Search
Search results
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Finding Dory (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Is it a return to form for Pixar/
For years, Pixar was an unstoppable force. The studio combined stunning animation with thought-provoking stories that adults and children could enjoy. From Toy Story to Wall.E, everyone, at some point will have watched a Pixar film.
Then a few things caused the bubble to burst. Firstly, other companies upped their game, big time, with Dreamworks in particular being hot on the heels of their rival. Secondly, Pixar’s own partner, Disney started churning out great animated films with Zootropolis and Wreck-it Ralph worth a mention.
Finally, Pixar lost its way. Cars and its dreadful sequel, followed by an underwhelming prequel to Monsters Inc and the marketing disaster that was The Good Dinosaur all culminated in a studio damaged by its own high standards. Now, in 2016, we have a sequel to arguably Pixar’s best film, Finding Nemo, but does Finding Dory build on its predecessor or sink faster than a stone?
Dory (Ellen DeGeneres) is a wide-eyed, blue tang fish who suffers from memory loss. The one thing she can remember is she somehow became separated from her parents as a child. With help from Nemo and Marlin, Dory embarks on an epic adventure to find them. Her journey brings her to the Marine Life Institute, a rehabilitation centre for diverse ocean species and from there; she tries to reunite with her long-lost relatives.
Finding Dory opens with a neatly packaged throwback to its predecessor, providing an easy way of getting the audience up to speed with what came before it – after all, it’s been 13 years since the release of the first film. From then on, it’s full steam ahead with a story that lacks the subtlety of Finding Nemo, but is engaging nonetheless.
The animation is you guessed it, exceptional. Nemo was one of the best films to showcase Pixar’s talents and its sequel continues that trend. The vibrancy of the colour palette is breath-taking and each shimmering wave makes you feel part of the watery depths. The blacks feel endless and the diversity of marine life just adds to the sparkle.
For adults, there are some cracking references to other films. Would you believe me if I told you Pixar managed to shoehorn an Alien homage in there? Well, they did, and it works beautifully. Couple that with a surprise turn from Sigourney Weaver as a park announcer and it’s a recipe for laughs all around.
Ellen DeGeneres takes centre stage this time around and rightly so. Dory is a loveable character, especially in her wide-eyed youth, and a very well-written one, despite her constant forgetfulness. Elsewhere, Idris Elba provides some laughs as a lazy sea lion and Ed O’Neill steals the show as a grumpy octopus.
Unfortunately, the final act of the film delves into unnecessarily and uncharacteristically silly territory. The joy of Pixar’s other works is that, despite their often out-of-this-world themes, they still feel grounded in reality. Dory’s finale is so ridiculous that it spoils the effect of the plot.
Nevertheless, you’ll be reaching for your tissues more than once as director and scriptwriter Andrew Stanton combines that heart-warming story with some lovely dialogue that will resonate with all generations.
Overall, Finding Dory isn’t the outright success it could’ve been, but it doesn’t continue the slip in Pixar’s quality either. The animation is truly wonderful and some of the references to more adult films are worked in very cleverly – but that final act; it’s just awful.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/08/01/is-it-a-return-to-form-for-pixar-finding-dory-review/
Then a few things caused the bubble to burst. Firstly, other companies upped their game, big time, with Dreamworks in particular being hot on the heels of their rival. Secondly, Pixar’s own partner, Disney started churning out great animated films with Zootropolis and Wreck-it Ralph worth a mention.
Finally, Pixar lost its way. Cars and its dreadful sequel, followed by an underwhelming prequel to Monsters Inc and the marketing disaster that was The Good Dinosaur all culminated in a studio damaged by its own high standards. Now, in 2016, we have a sequel to arguably Pixar’s best film, Finding Nemo, but does Finding Dory build on its predecessor or sink faster than a stone?
Dory (Ellen DeGeneres) is a wide-eyed, blue tang fish who suffers from memory loss. The one thing she can remember is she somehow became separated from her parents as a child. With help from Nemo and Marlin, Dory embarks on an epic adventure to find them. Her journey brings her to the Marine Life Institute, a rehabilitation centre for diverse ocean species and from there; she tries to reunite with her long-lost relatives.
Finding Dory opens with a neatly packaged throwback to its predecessor, providing an easy way of getting the audience up to speed with what came before it – after all, it’s been 13 years since the release of the first film. From then on, it’s full steam ahead with a story that lacks the subtlety of Finding Nemo, but is engaging nonetheless.
The animation is you guessed it, exceptional. Nemo was one of the best films to showcase Pixar’s talents and its sequel continues that trend. The vibrancy of the colour palette is breath-taking and each shimmering wave makes you feel part of the watery depths. The blacks feel endless and the diversity of marine life just adds to the sparkle.
For adults, there are some cracking references to other films. Would you believe me if I told you Pixar managed to shoehorn an Alien homage in there? Well, they did, and it works beautifully. Couple that with a surprise turn from Sigourney Weaver as a park announcer and it’s a recipe for laughs all around.
Ellen DeGeneres takes centre stage this time around and rightly so. Dory is a loveable character, especially in her wide-eyed youth, and a very well-written one, despite her constant forgetfulness. Elsewhere, Idris Elba provides some laughs as a lazy sea lion and Ed O’Neill steals the show as a grumpy octopus.
Unfortunately, the final act of the film delves into unnecessarily and uncharacteristically silly territory. The joy of Pixar’s other works is that, despite their often out-of-this-world themes, they still feel grounded in reality. Dory’s finale is so ridiculous that it spoils the effect of the plot.
Nevertheless, you’ll be reaching for your tissues more than once as director and scriptwriter Andrew Stanton combines that heart-warming story with some lovely dialogue that will resonate with all generations.
Overall, Finding Dory isn’t the outright success it could’ve been, but it doesn’t continue the slip in Pixar’s quality either. The animation is truly wonderful and some of the references to more adult films are worked in very cleverly – but that final act; it’s just awful.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/08/01/is-it-a-return-to-form-for-pixar-finding-dory-review/
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Pompeii (2014) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
The disaster movie has always been a genre guaranteed to create incredible box-office returns. If you look at Roland Emmerich’s impressive blockbuster hit 2012, which grossed over $750million, it is clear that destroying well-known landmarks = bums on seats.
