No time to die Review

 

Director: Cary Joji Fukunaga

Running time: 2 hours and forty three minutes

No Time to Die directly follows on from the last 007 movie, Spectre. Bond is once again retired, but this time he is seemingly in love with Madeleine Swann (Lea Seydoux). But it's not long before past events come back into play, and Bond is forced into action again.

What follows for the duration of the runtime is just about every trope you might expect from a classic Bond movie. Gadgets, action and a disfigured villain that has a secret lair. The action scenes are thoroughly entertaining without being too overblown. A thrilling car chase through Italian city Matera was the big highlight, probably my favourite part of the movie.

If you are going into this movie having not watched any of Daniel Craig's previous 007 movies, you are going to be completely lost. Unlike his predecessors, each of the Craig era movies tie into one another and all of them have in some way led into the events of No Time to Die. Which explains why this movie feels like one long goodbye to his tenure as the MI6 Spy.

The story is fairly simple and does the job but it's let down by an underdeveloped villain. Rami Malek does a good enough job as Safin, but aside from a creepy opening scene he's very much in the background until the last twenty odd minutes. And even for a Bond villain his motivations do not really justify his wider plan.

With the story shifting to a more character narrative, this is the best Bond performance Craig has given since Casino Royale. As was the case in that movie, the stakes are far higher and more personal for the character, and we see a fragility to Bond that we have not seen since then either. Lea Seydoux is also given a meatier role here, in Spectre she was little more than a damsel in distress but in this movie her importance is central to everything.

Similar to the villain, the supporting cast don't really do much until the last third of the movie, when everything dials up to eleven. I was disappointed that Ana De Amas's screen time was reduced to little more than ten or fifteen minutes, albeit with an impressive action scene. 

No Time to Die is a fitting end to Daniel Craig's Bond, it ties up his era like a bow. But an overly long run time and weak villain left me a little numb to the whole experience. If you are looking for just under three hours of entertainment you can't really go wrong here. And I think it's better than Spectre, so I can easily recommend a cinema visit.

***

I am not a huge 007 fan but I have seen every new release at the cinema since Casino Royale (which is still by far Daniel Craig's best Bond entry), so I am not an expert on the subject. But going forward I don't think they need to make the character less serious, they just need to make him less tragic.   

Verdict: 3/5

     

Avengers review (PS4 version)

Summer is an unusually quiet season for video game releases, that's until the early weeks of September when a few games suddenly pop up before the big holiday releases in the months afterwards. Which is one of the reasons why I decided to buy Avengers, despite none of the gameplay footage impressing me. The other reason is because it's made by Crystal Dynamics, the same company that made the Tomb Raider reboot trilogy, of which I adored enormously.

So I went into Avengers with little expectations, I just wanted an engaging campaign and a fun multiplayer as a side distraction when needs be. To some degree I got both of these things, but I cannot help but feel the game lacks ambition, and ends up just being another games a service title. Long story short, the beginning of the campaign starts on A-day, which is a celebration of the Avengers, it is also a day in which they intend to unveil a new energy source called Terrigen. But things don't go to plan when San Francisco is attacked and the terrigen spills out onto the streets of the city. Leaving it devastated and many of its citizens with new superpowers they never had before, these people eventually become known as Inhumans. 

The Avengers are blamed and disband soon afterwards, fast forward five years and we take control of Kamala Khan, a teenager who has superpowers owing to the attack on the city (in her case she can stretch her arms over longer than usual distances). The beginning of the story is by far the best part of the campaign, where you play as Kamala as she escapes from AIM (Advanced idea Mechanics), which is a private company that uses its machines to hunt down Inhumans. Kamala Khan is an immediately likeable character with her youthful naivety, but the campaign takes a dip in quality around middle of the game when it opens up and the missions begin to repeat themselves. Before going out in a blaze of glory in the last act, with an epic team up section and a challenging boss fight.   

