wall several feet away. Yeah.

And I’m not sure how zombies are being spawned, but I came across multiple copies of the same zombie in a very small area. Which is, admittedly, kind of funny when you get them all chasing you like an angry zombie clone army.

There’s nothing new in DayZ about the world in terms of environments to talk about. I didn’t see any new interiors. It’s all the same buildings, the same sparse layouts and – hell, they’ve still got the same ‘locked’ doors in many buildings, particularly to upper floors, that I thought would have been expanded into by now.

 
Oh, and bugs! Back when I was playing DayZ last year, there was a bug that would cause your screen to blur and remain blurred until you opened and closed the video options menu to reset it. More than a year later, and this bug persists but is now even more prevalent – every time I took damage from a zombie it would blur my screen forcing me to go into the options to restore it. Not only has this bug not been fixed, it’s actually worse.

I was debating whether to do this review given that DayZ still isn’t quite ‘finished’. But f**k it – at this rate, DayZ will be in Early Access ‘alpha’ until the end of days. I suspect the time will come, when the developers are finally sick of it and don’t think they can milk it any more, that DayZ will be ‘released’ as a ‘final build’ – when in fact it will remain as unpolished, content shallow and broken as it is now.

DayZ can be fun for a time and hell, if it was on sale and you’re interested, maybe even worth a punt if only for that early exploration/survival buzz. But even after another year of development, DayZ is an incomplete, broken mess and I doubt it’s going to get much better. Maybe in another year or two I’ll return to it again, but by that time I suspect it will have either been left to rot forever in Early Access hell, or simply released as a final build, but one full of broken code and promises.

Sadly, it now appears that DayZ was simply dead on arrival. And unless they can pull off a miracle, this is one corpse that won’t be getting up and shambling about any time soon.

It might punch you through a wall though.

3/10

Tuesday, 12 May 2015

Saturday, 9 May 2015

Now Playing: Grand Theft Auto V

Although there may be a few things previous games in the series did better to one degree or another, as a complete package, I think I’d rate GTA V as the best overall GTA experience yet. But does that mean its perfect? Well, no, but I’d say its missteps are far outweighed by all the things it does right.

Let’s begin with a short note about technical matters. I’ve already covered this in my First Impressions post, but it’s one aspect of GTA V I’m very impressed by. In terms of performance, GTA V far exceeded my expectations. The amount of control and display options is remarkable. Could there be further optimisation? Sure. But, overall, GTA V is a finely tuned beast of a game (it took me over 20 hours to download the bloody thing). Oh, and it looks fantastic.

GTA V is without a doubt one of the best looking games I’ve played. The attention to detail is incredible. Character models, car models, damage, texturing, lighting, animations – it all combines to create an exceptional open world – one which is even more enjoyable to explore and appreciate in the new first person mode.

And this is a world with a lot to see and do. If there’s one thing a GTA game typically delivers above all else, it’s the open sandbox environment – and GTA V is probably the best yet. The map of GTA V is extensive, although in terms of structure, it’s really one big circle split into two primary areas – city and rural. It’s a rewarding world to explore, one with an impressive amount of side events and activities.

The random events are a neat touch and I’ve rarely seen the same one twice. These events exist separately to the core and side missions, which I’ll talk about later. In addition to these, you also have various activities to enjoy – from playing tennis or golf, to practising yoga, to various forms of racing (land/sea/air), to watching television or going hunting – it’s an extensive selection, to say the least, although I must admit I do miss the bowling and pool of GTA IV and I would have loved the inclusion of some card games, especially for the Online.

 
Beyond these activities, the sandbox itself is simply fun to explore and screw about in. With cars, motorcycles, bikes, helicopters, planes, boats and even a submarine – the GTA V sandbox isn’t short on diverse and enjoyable distractions. It’s content rich, varied in locales and by far the real star of the show.

If I had one criticism of the world aside from the lack of a few preferred side activities, it’s that some of the map, particularly the rural half, feels somewhat empty. In fact, very little core or side missions take you beyond the city and out into the wilderness and when they do, it’s usually just for a lengthy drive between A and B.