However since 2012‘s 2009 release the genre has fallen into a dormant state. Nevertheless, four years later Paul W.S. Anderson attempts to reawaken this box-office behemoth with his take on the tragic true events at Pompeii, but does the film succeed in its task?
Partially is the short answer. Anderson’s first film since 2012’s disaster Resident Evil: Retribution is as cheesy as a Dairylea triangle, but it also has some stunning special effects to give it some life.
Game of Thrones’ Kit Harington stars as Milo, a slave captured by the Romans after they wiped out his entire family. He is taken to a gloriously recreated Pompeii and immediately sets his sights on the very beautiful Lady Cassia, played by a rather dull Emily Browning, who just so happens to be the daughter of the city ruler, Severus. I’m sure you can guess the plot…
What ensues is a cheesy mess of terrible acting and stilted dialogue that jars with the period nature of the film. Only the knowing of what is to come from Mt Vesuvius, which is beautifully rendered in CGI, stops the film from grinding to a halt.
Kiefer Sutherland dons a downright ridiculous English accent for the role of Senator Corvus, the chief antagonist in the film. He is on business in Pompeii to see if trade can be established and investment can be agreed with the great city of Rome – though this plot point gets lost along the way.
Another issue is the true story which Pompeii is based on. The great tale of tragedy and mother nature showing her ruthless side is one we all know – but all we really want to see is the mountain going boom. Unfortunately we must wait whilst Anderson tries his best to make us care about the characters with their sickly back-stories, for which he fails in breathtaking fashion.
Finally after nearly an hour of what feels like a poor-mans Gladiator we are treat to a stunning spectacle, as Mt Vesuvius explodes in rip-roaring style. As the mountain blows and the fireballs rage Anderson once again tries to get us interested in the paper-thin story, thankfully not pushing too hard this time, and he lets the special effects take over.
Historical accuracy is, surprisingly, very good. According to the director, Pompeii was faithfully recreated for the film with aerial shots of the city as it stands today topped up with CGI to show the thriving metropolis we see in the film.
Unfortunately, scientific accuracy takes a back-seat for the sake of high drama, which is the case with many films of this nature. The iconic pyroclastic flow, attributed to killing the majority of Pompeii’s inhabitants due to its huge speed and massive temperatures is slowed right down to ensure the film can last another ten minutes or so – though this is perhaps to be expected.
Overall, Paul W.S. Anderson has created a film which certainly looks the part, but is lacking in so many other areas. Kiefer Sutherland’s villain is completely upstaged by the constant shots of the volcano, which are almost pantomime like in their ‘it’s behind you’ staging, and the rest of the cast are wooden and not particularly likeable.
However, what it lacks in story and acting finesse it makes up in the beautiful special effects and engaging cinematography. It’s worth a watch just to see Pompeii get obliterated – which is probably not a very nice thing to say at all.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2014/05/03/pompeii-3d-review/
However since 2012‘s 2009 release the genre has fallen into a dormant state. Nevertheless, four years later Paul W.S. Anderson attempts to reawaken this box-office behemoth with his take on the tragic true events at Pompeii, but does the film succeed in its task?
Partially is the short answer. Anderson’s first film since 2012’s disaster Resident Evil: Retribution is as cheesy as a Dairylea triangle, but it also has some stunning special effects to give it some life.
Game of Thrones’ Kit Harington stars as Milo, a slave captured by the Romans after they wiped out his entire family. He is taken to a gloriously recreated Pompeii and immediately sets his sights on the very beautiful Lady Cassia, played by a rather dull Emily Browning, who just so happens to be the daughter of the city ruler, Severus. I’m sure you can guess the plot…
What ensues is a cheesy mess of terrible acting and stilted dialogue that jars with the period nature of the film. Only the knowing of what is to come from Mt Vesuvius, which is beautifully rendered in CGI, stops the film from grinding to a halt.
Kiefer Sutherland dons a downright ridiculous English accent for the role of Senator Corvus, the chief antagonist in the film. He is on business in Pompeii to see if trade can be established and investment can be agreed with the great city of Rome – though this plot point gets lost along the way.
Another issue is the true story which Pompeii is based on. The great tale of tragedy and mother nature showing her ruthless side is one we all know – but all we really want to see is the mountain going boom. Unfortunately we must wait whilst Anderson tries his best to make us care about the characters with their sickly back-stories, for which he fails in breathtaking fashion.
Finally after nearly an hour of what feels like a poor-mans Gladiator we are treat to a stunning spectacle, as Mt Vesuvius explodes in rip-roaring style. As the mountain blows and the fireballs rage Anderson once again tries to get us interested in the paper-thin story, thankfully not pushing too hard this time, and he lets the special effects take over.
Historical accuracy is, surprisingly, very good. According to the director, Pompeii was faithfully recreated for the film with aerial shots of the city as it stands today topped up with CGI to show the thriving metropolis we see in the film.
Unfortunately, scientific accuracy takes a back-seat for the sake of high drama, which is the case with many films of this nature. The iconic pyroclastic flow, attributed to killing the majority of Pompeii’s inhabitants due to its huge speed and massive temperatures is slowed right down to ensure the film can last another ten minutes or so – though this is perhaps to be expected.
Overall, Paul W.S. Anderson has created a film which certainly looks the part, but is lacking in so many other areas. Kiefer Sutherland’s villain is completely upstaged by the constant shots of the volcano, which are almost pantomime like in their ‘it’s behind you’ staging, and the rest of the cast are wooden and not particularly likeable.
However, what it lacks in story and acting finesse it makes up in the beautiful special effects and engaging cinematography. It’s worth a watch just to see Pompeii get obliterated – which is probably not a very nice thing to say at all.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2014/05/03/pompeii-3d-review/
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Witness in Tabletop Games
Jun 12, 2019
A classic ‘game’ from my childhood (seriously, we played it all the time) was Telephone. You know the one – someone whispers something to their neighbor, that person whispers it to their neighbor, and so on until it’s made its way around the group. Hilarity ensues when the final person reveals what they heard – usually a far cry from the original message! So when Travis pulled out Witness, a modern twist on Telephone, I knew that all my years of training would finally amount to something!