Aside from some small moments of platforming, Avengers is first and foremost a beat em up game, everything from the level and mission designs to the skill trees, function so you can pummel as many enemies as possible. The combat is rather simple and fun for the most part, with each hero genuinely feeling different from one another, and all have a pretty decent skill tree that you can upgrade to your liking. My two favourite heroes were Black Widow and Iron man, Black Widow is the quickest and most elegant to control, it was a joy to use her grapple hook to transport from one enemy to the next. Iron Man is difficult to use due to the finicky flight controls, but the satisfaction of using his ranged attacks never gets old. The Incredible Hulk is the only hero I did not enjoy playing, his slow movement and lack of interesting skills meant that I only ever used him when the story demanded it.

One area in which the upgrade system does not work is in the gear department, which works in a similar vein to what you see in Destiny and The Division. You collect the different gear by looting chest boxes lying around the game's worlds. But unlike those games, the loot just isn't interesting in Avengers because the stats just don't seem to make much of a difference. Although the combat is fun it's hardly complex, and adding a few percentage points on top of your damage or speed feels convoluted and pointless. 

What makes matters even worse is that the gear does not change the way you look, it's just a number. Which is utterly baffling because one of the central pillars of grinding or collecting for loot is so that your character looks cool and unique to what you want. I know we are dealing with established characters that have a set look, so there might have been an issue with licensing. But it's a crying shame that the gear is just a stat sheet, it kind of takes away some of the incentive to progress through the post game content.

While sticking to the subject of cosmetics, the game has a battle pass for each hero, which give you certain costumes that would otherwise not be available. You can purchase in-game money to use for some of the more fancy gear on offer. I never felt the need to spend any money on microtransactions, one because it just isn't worth the value, and two because what's on offer is no better than the base cosmetics that you start with. The in-game store does seem egregious when the overall grind just isn't worth it. I am not especially against microtransactions in games, but I worry that it's gradually taking precedence over product quality, but that subject is for another time.  

   

For a game centred on some of Marvel's mightiest heroes it's unfortunate that the locations in the game are rather bland. There's only one moment in which the story takes place outside of Earth, and even that is a short, linear section towards the end of the campaign. The other locations are set in a desert, a city and a snow covered locale, all of them are nothing more than a means to an end. Although you can explore them to find collectables and resources, they are neither visually interesting or engaging to traverse.  Although I did enjoy finding the audiotapes and reading files dotted around the maps, each of them add a little depth to the story and characters. 

In each of these locations will be enemy bases that you have to infiltrate for one reason or another, and it's in these buildings where the meat of the game's campaign takes place. It's where you will be smashing your way through countless enemies in narrow corridors that look rather identical to one another. The missions consist of the familiar protect or destroy objective markers, which is fine but rather unambitious. Rather like the open world maps, the enemy types are a little bland, consisting mostly of robots in some form or another. As cannon fodder they just about do their job, and they do have a purposeful role within the story. Which is especially the case towards the tail end of the game when they become more interesting and challenging.

Speaking of enemies, the boss battles are a real mixed bag, they generally require you to hit their weak points over and over, so they don't deviate too much from your usual video game bosses. But there were two that really stood out, one was at the start of the story and the other was right at the end, both were cinematic and important to the narrative. The others in the middle of the game became repetitive chores that lack imagination.

I might have been a little more lenient with my final review score had it not been for the technical issues that the game is littered with. This is especially the case in the last third of the campaign, where frame rates drop to ridiculous levels and textures take a while to load up. I have a base PlayStation 4 from 2016, and the game pushed it to the limit, causing it to crash three times during one rather uninspired boss battle against a giant, robot spider.

When the campaign is finished you're left with the multiplayer, some of these missions are new while others are retreads of those that you've already been through. To be honest I never played an overwhelming amount of the multiplayer, so I never tried a Warzone mission, which are bigger missions specific to the multiplayer. But from what I did play, the multiplayer does not deviate much from what you play in the campaign. You are still doing the same objectives and beating up as many onscreen enemies as possible. There is however a decent amount of content to keep you busy before more is delivered post release, which is not always the case with these games as a service titles on release day.

Despite all of my criticisms and what might come across as a highly negative review, Avengers is not a bad game by any measure. The combat hooks you in with its simple, undemanding button mashing, and that's a good thing to find in a game from time to time. It reminded me of how I felt as a kid when I played Streets of Rage back in the Mega Drive days. Although the story fades a little towards the end, it starts out exceptional, and overall it's pretty damn good. Aside from Thor each of the heroes play a pivotal role, and the villains have strong motivations for what they want to achieve. The story was certainly far better than I had anticipated. It's also elevated by some of the best voice acting I have ever come across in a video game, and a script that's full of charm and emotion. But this strong core is hindered by a mediocre outer shell, I really wish the game had focused on being a linear experience and left the open world stuff to the multiplayer and endgame.