So, where are we up to? Performance? Check. Graphics and animations? Check. Sandbox and Activities? Check. So far, so good. Let’s continue focusing on single player and talk about the story based missions, because this is the one area I am a little disappointed by.

But before I start to complain, let’s cover the good stuff. I really liked the three character switch mechanic. I liked each character, and also how each (Trevor in particular) represented a different style of play, each with their own story and special ability. I also, overall, really liked the side ‘Strangers and Freaks’ missions, which offered a varied selection of mission types for each of the three main characters.

I’m also pleased to say I enjoyed the core story missions far more than in GTA IV. They are more enjoyable, more diverse and allow a far greater degree of player freedom – although still not quite to the extent that I’d like. The way the game opens and slowly introduces us to these characters in turn is fantastic. These early missions build to your first heist – a jewellery store robbery.

And it’s brilliant. You get to choose a plan of approach, hire a professional crew and perform a series of small missions to acquire the gear you need. All of this culminates in the heist which is exciting to play and extremely satisfying when completed. I was hoping it would be the start of a series of increasingly complex and challenging heists.

Oh dear. And this is where, for me, GTA V drops the ball a little. No other mission in the game quite lives up to that first heist, and although there are more heist style missions, they simply aren’t as interesting, or don’t allow you any great choice of approach or crew. Instead, I found that following the initial heist and the introduction of Trevor, the story really began to drag in places, and this feeling persisted right up until the end. Hell, at times I felt I was just grinding my way through a mission to get it out of the way.


GTA V offers some excellent core missions, but it also feels weighed down by quite a few needless and forgettable ones which drag the whole experience down. In terms of the mission content, I was hoping for more involved and complex heists. I really think the game peaks way too soon with that initial heist, and a lot of what follows just doesn’t really compare.

And I hate to say it, but I kind of lost interest in the story the longer it dragged on. Fortunately, I liked the characters and wanted to see what would happen to them, and that’s what pushed me on. I was hoping that by the end, the story would weave all these loose threads together and provide a satisfying conclusion.

Oh dear. What GTA V really lacks when it comes to its story is focus. Balancing three main characters was always going to be tricky and I’d say they pull it off more often than not, but the story does suffer for it, struggling to establish any strong narrative thread as it frays into multiple strands. It lacks direction, and for long periods it feels like the story just isn’t going anywhere. Although I enjoyed the final heist, the following final mission feels rushed, almost tacked on without any great thought and very little build up.

So the single player of GTA V is impressive, even though it left me a little disappointed by its core missions and story. But the single player is really only half of the GTA V experience. The online multiplayer of GTA V is almost an entire game in its own right. It’s also an impressive and extensive experience, but like the single player – a flawed experience, perhaps more so. Let’s start with the good stuff.

There’s a neat character creator which begins your life in GTA Online. From here, you’ll be dropped into the open world of GTA V, free (after a terrible and short tutorial) to go about as you please. Unfortunately, the game doesn’t do a great job of guiding the player through these early stages. A lot of stuff you’ll just have to work out on your own.

GTA Online offers various ways to play – in your own private session, alone or with friends, or in a public free roam, in which you can toggle ‘passive’ (non-pvp) mode on and off. You have structured missions you can undertake either solo or as part of a small group, the most elaborate of these being the heist missions. You also have an extensive selection of activities such as races, deathmatch modes, team based versus modes and co-operative survival battles. Oh, and a lot of the single player side stuff too, such as golf and tennis.

You won’t unlock all of this stuff straight away, but as you level up. The higher your level, the more you’ll unlock – and this includes the various weapons. Completing missions and taking part in activities doesn’t just net you experience, but money – which you can then use to purchase and mod vehicles, clothes, tattoos, apartments, weapons and ammo. There’s a lot to see and do, even if you play solo, although it’s certainly a far more enjoyable and rewarding experience if you play with friends.