Witness is a cooperative game of memory and deduction set in the world of the 1940’s comic “Blake and Mortimer.” You and your compatriots are working together to solve mysteries! But there’s a catch – you each only know certain information, and are limited in how you are allowed to disclose it to each other. If you could just say it outright, there’d be no fun! Each player gets a character book filled with cases and information. Everyone reads their information for the chosen case, and then, like in Telephone, and in a certain order, players whisper their information to the player next to them. Play continues until everyone has heard (through the grapevine, of course) all 4 players’ information. After all information has been relayed, players get a chance to write down any notes from what they remember – but only after everything has been said! Players then open the Questions booklet to their specific case and answer three questions about their specific puzzle. Players receive points for correct answers, and as a team, are attempting to achieve the highest score possible!
I think that Witness is such a neat game. It’s a fun mechanic – you’re trying to remember all of your information to accurately pass it on, only to hear more information to add to what you already need to remember, to then pass it on again! It definitely makes for some funny misheard information! Another aspect of Witness that I like is that it goes beyond a regular game of Telephone in the fact that there’s an end goal – you’re trying to piece together all of the information as you hear it second- or even third-hand to correctly answer some questions. There’s more pressure to communicate accurately because you and your team are striving for a compilation of perfect information to help you score the most endgame points. Witness ups the stakes more than your average game of Telephone, and that’s what makes it interesting and engaging for me.
The major downside of Witness is that it is a game for EXACTLY 4 players. You can’t play with 3. You can’t play with 5. It absolutely 100% must be played with 4 players. And sometimes that’s just not possible. We all know those game nights where maybe only 2 or 3 people are available. Or maybe those times when you invite a large number of people over and they all come. In either scenario, Witness is out, and that is a bummer because it is such a neat game. Since the information is divided between 4 books, there’s unfortunately no way to adapt it for other player counts. So you can either play Witness or you can’t – there’s no ‘maybe.’
Overall, I enjoy playing Witness. I think it’s a unique approach to a simple game. Unfortunately, I believe this game is out of print, but if you can get your hands on a copy, or you see it on a friend’s shelf, give it a play! Whispering to your neighbor and solving little logic puzzles never seemed so fun! Purple Phoenix Games gives Witness a mysterious 11 / 18.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/04/02/witness-review/
Witness is a cooperative game of memory and deduction set in the world of the 1940’s comic “Blake and Mortimer.” You and your compatriots are working together to solve mysteries! But there’s a catch – you each only know certain information, and are limited in how you are allowed to disclose it to each other. If you could just say it outright, there’d be no fun! Each player gets a character book filled with cases and information. Everyone reads their information for the chosen case, and then, like in Telephone, and in a certain order, players whisper their information to the player next to them. Play continues until everyone has heard (through the grapevine, of course) all 4 players’ information. After all information has been relayed, players get a chance to write down any notes from what they remember – but only after everything has been said! Players then open the Questions booklet to their specific case and answer three questions about their specific puzzle. Players receive points for correct answers, and as a team, are attempting to achieve the highest score possible!
I think that Witness is such a neat game. It’s a fun mechanic – you’re trying to remember all of your information to accurately pass it on, only to hear more information to add to what you already need to remember, to then pass it on again! It definitely makes for some funny misheard information! Another aspect of Witness that I like is that it goes beyond a regular game of Telephone in the fact that there’s an end goal – you’re trying to piece together all of the information as you hear it second- or even third-hand to correctly answer some questions. There’s more pressure to communicate accurately because you and your team are striving for a compilation of perfect information to help you score the most endgame points. Witness ups the stakes more than your average game of Telephone, and that’s what makes it interesting and engaging for me.
The major downside of Witness is that it is a game for EXACTLY 4 players. You can’t play with 3. You can’t play with 5. It absolutely 100% must be played with 4 players. And sometimes that’s just not possible. We all know those game nights where maybe only 2 or 3 people are available. Or maybe those times when you invite a large number of people over and they all come. In either scenario, Witness is out, and that is a bummer because it is such a neat game. Since the information is divided between 4 books, there’s unfortunately no way to adapt it for other player counts. So you can either play Witness or you can’t – there’s no ‘maybe.’
Overall, I enjoy playing Witness. I think it’s a unique approach to a simple game. Unfortunately, I believe this game is out of print, but if you can get your hands on a copy, or you see it on a friend’s shelf, give it a play! Whispering to your neighbor and solving little logic puzzles never seemed so fun! Purple Phoenix Games gives Witness a mysterious 11 / 18.
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/04/02/witness-review/
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Kingdomino in Tabletop Games
Jun 12, 2019
So I am building a kingdom with these land pieces and I can just make my kingdom look however I want? Oh, I have to stay within a 5×5 square but my castle can go anywhere? And I can pick any one of those tiles in that column there? That sounds easy. Wait, that’s all? That’s the entire game?
DISCLAIMER: This review is focused on vanilla Kingdomino. We have the Age of Giants expansion and will be reviewing that as well. Maybe. If or when we do we will add that content to this review or link to it here. -T
Yep. That’s the entire game. On your turn you take the tile your meeple is currently sitting on and place it on another tile from the current offer column. That new tile will be your tile to be placed during the next round. Now you take the tile you just moved from and place it anywhere on your kingdom “grid” matching up similar land types if you can. Each crown icon shown in a land type will score 1 VP per land tile that is connected and matching. Example: you have a sand tile with two crowns on it. You have connected several tiles together and you have a connected sand area of seven squares showing sand. Two crowns times seven squares equals 14 VPs for that sand area. Just do that for all areas with crowns to get your final score.
Where is the conflict, you ask? Every good story has a conflict! Well, you cannot take just ANY tile you want. The tiles are placed in the offer column in numeric order (on the backs of the tiles are numbers). Then they are flipped so you can see what is coming up on the next round. Whomever chooses the lowest number tile goes first, and subsequently chooses their tile for the next round. Herein lies the conflict and what little player interaction there is in the game: you can block your opponent(s) by taking the tiles you see they may want. I personally do not play any games this way, but it’s a valid strategy. I am in it to win it, not in it to make you lose it.
Ok, so at first glance this is a children’s game. It can also be a hard sell to get people to want to play it. “It’s like Dominoes, but better.” That usually doesn’t spark a whole lot of energy and interest when I open with that. I am open to better sales pitches because this is a truly great game. Yes, it’s ultimately Dominoes at its heart. Yes, it’s very light. But dang it, this game is really fun!