At present Avengers is a decent game, it's the jack of all trades but the master of nothing. It does have the potential to get better, which will hopefully be the case as the developers have promised new content in the future. Not to spoil anything but the game does have an epilogue that hints at future story DLC, which does interest me. Can I recommend this game? only for those who are in need of a new game, as well as those who are Marvel fans. For everyone else I would wait for a reasonable sale.

Verdict: 6/10       

 

Tenet review

Director: Christopher Nolan

Rating: 12A

Running time: 2 hours and thirty minutes

I am in the minority of people who doesn't like most of Christopher Nolan's movies, my personal favourite is Batman Begins (of which I also consider to be one of the best comic book adaptations of all time). His others leave me feeling indifferent, they are all wonderful in concept but lacking in the execution department. I do confess to have never seen Inception and Dunkirk, which are two of his more recent movies.

Tenet is the first movie I've seen in the cinema since the middle of March, which was about a week before the national lockdown happened here in the UK. So I was more than pumped to watch the first major release since they reopened, which makes it even more of a shame that I left disappointed and deflated by the movie. Aside from watching the first trailer, I went in knowing almost nothing about Tenet.

The incomprehensible plot revolves around an agent (John David Washington) who has to stop a Russian oligarch (Kenneth Branagh) from using a time bending device that could lead to world war three. It ought to make for a thrilling story, but no cohesive or engaging narrative develops from any of it. Most of it is described through heavy exposition by characters that aren't particularly interesting. That's not to say that there aren't smart moments in the story that blindside your expectations, but the overall package is missing a spine that holds anything together and a central mystery to keep it intriguing.

The movie would be best described as a spy thriller, with elements of the science fiction in the background. It's in the science fiction area of the movie where it showcases some clever moments of visual story telling, but they are in small doses. Not to spoil anything, but the plot does not play out in a typical A to B straight line.  

There's a lot more action than you would expect from a Nolan movie, and like the story, it falls flat when all said and done. From the previous movies that I have seen of his, action scenes are not one of the director's strong points. I appreciate the fact that they are generally edited so that the audience know what's going on in each shot, which is not the case in most action scenes in modern movies. But for me they lack any form of flair that generates excitement. Some of his other movies could get away with this because we cared about the characters, which in turn creates tension. And action without any form of tension is just not effective.

What makes these action scenes even worse is the dreadful, head banging sound mix. Every moment of action or potential tension was ruined by a listless thumping sound that repeated over and over. It happened during character dialogue as well to make things even worse, I honestly cannot remember a sound mix so obnoxious in my life. And I say that as someone who rarely takes much notice of the sound in movies unless it is noticeably good. A movie score should immerse you in the experience regardless of what emotional effect it wants to have on you. This is the first time I've seen a movie where the sound mixing actively hindered my enjoyment. 

Tenet is an above average movie that feels like a wasted opportunity, it's not without its merits, there's a lot of ambition and the story for all of its faults does come full circle and end in a satisfying way. And I thought Robert Pattinson and Elizabeth Debicki were pretty impressive in their significant, albeit supporting roles. But I have little intention of going back for a re-watch any time soon. However, I would not be surprised if I might find myself appreciating it a little more on a second watch.

Verdict: 2.5/5

   

The Last of us Part 2 review

I need to make a confession, I never loved the first Last of Us, I thought it was a competent action game with exemplary graphics, but I never felt attached to the characters by the time the credits rolled. I appreciated its ambition and the ending was genuinely thought provoking, unlike most other video games. So I was not initially hyped for The Last of Us Part 2, but that quickly changed as the release date was drawing closer, so I ended up pre-ordering a copy, which is something I hardly ever do.