 
I’m quite impressed with GTA Online, but like I said, I do think it’s a flawed experience. As I’ve already mentioned, the game doesn’t do a great job at explaining things. This isn’t a major issue because you can figure out most things on your own, but it’s worth mentioning. I didn’t know what the hell was going on or what I was supposed to be doing when I was first dropped into GTA Online. The long and frequent loading between the initial run of ‘tutorial’ missions certainly didn’t help.

Because whilst game performance is good, loading in the Online mode is rather lengthy, especially when switching between missions. It has an annoying habit of timing out and kicking you back to the free roam, making playing through a playlist of modes a frustrating experience. And there’s some weird choices made (or bugs?) with regards to how you can ‘group’ with other players.

The game will automatically try to place you in a free roam with friends, which is nice (when it works), but if you then complete a mission together and attempt to return to the same world map, even if you’re in a closed friend session, the game can kick you both into your own separate free roams. I don’t know if it’s a bug or working as intended, but I do know its bloody irritating.

So the friend/group aspect could certainly use some work. But what else bothers me? Well, although I’m not against the level up system, I do think they pushed it way too far. Even when I’d only hit level 20 or so, I was getting a bit tired of repeating the structured missions time and time again. But currently, this is the only real way to level up or earn cash at any significant rate. I found myself running missions repeatedly, not because I particularly enjoyed them (certainly not on the ninth or tenth go) but simply to grind them for experience and money.

Oh right, money. Everything costs money in GTA Online, and it can be rather pricey – even ammo. So once again, you’ll be grinding missions just to save up for stuff, be it cars or weapons. And I really didn’t want this – World of Grind Theft Auto. I don’t want to have to grind through another 10 bloody levels just to unlock a different type of assault rifle. I really wish the game had a separate ‘everything unlocked for free’ mode you could just piss about in without worrying about how much stuff costs, or if you are the right ‘level’ to use it.

The level system is also pretty badly balanced in terms of free roam pvp. Higher level players get access to far better weapons and armour which I think discourages pvp to a degree, because lower level players simply can’t compete against a guy with heavy armour, a mini-gun and rocket launcher. As a result, a lot of people just remain in passive mode.

In addition to this tedious money/experience grinding and level requirements resulting in a competitive imbalance, you also have this ridiculous ‘insurance’ system for personal vehicles. I really don’t understand the thought or intention behind this system. You have ‘personal’ cars you can insure for a one-off cost and if destroyed, they will simply respawn with a quick phone call. It makes sense given how extensive the car modification system is – you don’t want to lose the money you’ve invested in that vehicle.


However, this system extends to the pvp aspect, whereby if another player destroys your personal vehicle, they then have to pay the insurance cost. Admittedly, the cost is somewhat negligible compared to what you can earn running a few missions, but I really don’t understand the need for such a penalty at all. These are virtual cars which can respawn. Is this system intended to discourage destroying personal vehicles because it’s considered ‘rude’? Let me say it again – virtual cars.

I really don’t understand the need or point of this system. If people don’t want to engage in pvp there’s the passive mode or the private/closed session options. And if people want to use armoured vehicles or heavy weapons (which the game allows) they should be free to do so without fear of being penalised.

The funny thing is, that whenever I go out in the public free roam now, looking for some pvp action, I never take my personal vehicles. Why? Because if someone blows me up in retaliation, I don’t want them to get penalised for it. That must sound weird, but to me, this system runs contrary to what GTA Online public sessions should really be about – carnage and mayhem! Let us use tanks and rocket launchers and sticky bombs and blow shit up without dumb penalties and ‘punishments’! Why put this stuff in the game if you then discourage using it?

One last thing to mention about the Online is that sadly, we’re already starting to see people using hacks pop up more regularly. I really hope they don’t let GTA Online end up like Red Dead Redemption. I loved playing that online, but it got to the point where it was unplayable on public sessions as pretty much every one I joined had someone using hacks, either to make themselves invulnerable, or to snipe you through the scenery from beneath the bloody map.