The little cardboard castles that you build around are cute, but also kinda unnecessary. The meeples are, well, meeples. Not really too exciting to look at, but they are merely there to show player color. The domino tiles are a good thickness and the art is fun and whimsical. I LIKE looking at the tiles and sometimes finding a little hidden easter egg in there. I have no complaints about the components. Good on you, Blue Orange Games.
The game play is so simple but also so engaging! My mother, who usually only plays Rummikub, actually agreed to play this with me and she really really enjoyed it! Kids can play it and do really well. Older adults can too! It’s a great game to consider for gateway gaming, for a filler palate cleanser, or even for lighthearted tournament play. It just works well in so many scenarios. Is it my favorite game of all time? No. Is it in my Top 10? No. But I can guarantee you that I will never get rid of this little gem.
That said, Purple Phoenix Games gives this title a royal 14 / 18. Build on, Kingdomino!
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/02/27/kingdomino-review/
DISCLAIMER: This review is focused on vanilla Kingdomino. We have the Age of Giants expansion and will be reviewing that as well. Maybe. If or when we do we will add that content to this review or link to it here. -T
Yep. That’s the entire game. On your turn you take the tile your meeple is currently sitting on and place it on another tile from the current offer column. That new tile will be your tile to be placed during the next round. Now you take the tile you just moved from and place it anywhere on your kingdom “grid” matching up similar land types if you can. Each crown icon shown in a land type will score 1 VP per land tile that is connected and matching. Example: you have a sand tile with two crowns on it. You have connected several tiles together and you have a connected sand area of seven squares showing sand. Two crowns times seven squares equals 14 VPs for that sand area. Just do that for all areas with crowns to get your final score.
Where is the conflict, you ask? Every good story has a conflict! Well, you cannot take just ANY tile you want. The tiles are placed in the offer column in numeric order (on the backs of the tiles are numbers). Then they are flipped so you can see what is coming up on the next round. Whomever chooses the lowest number tile goes first, and subsequently chooses their tile for the next round. Herein lies the conflict and what little player interaction there is in the game: you can block your opponent(s) by taking the tiles you see they may want. I personally do not play any games this way, but it’s a valid strategy. I am in it to win it, not in it to make you lose it.
Ok, so at first glance this is a children’s game. It can also be a hard sell to get people to want to play it. “It’s like Dominoes, but better.” That usually doesn’t spark a whole lot of energy and interest when I open with that. I am open to better sales pitches because this is a truly great game. Yes, it’s ultimately Dominoes at its heart. Yes, it’s very light. But dang it, this game is really fun!
The little cardboard castles that you build around are cute, but also kinda unnecessary. The meeples are, well, meeples. Not really too exciting to look at, but they are merely there to show player color. The domino tiles are a good thickness and the art is fun and whimsical. I LIKE looking at the tiles and sometimes finding a little hidden easter egg in there. I have no complaints about the components. Good on you, Blue Orange Games.
The game play is so simple but also so engaging! My mother, who usually only plays Rummikub, actually agreed to play this with me and she really really enjoyed it! Kids can play it and do really well. Older adults can too! It’s a great game to consider for gateway gaming, for a filler palate cleanser, or even for lighthearted tournament play. It just works well in so many scenarios. Is it my favorite game of all time? No. Is it in my Top 10? No. But I can guarantee you that I will never get rid of this little gem.
That said, Purple Phoenix Games gives this title a royal 14 / 18. Build on, Kingdomino!
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2019/02/27/kingdomino-review/
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Jaipur in Tabletop Games
Jun 12, 2019
Finding a time when the entire group can get together to game can be rare – there always seems to be at least one person who cannot come. But fear not! Low attendance at any given game night does not automatically make it a dud! There are many excellent games for only two players, and that brings us to Jaipur!
Congratulations! You have become one of the most powerful traders in the Indian city of Jaipur – nobody can strike a deal quite like you! Only the best merchant will have the privilege of trading directly with the Maharajah (the city leader), and that is definitely you! Or at least, it was until a new competitor showed up and started swiping your customers… Will you give up your position willingly? Of course not! Through cunning strategy, you can prove that you are still the best trader the city has to offer – so let the competition begin!
In Jaipur, you and your opponent take turns buying, trading, and selling goods and camels for money. Out-sell your opponent in two out of three rounds to become the greatest tradesperson! Collect sets of the same goods to maximize your earnings, and use your camels wisely in trades as you try to anticipate the market trends. On your turn, you can take one of four actions: 1. Take a single good from the market, 2. Take all of the camels from the market, 3. Exchange goods/camels from your hand for multiple goods in the market, or 4. Sell goods. What will your strategy be? Monopolize the market in a specific good, or dabble in all goods? Try to anticipate your opponent’s strategy and throw a wrench in their plans, or mind your own business? No matter what you choose, strategy is the key to success in Jaipur, so make it count!
Jaipur is probably my favorite two-player game to date. The rules are simple enough, the mechanics (card drafting and set collection) are straight-forward, and it requires enough strategy to make it a fun challenge! Since it is a specifically two-player game, everything you do directly impacts your opponent. On your turn, not only are you trying to think of the best move for you to make, but you must also be thinking of what your opponent is trying to accomplish. If a couple of rounds pass and I see my opponent picking up silver goods, I can probably guess they’re hoping to make bank by selling a complete set. So do I pick up the next silver I see on my turn? Or do I cash in the set of diamonds that I’ve been secretly picking up each round? My strategy is constantly changing based on what cards appear in the market at any given time, and that is what elevates this technically simple game for me!
The only grievance for me with Jaipur has to do with the market distribution. The market cards are re-shuffled at the end of each round, and sometimes the shuffling is not balanced. I have lost many rounds because I am forced to take low-scoring goods or camels from a saturated market, only to reveal high-scoring goods for my opponent to take on their turn. Ultimately, that is not an issue with the game, but an issue with my poor card-shuffling ability. If anything, I try to see it as a strategic challenge – how can I best use these lowly goods to balance out the better cards my opponent has picked up? Nothing is a given in this game, and the market can completely change in a single turn!
If you want a quick but engaging game, look no further than Jaipur. It’s a solid two-player game that deserves more love! Purple Phoenix Games gives it a 16 / 18 (Bryan hasn’t played it yet).