The bulk of the game is set four years after the first, where the main characters, Ellie and Joel, have settled in a walled off town called Jackson, in the state of Wyoming. From the get go there seems to be a partial sense of normality that has returned to the world, at least in Ellie's own life. The narrative takes a dramatic turn of events early on, leading Ellie to leave her relative comfort and journey to the city of Seattle searching for vengeance. It's not long after you arrive that the plot begins to twist and turn as you learn more about two factional groups, who are vying for control over what is left of a city that's been ravaged by nature and the loss of humanity.


In gameplay terms, little has changed, although I rather enjoyed the inclusion of a jump button. So there's far more platforming than I expected, which was a nice surprise. Outside of one particular area of Seattle, the game is relatively linear as you go from one point to the next, but the areas you explore are far bigger and multi layered compared to those in the first game. I loved exploring every nook and cranny for supplies, especially after a heavy gun fight.

Because of the relative scarcity of ammo and supplies, I tried to play as stealthily as possible, which is a lot easier said than done. So I ended up shooting my way through enemies far more than I intended. The combat can be clunky and a little awkward, and nothing more than just functional. However, it's always engaging because the feel of the weapons is extraordinary satisfying. On the standard difficulty I found myself with just enough ammo and supplies between each area, I never once felt overpowered or too desperate. The melee combat is rather simple but effective in its raw violence and tension. There is nothing elaborate about it, it basically boils down to you timing a dodge and then countering by hitting the square button. Every connecting hit you make is extremely gratifying. Word of warning, melee combat only works well when you are equipped with a weapon such as a baseball bat or a machete. Using your fists or a standard knife takes longer and only works when you are confronting one enemy at one particular moment. Like the guns, these melee weapons can be upgraded, but their durability does not last long. 

The enemy AI is challenging for the most part, human enemies have an almost perfect aim, and they do try and flank you when you are pinned back. But it was the infected that are the most challenging foes. If you make one mistake in a roomful of them, prepare to be aggressively rushed down, and once one of them locks onto you it can be a excruciatingly frustrating to fend them off. There are different enemy types for both the infected and the human cannon fodder, but outside of the way they look and the factions they belong to, the human enemies are generally carbon copies of each other. The various forms of infected will require a little more strategy to kill from one type to the next. One of the most deadly are the clickers, who will kill you the second they grab hold of you. It is a huge credit to the design team that they look so disgusting, and just thinking about them makes my skin crawl. 

Combat is made easier by a typical upgrade system that you use via the supplies you collect. It comes in two forms, on the one hand you can upgrade your character's more personal traits such as their health bar or crafting speed. The other side is to do with the weapons, of which you can refine and retool at various work benches placed in certain areas you travel through. While the upgrade system is by itself rather basic, it gels exceptionally well with the overall flow of the game, as you will want and need to explore the intriguing environments for supplies in order to survive.

Speaking of the environments, they do for the most part leave you with a variety of choices on how you wish to get past enemies. The environments and overall graphical fidelity of the game is truly gorgeous, the lighting effects and vistas of the exterior locations are the best that I have seen on the PlayStation 4. But these small moments are deceitful and contrast with the majority of the locations you explore. While some of the exteriors of the world look beautiful on first look, the interior locations are grimy and unsettling, the basement of a particular hospital was the most disturbing place I explored.

The Last of Us Part 2 is a rare game that manages to make its locales an intricate part of the story, rather than just a backdrop. You will notice subtle details in each of the rooms you visit that will tell you something about the people that inhabited them. Whether it's the way a living room or bedroom has been decorated, or the placement of a particular item. One small nuance that I really liked was when you use the work bench to upgrade your weapons. As soon as you have selected the upgrade you want, the character will take apart the weapon and then piece it back together. 

Like the first game, The Last of us Part 2 succeeds in being a cinematic experience, and it works most of the time. The cutscenes are finely directed and the performances are wonderful, as well as the animations which can be truly grisly with the realistic violence. This is helped with a consistently good script, a perfect example of this is with the in-game conversations between the characters, which are rather charming, and they provide a little rest-bite between the action.

The first half of the game is a straight up revenge plot, where you take control of Ellie, in the second half of the game you take control of a new character called Abby. When this change in direction occurred I did for a brief moment sigh in disbelief, because the story appears to grind to a halt. But by the end of the game I was more invested in Abby's story arc than that of Ellie, and she has the best action set pieces and the more interesting locations to explore. One particular boss battle reminded me of Resident Evil, which made it all the more enjoyable to defeat.