Okay, I’d better wrap this up. GTA V is an excellent title. It’s well worth your time, and you’ll find a lot of quality, rewarding and enjoyable content both online and off. It has its flaws, primarily with regards to its story and its Online modes, but not enough to damage the overall experience. As a complete package, I think I’d rate GTA V as the best in the series yet. And it’s something that, thanks to its extensive Online options, I suspect I’ll be playing for many months to come.

I must admit, however, that if I had the choice, I’d still have preferred an updated PC version of Red Dead Redemption. Hey, a man can dream, right?

8/10

Tuesday, 5 May 2015

Suburban Killbot Year 3

So that Skyrim Mod Store was pulled pretty fast, but I doubt we’ve seen the last of it. This experiment may have failed, but I suspect it shall return in one form or another in the future. I’m not against the notion of paid mods in principle, but it’s the implementation of such a system that’s key. The Skyrim Mod Store was thrust upon an established community with zero warning, little explanation and, with apparently very little thought. I’m amazed that anybody at Valve or Bethesda believed this was the best way to go about it. But like I said, I don’t think this is the last we’ll hear of it.

Anyway, this post isn’t meant to be about that, but about another year of Suburban Killbot! It’s taken 3 years but I think I’ve finally settled into a format that I like in terms of variety of posts and post length. I’ve been a bit short on writing related posts this year, but I hope that will change when my new book goes out to publishers in June. I’m also thinking about expanding into video content. In the next few days I’m finally getting my Internet upgraded to the point where uploading videos is now feasible, and putting up a few raw gameplay videos might be fun. I’m not really interested in doing commentary, cams or video reviews though – too much work!

I’ll be doing a free e-book promotion soon, certainly before the end of the month. I’ve also got a GTA V review I’m working on. I don’t typically draft or spend that much time on my reviews, but with a game as extensive as GTA V, it’s hard not to. I hope to have that wrapped up before The Witcher 3 is released.

So, as I’ve been doing in these posts, it’s time for the expanded mosaic of all the top-rated games I’ve covered on the blog.


I’m no longer sure how many games I’ve played and covered since I started all this, but I know it’s quite a lot. And this might be the last mosaic I do. It’s getting rather big.

Saturday, 2 May 2015

Total War Battles: Kingdom (BETA)

Kingdom is a tablet based spin-off title of the Total War series. It’s also available on Steam where its currently in open beta. It’s a free to play title so I thought I’d give it a go. This isn’t the first time TW has dabbled with a mobile/tablet variation, but Kingdom is quite a step up from Battles: Shogun (2012) in terms of content and mechanics. Rather than focusing purely on combat, Kingdom is more about castle and land construction. It also has its own battle system, plus various missions and ‘quests’ to undertake.

I’ve seen Kingdom get a lot of hate on Steam, partly because it's a tablet game which many don’t want to see on the platform (and I’d agree to an extent) but it’s also not really fair on Kingdom, which as far as a tablet based game goes, is actually very polished and surprisingly decent. I don’t see the point of hating it simply for what it is – a ‘casual’ tablet based Total War spin-off.

Despite sharing the Total War name, Kingdom is a very different sort of game. You begin with a single castle keep in a small region of medieval England. From here, you can reshape the land to a limited degree – raising and lowering the land, for example – and then build up a custom town around your keep of homes, churches, taverns, blacksmiths and various types of barracks for your army. You can build walls around your town, roads to connect to new towns you’ll establish, bridges across rivers and dams to prevent flooding.

Of course, all of this building and land reshaping costs resources – food, stone, silver and wood. Some can be gathered on the map from resource ‘stashes’ – piles of dead wood, for example – but these are exhausted fairly quickly. So you’ll need to construct resource producing buildings. It’s a fairly simple system – a farm harvests food, a quarry mines stone, a blacksmith produces silver etc. And some buildings, such as blacksmiths or taverns, require workers and artisans which are generated over time by your keep. Harvesting the other resources also takes time, typically about 8 minutes for a single node of say, wood or food. You can set your buildings to harvest multiple nodes at once but this can extend the collection time to 8 hours or so.