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2018/12/28/jaipur-review/
Congratulations! You have become one of the most powerful traders in the Indian city of Jaipur – nobody can strike a deal quite like you! Only the best merchant will have the privilege of trading directly with the Maharajah (the city leader), and that is definitely you! Or at least, it was until a new competitor showed up and started swiping your customers… Will you give up your position willingly? Of course not! Through cunning strategy, you can prove that you are still the best trader the city has to offer – so let the competition begin!
In Jaipur, you and your opponent take turns buying, trading, and selling goods and camels for money. Out-sell your opponent in two out of three rounds to become the greatest tradesperson! Collect sets of the same goods to maximize your earnings, and use your camels wisely in trades as you try to anticipate the market trends. On your turn, you can take one of four actions: 1. Take a single good from the market, 2. Take all of the camels from the market, 3. Exchange goods/camels from your hand for multiple goods in the market, or 4. Sell goods. What will your strategy be? Monopolize the market in a specific good, or dabble in all goods? Try to anticipate your opponent’s strategy and throw a wrench in their plans, or mind your own business? No matter what you choose, strategy is the key to success in Jaipur, so make it count!
Jaipur is probably my favorite two-player game to date. The rules are simple enough, the mechanics (card drafting and set collection) are straight-forward, and it requires enough strategy to make it a fun challenge! Since it is a specifically two-player game, everything you do directly impacts your opponent. On your turn, not only are you trying to think of the best move for you to make, but you must also be thinking of what your opponent is trying to accomplish. If a couple of rounds pass and I see my opponent picking up silver goods, I can probably guess they’re hoping to make bank by selling a complete set. So do I pick up the next silver I see on my turn? Or do I cash in the set of diamonds that I’ve been secretly picking up each round? My strategy is constantly changing based on what cards appear in the market at any given time, and that is what elevates this technically simple game for me!
The only grievance for me with Jaipur has to do with the market distribution. The market cards are re-shuffled at the end of each round, and sometimes the shuffling is not balanced. I have lost many rounds because I am forced to take low-scoring goods or camels from a saturated market, only to reveal high-scoring goods for my opponent to take on their turn. Ultimately, that is not an issue with the game, but an issue with my poor card-shuffling ability. If anything, I try to see it as a strategic challenge – how can I best use these lowly goods to balance out the better cards my opponent has picked up? Nothing is a given in this game, and the market can completely change in a single turn!
If you want a quick but engaging game, look no further than Jaipur. It’s a solid two-player game that deserves more love! Purple Phoenix Games gives it a 16 / 18 (Bryan hasn’t played it yet).
https://purplephoenixgames.wordpress.com/2018/12/28/jaipur-review/
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Chalk Pit (Ruth Galloway, #9) in Books
Feb 13, 2018
Dr. Ruth Galloway is called in to investigate some bones found underground: local architect Quentin Swan is building a large center, and he worries the bones will delay his plans. Ruth fears he is correct, as she quickly realizes the bones are human (and not ancient). Meanwhile, members of DCI Nelson's team are looking into a missing "rough sleeper" (homeless person, in American parlance). Others in the community are saying she went "underground." Is this a figure of speech, or really true? After all, a geologist at Ruth's university says that there is web of chalk mining tunnels beneath King's Lynn. Nelson is also dealing with a new boss, who is putting pressure on him from all sides--from driving more safely (as if) to focusing more on strategy and less hands-on investigation. Can Nelson put aside this new distraction and solve these cases?
It's hard to believe this is the ninth book in Elly Griffiths' fantastic Ruth Galloway series. I'm sure all my reviews are starting to sound somewhat similar by now, but these books are just so wonderful, and I love them so. Ruth is a great character: she's well-written and completely herself, and the cast of characters that surround her in each book (Nelson, his wife, Judy, Cathbad, Clough, Tanya, etc.) are also their own people. Each are so fully developed that you feel as if you know them as intimately as friends. I love Ruth and her antisocial nature, her sarcasm, and her fierce devotion to her daughter, Kate (who can be so different from her mother). I love gruff Nelson. I love all of Nelson's subordinates on the force. They seriously do feel like friends, and while I loved this book, I felt bereft when it ended, because it means I have to wait again for another one (I will be so sad when this series ends).
I have no complaints with book #9. I enjoyed the plot and while it wasn't a total page-turner, it kept me guessing, and I didn't figure out everything ahead of time, which I always appreciate. There are some interesting developments in the whole Ruth/Nelson/Michelle saga and while I wish I could just flash forward to find out everything that happens, I was intrigued by all of them. This little love triangle is a great backstory to the novels, and the tension between Ruth and Nelson is so achingly portrayed in the books: Griffiths is doing a wonderful job of depicting it as Kate ages and new complications emerge with the dynamic.
In the end, as I always say: if you aren't reading this series: you should. It's wonderful, engaging, and I truly think you will fall for Ruth and her world. You don't necessarily need to read these books in order (novel #9 and its plot will stand on its own), but I think starting at the beginning will certainly enrich the experience. Meanwhile, I will be patiently waiting for #10 and secretly dreaming of a world where Ruth and I are the sort of friends where we can eat food together without judgement and occasionally get together without any social pressure.
You can read my reviews of book #8, THE WOMAN IN BLUE, <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25897794-the-woman-in-blue">here</a>;; book #7, THE GHOST FIELDS, <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/22749744-the-ghost-fields">here</a>;; and book #6, THE OUTCAST DEAD, <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18222687-the-outcast-dead">here</a>;.
<center><a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">Blog</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/mwcmoto">Twitter</a>; ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/+KristyHamiltonbooks">Google+</a>; ~ <a href="https://www.instagram.com/justacatandabook/">Instagram</a>; </center>
It's hard to believe this is the ninth book in Elly Griffiths' fantastic Ruth Galloway series. I'm sure all my reviews are starting to sound somewhat similar by now, but these books are just so wonderful, and I love them so. Ruth is a great character: she's well-written and completely herself, and the cast of characters that surround her in each book (Nelson, his wife, Judy, Cathbad, Clough, Tanya, etc.) are also their own people. Each are so fully developed that you feel as if you know them as intimately as friends. I love Ruth and her antisocial nature, her sarcasm, and her fierce devotion to her daughter, Kate (who can be so different from her mother). I love gruff Nelson. I love all of Nelson's subordinates on the force. They seriously do feel like friends, and while I loved this book, I felt bereft when it ended, because it means I have to wait again for another one (I will be so sad when this series ends).