I don't have too many complaints to make, nothing that stopped my enjoyment of the game. From a gameplay perspective, changing weapons can feel a little finicky. From a story perspective, the pacing can be a little erratic with the narrative switching backwards and forwards, because some of the flashbacks don't initially execute on their premise. But they do become important within the grander context of the narrative.

It took me twenty six hours to complete the game over three days of playing, and I was invested from beginning to end. Which is a sign of an excellent experience, as I said from the outset, I never loved the first game and I was never compelled to go back to it. But having completed the sequel I will return to it at some point over the coming months.

The Last of Us Part 2 is a game that every PS4 owner should experience at some point, but be warned, it is dark and grim, and sometimes gut wrenching. But it's not to be missed, even if you don't find yourself liking the story, there is a great survival horror/action game beneath it all. 

   

Verdict: 5/5

Resident Evil 3 review (PS4 version, campaign only)

In terms of quality, the original Resident Evil 3 would rank amongst the lowest in the series for me, not that I don't like it, it's just the one game in the mainline titles that I've replayed the least. Although it never moved the story forward as one would have expected from a sequel, we did find out the ultimate fate of Raccoon City, and what happened to some of the characters who were in the first Resident Evil. Most notably Jill Valentine who's the lead character, and a member of the elite special forces team, STARS.

I loved the Resident Evil 2 remake, it was my my favourite game of last year, I do however, still think the 1998 version is the definitive title. So I was always looking forward to an inevitable remake of the third game, although I never expected it to release so soon. Having completed it on both standard and hardcore difficulty, it leaves me with similar feelings to those I had of the original.

Resident Evil 3 begins before the events of the second game, just as the zombie outbreak ravages across Raccoon city. The main antagonist, Nemesis, shows up from the very beginning this time, chasing Jill through a block of apartments until she manages to escape onto the streets. Where a significant chunk of the first half of the game takes place.

From then on the game doesn't deviate too much from the typical Resident Evil formula, as you collect items that allow you to progress further. The burning chaos of the Raccoon city streets provides for a great opening location, and from a visual point of view the game looks splendid throughout as you go from one new area to the next, (the lighting effects mesh particularly well with the dark aesthetic of the locales).

For me it's the exploration in these games that I like the most, I love checking every nook and cranny, and finding things that will be useful for my survival. This is one of the first gripes I have with the game, as good as the locations are to explore, the game is far too linear for my liking.

There's not a whole lot of backtracking in the game, once areas are completed there's little subsequent connection between them as you move forward. This is further compounded by the lack of puzzles, now don't get me wrong, not all puzzles in Resident Evil games are fun to do, but they exist for the player to explore and manage their inventory. At the end of completing a puzzle you are rewarded with a new location or item that lets you progress, I haven't experienced too many games that provide such gratification after so much toil. Resident Evil 3 really could have been helped with a bit more exploration and puzzle solving to add to the game's length and dynamism.

**

The original Resident Evil 3 upped the ante in the action department, it was nowhere near the levels that future Resident Evil games would become. But you could argue that it was the first change in direction that the series took, and the remake follows the same pattern by having a lot more action than the Resident Evil 2 remake. The shooting in this game is fine enough, it's nothing special, but the guns feel weighty when they are triggered, and there's plenty of arsenal to pick up during the game.

Not only are the zombies grouped together more than I expected, I found them to be more aggressive than ever before. If you aren't careful you can really screw up certain sections quicker than you think. I have always found the best way to play a Resident Evil game is by conserving as much ammo as possible, and only use it when absolutely necessary. But the narrow environment designs and high number of onscreen enemies make this a little more challenging than usual. There is a dodge manoeuvre to help you if needs be, a feature that was first introduced in the original game and surprisingly never implemented again until now. It's a helpful tool to use if you can master it, but as I said, this is difficult to do in relatively narrow spaces.