And that’s the thing with Kingdom – it’s the sort of game designed to be played in short 5-15 minute bursts, where you’ll set your buildings to harvest, engage in some battles, then come back and collect. Or, if you’re not going to be playing for an extended period – set it to harvest a large area overnight. The system works quite well if you play it in the way its intended – as a game on the go. Which is also why it doesn’t quite feel right on PC.

Of course, you can instantly collect resources for a cost of Gold. Gold can be earned through missions/quests or (rarely) found in the game world, but if you want a lot of it you’ll need to purchase it. This is the microtransactional aspect of Kingdom – offering various coffers of Gold for an increasingly high price. The thing is though, that in the (admittedly short – about 3 hours) time I spent with Kingdom, I never hit any point where I felt I needed to buy gold to progress. You’re granted a pretty generous starting amount and earn some more as you level up.

As long as you’re not too impatient, collecting resources really isn’t that bad – if you play in short bursts rather than sitting waiting for timers to count down. In only 3 hours of play I reached level 12 and built up a nice little town with a solid army – and zero gold bought. In fact, I had quite a bit left over. So as far as I’m concerned, in terms of a free to play tablet title with microtransactions, Kingdom is actually fairly generous compared to other stuff I’ve seen.

So do I hate it for not being a ‘proper’ Total War title? No, that would be silly. It’s not trying to be and shouldn’t be judged as such. Should I hate it for its microtransactions? From what I’ve played, I really can’t. But do I think Kingdom, as its own game, is worth my time? No. I don’t think Kingdom is a bad game in terms of a free to play tablet title, but that doesn’t mean I think it’s particularly good either.

My problem with Kingdom is that I was tired of it after only a handful of hours. Even playing in short bursts, the game lacks any real depth or challenge that doesn’t require either patience (to gather what resources you need) or tedious grinding (to level up your army). Within three hours I felt I’d seen everything the game had to offer and was already losing interest.


Building up your town is certainly fun for a short time, but you soon realise how limited the options are in terms of building types and placement. This is also an issue with the land reshaping. It’s very basic, and the resource cost of using it means you won’t be able to sculpt the land to any great degree. You can unlock and expand into new regions of the map over time and even build up multiple towns, but honestly, there’s no real incentive to bother. And that’s the thing, there’s no real long term reason to keep going. You gather resources so that you can build more buildings to gather more resources. And that’s about it.

So let’s talk about the battle system in Kingdom. Like the building aspect, it’s a solid but ultimately shallow feature. Battles are limited to a handful of troops on each side who basically just charge at one another. You can quickly rearrange your formation a little at the start of the fight and use a few special abilities, but it’s incredibly basic and lacks any real strategy aside from clicking on your units to get a ‘perfect’ charge. For a tablet user who doesn’t typically play strategy titles, it might be enjoyable for a time, but I think even they would soon lose interest. I really don’t see why the system couldn’t have been fleshed out with more units, tactics and features.

The other major problem with the battle system is how long it takes to upgrade your troops. You earn very little XP per fight, so to tackle tougher battles, you’ll have to tediously grind your way through dozens of easier ones. It grew rather tiresome very quickly. Oh, and if you’re wondering what the ‘mission/quest’ aspect I mentioned is all about, it’s really just different battles loosely strung together.

I don’t think Kingdom is terrible. As a tablet game it’s…fine, I guess. But it feels like it could have been a lot more though, and if they hadn’t gone the free to play/microtransaction route, I think it could have been a neat little castle/town building game. Charge a couple of bucks for it, remove the lengthy timers and just let people build and reshape the land without cost.

As it is, Kingdom is a fairly polished, pretty and competent title, but one without any real depth, challenge or reason to play beyond a few short hours. Maybe if I had a tablet I’d hop into it on occasion, but on PC it’s just not worth my time – I’d rather just play Attila.