I have no complaints with book #9. I enjoyed the plot and while it wasn't a total page-turner, it kept me guessing, and I didn't figure out everything ahead of time, which I always appreciate. There are some interesting developments in the whole Ruth/Nelson/Michelle saga and while I wish I could just flash forward to find out everything that happens, I was intrigued by all of them. This little love triangle is a great backstory to the novels, and the tension between Ruth and Nelson is so achingly portrayed in the books: Griffiths is doing a wonderful job of depicting it as Kate ages and new complications emerge with the dynamic.
In the end, as I always say: if you aren't reading this series: you should. It's wonderful, engaging, and I truly think you will fall for Ruth and her world. You don't necessarily need to read these books in order (novel #9 and its plot will stand on its own), but I think starting at the beginning will certainly enrich the experience. Meanwhile, I will be patiently waiting for #10 and secretly dreaming of a world where Ruth and I are the sort of friends where we can eat food together without judgement and occasionally get together without any social pressure.
You can read my reviews of book #8, THE WOMAN IN BLUE, <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25897794-the-woman-in-blue">here</a>;; book #7, THE GHOST FIELDS, <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/22749744-the-ghost-fields">here</a>;; and book #6, THE OUTCAST DEAD, <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18222687-the-outcast-dead">here</a>;.
<center><a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">Blog</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/mwcmoto">Twitter</a>; ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/+KristyHamiltonbooks">Google+</a>; ~ <a href="https://www.instagram.com/justacatandabook/">Instagram</a>; </center>
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Arrangement in Books
Feb 13, 2018
Lucy and Owen fled Brooklyn for the suburbs not long after their son, Wyatt, came along. In the perfect little town of Beekman, they have a beautiful old house, a yard full of chickens, and interact with a cast full of eclectic characters. Lucy also has her hands full with Wyatt, a challenging kid with autism. One evening, when some friends come over and the drinks flow freely, they mention their open marriage. At first, Lucy and Own are a bit shocked. But as the exhausted duo look around at their life, they begin to consider "the arrangement." Owen grabs a pad and a pen and they eke out some rules. It still seems like a joke, until Lucy says she wants to give the arrangement--a six-month experience where they each have an ongoing, no questions asked free pass in their marriage--a go. Surely nothing will go wrong, right?
This novel is a different, oddly intriguing read, offering an extremely realistic portrayal of marriage and raising children. Warm and fuzzy it is not, yet it's still engaging and features relatable characters. Lucy and Owen's exhaustion is palatable, as is Lucy's frustration and love for Wyatt, who is an intelligent, fun, and extremely challenging special needs kid. (You will grow to love him, even as you completely empathize with why poor Lucy might need a break--one of the definite strengths of the book.) For a good early portion of the novel, I found myself thinking I would be reading a quite grim look at parenthood and marriage. And it is, in many ways. After all, why are Lucy and Owen so willing to embark on the arrangement, you wonder? Are they bored with their life, with each other? Are they simply tired parents? What causes them to choose this? As the arrangement begins, their reactions to its ongoing presence in their lives is surprising, and Dunn does a good job at capturing some nuance in their character that you might not expect. These are real married people, with real issues.
Still, there are definitely some odd bits and pieces stuck into the story. It seems disjointed at times, and some of the characters and their stories seem to pop up at weird times, forcing you to remind yourself how they fit into Lucy and Owen's life and the town of Beekman (for we don't hear just from our main couple, but several others who live in town). The novel meanders at times, and I wouldn't call the ending closure, per se, though it falls in line with the realism of the novel.
Where Dunn shines is her humor, which slips through even some of the darker moments. Moments with Wyatt are perfectly captured. Lucy's friend, Sunny Bang, is one of the best things about this book, and you'll love every second featuring her. There's a scene at the town church with many of the local kids (and their pets) that is solely worth purchasing the entire book. Seriously, Dunn writes with a sharp wit, and it's one of the main reasons my rating upped to 3.5 stars. The book is often smartly funny and feminist, even if it has its depressing, wandering moments. It's a fascinating look at marriage, for sure, and I was certainly intrigued to see how the arrangement would play out. It was also a welcome break from all the thrillers I'd been reading lately, so thanks! If you like sharp and witty characters coupled with a psychological inside look at modern-day marriage, you'll find this one quite compelling. 3.5 stars.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you) in return for an unbiased review. It is available everywhere as of 03/21/2017.
<center><a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">Blog</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/mwcmoto">Twitter</a>; ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/+KristyHamiltonbooks">Google+</a></center>;
This novel is a different, oddly intriguing read, offering an extremely realistic portrayal of marriage and raising children. Warm and fuzzy it is not, yet it's still engaging and features relatable characters. Lucy and Owen's exhaustion is palatable, as is Lucy's frustration and love for Wyatt, who is an intelligent, fun, and extremely challenging special needs kid. (You will grow to love him, even as you completely empathize with why poor Lucy might need a break--one of the definite strengths of the book.) For a good early portion of the novel, I found myself thinking I would be reading a quite grim look at parenthood and marriage. And it is, in many ways. After all, why are Lucy and Owen so willing to embark on the arrangement, you wonder? Are they bored with their life, with each other? Are they simply tired parents? What causes them to choose this? As the arrangement begins, their reactions to its ongoing presence in their lives is surprising, and Dunn does a good job at capturing some nuance in their character that you might not expect. These are real married people, with real issues.
Still, there are definitely some odd bits and pieces stuck into the story. It seems disjointed at times, and some of the characters and their stories seem to pop up at weird times, forcing you to remind yourself how they fit into Lucy and Owen's life and the town of Beekman (for we don't hear just from our main couple, but several others who live in town). The novel meanders at times, and I wouldn't call the ending closure, per se, though it falls in line with the realism of the novel.
Where Dunn shines is her humor, which slips through even some of the darker moments. Moments with Wyatt are perfectly captured. Lucy's friend, Sunny Bang, is one of the best things about this book, and you'll love every second featuring her. There's a scene at the town church with many of the local kids (and their pets) that is solely worth purchasing the entire book. Seriously, Dunn writes with a sharp wit, and it's one of the main reasons my rating upped to 3.5 stars. The book is often smartly funny and feminist, even if it has its depressing, wandering moments. It's a fascinating look at marriage, for sure, and I was certainly intrigued to see how the arrangement would play out. It was also a welcome break from all the thrillers I'd been reading lately, so thanks! If you like sharp and witty characters coupled with a psychological inside look at modern-day marriage, you'll find this one quite compelling. 3.5 stars.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you) in return for an unbiased review. It is available everywhere as of 03/21/2017.