   
Outside of your typical zombies, namesake enemies from previous entries do make a return, including the zombie dogs, the licker and the long awaited return of the Hunters from the first Resident Evil. New enemies include what can only be described as a grotesque worm/frog like creature on legs, as well as these tiny parasite insects that appear in one small but annoying section of the game. All of them are disgusting looking, and most can instantly kill you if you're complacent. As I stated earlier, the enemies in this game are extremely aggressive, sometimes to the point of being difficult in a too artificial way that prohibits the experience.

Which brings me finally to Nemesis, the infamous tyrant that will stop at nothing in your pursuit, as he was in the original. He appears at select times during the game, some of these moments will play out as quick time event set-pieces. I've heard a lot of people complain that he doesn't act like Mr X from Resident 2 remake, who continuously stalked you when he showed up. But I'm glad that's not the case, because while Mr X was thoroughly frightening on the first and second playthroughs, the novelty wore off soon afterwards. To be honest I found Nemesis rather abrupt and annoying, often choking up the pace of the game. I could only imagine him being even worse if he was an ever present stalker constantly on your heels.

I will praise his redesign which is far more intimidating and monstrous than before, and his continuing mutation in the latter half of the game is the thing of nightmares. He also provides some decent albeit bombastic boss battles at various points. Which is saying something because Resident Evil boss battles are a mixed bag, and I really disliked the way some of them worked in the Resident Evil 2 remake.

**

The worse aspect of this game, the one negative that stands out above all else are the locations cut from the original. These specifically include the park and factory that you explored towards the game's climax. There is a new location that wasn't in the original, and it's arguably the toughest and least linear section you'll explore, but omitting the park and factory is a strange move. Especially when you consider the length of the game is only between five and seven hours long.

Speaking of the game's length, I find it baffling that there are no multiple choice routes that were a unique feature in the original. At various points in the original game, usually when a dramatic moment was about to happen, you got a choice of two options to pick, each opening up a slightly different path forward. It's a mind boggling exclusion because the game could have done with more immersion and replay value. Because once you've completed the story the only unlockables of any worth are higher difficulties, and a shop where you can buy weapons and upgrades with the points you've earned playing the game.

**

Resident Evil 3 is a fun game, but only a decent entry in the series, that sadly ends up being a somewhat missed opportunity. I hate to say it but it does feel a tad half hearted when you compare it to last year's glorious Resident Evil 2. I can't honestly recommend this at full price unless you're a huge fan of the series. There is Resistance, a multiplayer game bundled together with the main game. But I have not tried it yet, and from what I've watched and the poor reviews its received, I doubt I ever will.

Verdict: 6.5/10

While writing this review it was announced that a Resident Evil 4 remake is in the works, which I find hard to understand because it really doesn't need one. However, I am open to it, I can see ways in which you can evolve the experience, but I don't think they need to make drastic changes overall. I believe a Code Veronica remake is more justifiable, it's the black sheep of the series, but the one that would benefit most from a compelling rework.








    

Enter the Scrub: My short journey in the fighting game genre

As I stated last year in my Mortal Kombat 11 review, I have never really delved too deep into the fighting genre outside of the original Super Smash Bros and Tekken Tag Tournament. To my surprise I really enjoyed Mortal Kombat 11, I have put over two hundred hours into the game, so it's fair to say that I have more than got my moneys worth. But it wasn't MK11 that got me interested in the genre, it was For Honor, which isn't a traditional fighting game to be honest. It's a completely different beast to the others, for one it isn't an arcade game, it's far more of a simulator fighter.

I liked For Honor because it wasn't about trying to smash out the best combo you've practised to death, it was about strategy and conditioning. It was also grounded in reality, with each fighter representing a particular form of historical warrior (knights, samurais and vikings, ). It was also a fun if infuriating online multiplayer game, I must have sunk over hundred hours playing online with my friends.

Towards the end of last year, having rinsed MK11 to death, I wanted to experience a new fighting game, and since then I have played most of the popular fighters that are available for the PS4. Some are better than others, but I came away with similar experiences with each title. From dealing with toxic players, a deep learning curve and stages of repeatedly deleting and then reinstalling a game over losing too many online fights.

Unlike other game genres, fighters generally have a big barrier to entry. They require a lot of what can sometimes be agonising practise before there is any chance that you're remotely decent enough to compete online (which is what I predominately want to do). And as much as you might practice, there is likely to be only a handful of characters that you enjoy using. These issues can be arduous, they certainly put me off of certain games. But once you have a significant number of hours under your belt, you eventually grasp the mechanics of most games.

I certainly believe the genre could be more accessible, there are indy games that try to simplify things, such as Fantasy Strike (which I have not played), but it's a rare example. Most require learning combos to the point that they become muscle memory, spacing adjustment to punish your opponent, and match up experience with each of the roster. But once you have grasped things it's rewarding to see your gradual progression from scrub to intermediate, and up to high level. 

**

Mortal Kombat 11 is daunting at first because it requires a lot of spacing and precision, and a lot of the fighters can feel really cheap and over powered. But the combos are relatively short, and the roster is a diverse bunch that are unique from one another. That's not to forget the rich story mode and single player content, and boy does the game look and sound fantastic. Unlike other mainstream fighting games, Mortal Kombat's aesthetic is very fantastical and it can be crazy violent. Of all the fighting games I've played this is the only one that I have really stuck with because the pace of the combat is just about right, and the combo juggles are not overwhelming. But don't think MK11 is easy, I would argue that it has a high skill ceiling, even if it isn't as technical compared to the others.

Dead or Alive 6 is a lot of fun, like Tekken 7 it's a 3D fighter, but it feels more kinetic and satisfying. The character models control and animate superbly, for example kicks feel like kicks, and joints move as you push the buttons. DOA6 is also one of the most balanced of all the fighting games that I've played, and every character in the roster has a moveset that can be used in a specific way according to how you want to play.

On the surface, the combat in DOA6 is intuitive, each button has one specific function (kick, punch, hold and throw), that makes up its triangle system. Strikes beat throws, throws beat holds, and holds beat strikes. This allows the combat to feel less restrictive, because unlike Tekken and MK, DOA6 is less of a dial a combo fighting game. 

The good thing about this is that the game is reasonably accessible to grab hold of at first. But the more you play the game, and the more you compete online, you realise that the combat is rather complex. More so than any other fighting game in my opinion.

The bad thing about the triangle system is that a lot of fights turn into guessing games. While it's fantastic to turn the tables on an opponent whose beating on you, your timing has to be precise if you want to hold someone's attack. There is also the problem of a fairly low player base, so it's going to take quite a while to get through the ranks. So don't be surprised if you end up fighting the same people over and over.

Street Fighter 5 is a strange one, it's a polished 2D fighter that I enjoy the fundamentals of, but it's the one that frustrates me the most. If you include the DLC expansions, the roster has a hefty forty characters, and each are different enough to find a handful that will suit your play style. 

At first the motion controls took some real getting used to, but I overcame this with plenty of experience. But I hate the way special moves are used in this game, unlike other fighting games where your specials are used sparingly, Street Fighter 5 is full of them. Along with the cheap movesets and overpowered jumping (that happens all too frequently), the game just became a chore after a while.

Tekken 7 is probably the most balanced of all the fighting games I've played. It is also the most satisfying to play once you've reached the higher level ranks. It's beginner friendly, with a diverse roster to choose from. However, it is the most technical fighting game on the market, fights play out like a game of chess where one mistake can cost you very dearly. There really is no room for error.

It has the highest skill ceiling of any fighting game that I have played. Not only are the movesets for each fighter expansive, you're also going up against an experienced player base. The gap between those at intermediate and high level play is huge, so expect a real slog before you're able to consistently compete online.

***

Competing in fighting games feels personal, more personal than a racer or a shooter. You are after all, beating each other to death, and there is great pride in using your skills to outmatch someone else.

The huge flip-side to this is the toxic community you will bump into, and I have experienced trolls in every fighting game I have played. There are three kinds of toxic players that I've come across, there are those that have sent me barely literate messages telling me how shit I am despite beating them. And then you get the opposite of this, when someone will message me telling me how shit I am after I've been thrashed in a match. 

I can ignore this form of toxicity, but I can't stand what I call the veteran wankers. These are experienced players that get joy in beating newbs, and they make sure you know about it. For example they might endlessly taunt you (unfortunately, most fighting games allocate a taunt button), or spam the same move that you have no idea of avoiding. Some might even teabag you. Tea-bagging in fighting games is when someone continuously presses up and down on the d-pad to create a stupid animation.