<center><a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">Blog</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/mwcmoto">Twitter</a>; ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/+KristyHamiltonbooks">Google+</a></center>;
Nick doonan (0 KP) rated Dunkirk (2017) in Movies
Apr 4, 2018
A movie you only watch once.
Contains spoilers, click to show
Okay so i was sceptical about watching this movie and have put off watching it for quite some time but, as it is Christopher Nolan and the IMDb ratings seem to show above average on it, i thought i'd give it a chance seen as i loved all his previous movies.
Boy was i disappointed. .
I don't quite know where Nolan was planning to go with this movie or what it was even for but it is completely out of sync with all his other creations. I wanted to actually turn off the movie half way through it but my liking for Nolan kept me watching until it's pitiful and yet quite anticipated ending.
So the movie starts off with soldiers walking through the streets. Looking at the mess left behind from the still engaging warfare of the french. Then we cut to a young lad, separated from his group, avoiding gunfire, running away to stay alive. It's fast paced and it looks like a great start. THEN...
The young lad ends up at the beach where all the soldiers are waiting to be picked up and taken back home to England. A lot of long staring goes on and a very dramatic run by two soldiers taking an injured soldier to one of the boats prevails, but what was the dramatic music for? We then cut to our only 2 fighter pilots, protecting the skies. They seem to have a good friendship but we don't see any of it materialise until the end where one goes ''come on Farrier''. It is hard at this point to actually get on board with any of the characters, whether to like them or dislike them. The majority of the movie is spent watching a young lad trying to get on a board to get back home but keeps meeting obstacles on his way. Eventually, in particular fashion at the end, boats arrive and everyone safely returns home after what felt like eternity.
Conclusion?
I watched this movie purely because it was by Christopher Nolan. If it hadn't been, i wouldn't recommend this to anyone or even watched it myself. It's a movie you would only watch once and this suprises me. I expected so much better from such a great director. It was sloppy, messy and rushed and more importantly... it was just absolutely dull all the way through.
Cillian Murphy had a great part but felt watered down. I really struggled to get on board with anything that was going on.
I wanted to really enjoy this movie, i really did. but i struggled to actually get into anything that was going on. There was no character depth or explanation behind anything that was going on.
*SPOILER HERE....but it's not major so don't worry.* What was the deal with the young lad that died? Why did he mean so much to the old man and his son? Why was the dramatic music used so much for when ziltch was happening? I mean, literally, dramatic music getting faster and faster and then cuts to silence and nothing?
This movie started off quite promising. Walking the streets in the aftermath of battle, avoiding gunfire and then 3 minutes later, nothing. I feel like it was going to go back and explain why certain things was happening but it never did. I honestly don't understand this movie at all. The majority of the movie felt like a filler. The spitfire scenes were tedious and boring, despite the fact they were probably the only best scenes from the movie. This movie is a ''watch once, never again'' type movie. It had absolutely nothing make you want to come back. You can't like any of the characters because of the character depth being missing and it just felt messy.
I'm genuinely dissapointed that this movie wasn't as good or enjoyable.
Boy was i disappointed. .
I don't quite know where Nolan was planning to go with this movie or what it was even for but it is completely out of sync with all his other creations. I wanted to actually turn off the movie half way through it but my liking for Nolan kept me watching until it's pitiful and yet quite anticipated ending.
So the movie starts off with soldiers walking through the streets. Looking at the mess left behind from the still engaging warfare of the french. Then we cut to a young lad, separated from his group, avoiding gunfire, running away to stay alive. It's fast paced and it looks like a great start. THEN...
The young lad ends up at the beach where all the soldiers are waiting to be picked up and taken back home to England. A lot of long staring goes on and a very dramatic run by two soldiers taking an injured soldier to one of the boats prevails, but what was the dramatic music for? We then cut to our only 2 fighter pilots, protecting the skies. They seem to have a good friendship but we don't see any of it materialise until the end where one goes ''come on Farrier''. It is hard at this point to actually get on board with any of the characters, whether to like them or dislike them. The majority of the movie is spent watching a young lad trying to get on a board to get back home but keeps meeting obstacles on his way. Eventually, in particular fashion at the end, boats arrive and everyone safely returns home after what felt like eternity.
Conclusion?
I watched this movie purely because it was by Christopher Nolan. If it hadn't been, i wouldn't recommend this to anyone or even watched it myself. It's a movie you would only watch once and this suprises me. I expected so much better from such a great director. It was sloppy, messy and rushed and more importantly... it was just absolutely dull all the way through.
Cillian Murphy had a great part but felt watered down. I really struggled to get on board with anything that was going on.
I wanted to really enjoy this movie, i really did. but i struggled to actually get into anything that was going on. There was no character depth or explanation behind anything that was going on.
*SPOILER HERE....but it's not major so don't worry.* What was the deal with the young lad that died? Why did he mean so much to the old man and his son? Why was the dramatic music used so much for when ziltch was happening? I mean, literally, dramatic music getting faster and faster and then cuts to silence and nothing?
This movie started off quite promising. Walking the streets in the aftermath of battle, avoiding gunfire and then 3 minutes later, nothing. I feel like it was going to go back and explain why certain things was happening but it never did. I honestly don't understand this movie at all. The majority of the movie felt like a filler. The spitfire scenes were tedious and boring, despite the fact they were probably the only best scenes from the movie. This movie is a ''watch once, never again'' type movie. It had absolutely nothing make you want to come back. You can't like any of the characters because of the character depth being missing and it just felt messy.
I'm genuinely dissapointed that this movie wasn't as good or enjoyable.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Rage 2 in Video Games
Jun 19, 2019
In 2010 Bethesda released RAGE. The game was the next step in the Id Shooters as it combined the combat the company was known for with a story, outdoor locales, customization, and vehicle combat and racing. As if that was not enough; the game featured a large Post-Apocalypse world, tons of enemies, and several side missions.
The game was so large that it took several discs to contain the game and I remember our review unit arriving extra early so we had time to load the large game so we could be ready to play when it went online.
Nine years later we finally get the sequel as RAGE 2 has arrived from Avalanche Studios. The game picks up 20 years after the first game as players take on the character of Walker; a first generation offspring from the original Ark survivors.