**


If you're willing to put the effort in and brush aside the never ending frustration, fighting games can provide a great way to play competitive online multiplayer. I would start with Mortal Kombat 11, it will teach you the fundamentals, and from there move onto Tekken 7 where you'll have a much deeper experience if you put in the hard work.

Side note: 

In the last month or so I have been playing a lot of Super Smash Bros Ultimate. At some point I'll write a blog on what other fighting games can learn from it. It is so much fun, although simple compared to other fighters there's a lot of hidden depth to it.        

Joker review

Director: Todd Phillips
Runtime: 2 hours and two minutes

I was not enthusiastic about a ‘Joker’ origins movie when it was first announced. The Joker character works as a mysterious maniac with no background, he is just a comic book villain after all. Not that I believed it shouldn’t be attempted, but like most prequels, the more you peel at the layers of something the more that its initial premise loses its appeal. In trying to expand something you just end up shrinking it. I still think that’s true in most cases, but Joker manages to be better than it has any right to, and bigger than the sum of its parts.

In short, Joker is set in a downtrodden 1981 version of Gotham City, where we follow Arthur Fleck, a mentally ill man who works as an amusement clown and lives with his sick mother. A series of unfortunate events lead Arthur down a dark path towards the villain we all know from the Batman lore. 

Before I get onto Joaquin Phoenix’s tremendous but disturbing portrayal of the Joker, I must applaud the overall look and feel of the movie’s setting. Gotham has generally been painted as a dark and gothic city, this was especially the case in the early Tim Burton movies and the recent Arkham games. But none of them have the dour and oppressive feel of the Gotham we see in Joker, it’s a character within itself, which is a rare achievement for any setting in any entertainment medium. And unlike previous interpretations of the fictional city, a lot of the scenes are shot during the day. Along with the exemplary cinematography, it creates a grimy but realistic locale.

The Joker has had several onscreen interpretations over the last five decades, all borrowing from each other in one way or another, and all are memorable for the most part. Whether it’s Jack Nicholson’s overrated but comically manic portrayal to Heath Ledger’s calculating and imposing turn in ‘The Dark Knight’. Without sounding contrarian, the Joker is a nuanced character but one with little depth and many years of written material for performers to draw from. So, it’s no surprise to find Joaquin Phoenix do justice to the titular character.

But he manages to bring a human element to the role, while Arthur Fleck is a bit of a weirdo and crazy at face value, he is still a seriously damaged man that’s been let down by society. He never receives any post, has no friends, he is openly talked down to and he conjures up things in his own head that don’t exist. His violent actions later in the movie can’t be justified, but the journey to those moments are understandable within the context of the movie. 

There are scenes of graphic and raw violence, I would not say they are particularly distasteful, it’s just the context of what they mean within the story that might upset some people. I have seen far more gratuitous violence in worse movies.

Arthur fleck is the focus of most of the movie, so the supporting characters are few and far between, the only one with much impact on the plot is Robert De Niro as Murray Franklin. He’s a talk show host that Arthur admires, and becomes a prominent figure in the last third of the movie.

The movie’s connection to the overall Batman lore was my favourite aspect to the experience, and to be honest, it was only this connection that really kept me interested in the narrative. We have appearances by Bruce Wayne (albeit as a young child), Alfred and Thomas Wayne, who has a small but important role within the plot. Without these connections you are kind of left with a bunch of expertly performed scenes that have no real story to drive forward.

Despite being riveted for most of the run time, it did leave me with a feeling of emptiness. And I think that’s because the movie has several messages that it’s trying to put across without having the conviction of sticking to one. To its defence, the messages are powerful, especially when it tackles the subject of class value.

I would recommend going to see Joker, even if you aren’t a fan of the IP, it’s a rare mainstream movie that’s character driven. I walked into the theatre with low expectations and came out pleasingly surprised, but I don’t think it’s the masterpiece others have claimed it to be. It borrows too much from other people’s work, and its message is a bit muddled. Before finishing I want to mention the respectable two hour run time, which never once felt like it was wasting my time, which so many contemporary movies seem to do these days.

Verdict: 4/5