After a deadly attack by the evil General Cross and his army of Mutants; Walker takes on the role as the last of the Rangers and travels the Wastelands to find new Ranger tech, make allies, gather loot, and fight Bandits, Mutants, and other enemies that arise.
Walker has a nice arsenal of pistols, Shotguns, Machine Guns, Rocket Launchers, Grenades, and his deadly Wingstick as well as a series of Nanotech powered abilities which can be improved and gained over time.
There are various towns for players to advance the main mission as well as gain side missions, trade, buy, and increase their vehicle and weapon abilities.
Players will need all this and more as the enemies are numerous and deadly. Just driving between two points on a mission can lead to roving bands and convoys attacking you; not to mention Road Blocks and other Bandit Dens that arise.
The game deftly combines first person combat and vehicle combat and offers some very fine graphics which really lead to the immersion. One issue I had is that some missions seem more like a back and forth between two points versus some of the more cohesive moments on other missions.
The NPC characters do not do as much as some may like as you will pretty much be a Lone Wolf but you will be able to chat with characters to advance the story and get side missions.
The game does require players to win a race in order to advance the story and it took many tries including some frustrating second place finishes before I was able to cross the Finish Line first ahead of the pack.
The game provides plenty of gameplay as I put in over 20 hours on it and there are still some areas I can wander to clean up but with DLC and new content coming; I am looking forward to seeing what is to come. I also look forward to fully loading out my vehicles and weapons as the three main weapons I have are amazing and I would love to see what the full loadout can do.
I was a bit disappointed over the lack of Multiplayer as it was included in the first game and I had hoped we would be able to get both vehicle and FPS combat this time out or at the least a Co-Op mode.
The music and sound effects are good although they can drop or fade now and then but this has become better with a recent patch.
RAGE 2 provided plenty of immersive entertainment and was a very entertaining and engaging game despite some frustrations along the way. The game clearly indicates more is coming to the story and I cannot wait to see what comes next.
http://sknr.net/2019/06/07/rage-2/
The game was so large that it took several discs to contain the game and I remember our review unit arriving extra early so we had time to load the large game so we could be ready to play when it went online.
Nine years later we finally get the sequel as RAGE 2 has arrived from Avalanche Studios. The game picks up 20 years after the first game as players take on the character of Walker; a first generation offspring from the original Ark survivors.
After a deadly attack by the evil General Cross and his army of Mutants; Walker takes on the role as the last of the Rangers and travels the Wastelands to find new Ranger tech, make allies, gather loot, and fight Bandits, Mutants, and other enemies that arise.
Walker has a nice arsenal of pistols, Shotguns, Machine Guns, Rocket Launchers, Grenades, and his deadly Wingstick as well as a series of Nanotech powered abilities which can be improved and gained over time.
There are various towns for players to advance the main mission as well as gain side missions, trade, buy, and increase their vehicle and weapon abilities.
Players will need all this and more as the enemies are numerous and deadly. Just driving between two points on a mission can lead to roving bands and convoys attacking you; not to mention Road Blocks and other Bandit Dens that arise.
The game deftly combines first person combat and vehicle combat and offers some very fine graphics which really lead to the immersion. One issue I had is that some missions seem more like a back and forth between two points versus some of the more cohesive moments on other missions.
The NPC characters do not do as much as some may like as you will pretty much be a Lone Wolf but you will be able to chat with characters to advance the story and get side missions.
The game does require players to win a race in order to advance the story and it took many tries including some frustrating second place finishes before I was able to cross the Finish Line first ahead of the pack.
The game provides plenty of gameplay as I put in over 20 hours on it and there are still some areas I can wander to clean up but with DLC and new content coming; I am looking forward to seeing what is to come. I also look forward to fully loading out my vehicles and weapons as the three main weapons I have are amazing and I would love to see what the full loadout can do.
I was a bit disappointed over the lack of Multiplayer as it was included in the first game and I had hoped we would be able to get both vehicle and FPS combat this time out or at the least a Co-Op mode.
The music and sound effects are good although they can drop or fade now and then but this has become better with a recent patch.
RAGE 2 provided plenty of immersive entertainment and was a very entertaining and engaging game despite some frustrations along the way. The game clearly indicates more is coming to the story and I cannot wait to see what comes next.
http://sknr.net/2019/06/07/rage-2/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of Tom Clancy's The Division in Video Games
Jun 19, 2019
As if pulled directly from the headlines Tom Clancy’s The Division is a chilling look at New York in the aftermath of a deadly pandemic. Dubbed the Dollar Flu, after tainted money was released during Black Friday, Manhattan is a desolated region populated by scavengers, roaming gangs; people just trying to survive. It is into this scenario that players take on the role of an agent of an elite government division known as “The Division”, their task is to help restore order, investigate the outbreak, and bring facilities and a sense of normality to a devastated area. Playing from a third person perspective and mixing elements of a RPG and shooter, The Division is an extremely ambitious and highly detailed project. Players are tasked with several main missions but also have the option to do side missions which help them gain resources in order to upgrade their base and equipment. Weapons and accessories can be bought, sold, or modified, and various skill options ranging from healing to combat options become available as well.
One of the great things about the game is the ability to join other players to complete your missions. At the start of a mission, players have the option to be matched up with other players but of course the difficulty will ramp up based on the number of players that are currently assigned. The level of difficulty can be extreme but the enjoyment rewards of successfully completing the mission of this magnitude are worth it.
There was a lot of complaining online from gamers about the delays that the game had coming to market and I would say that the time has definitely been well spent. It is a deeply immersive game that is very impressive to look at in terms of the detail that Ubisoft has put into re-creating the city. The enemies are diverse and challenging and the storyline is extremely engaging.
I am not a huge fan of micromanagement in terms of having to sort out my gear and tactful upgrades I’ve always been more in favor of finding and using an item rather than crafting and purchasing because I do not like to have to decide what is worth keeping and what is worth discarding or selling. The great thing is the game gives me the ability to play in my comfort zone but also step outside it and take some new paths to enhance my loadout.
There are unfortunately a few bugs in the game as I remember one early mission in a department store were encountering a flamethrower equipped enemy on a staircase I backed up and dispatched them with a volley from my assault rifle. My triumph was short-lived as I found that I become wedged between an ankle high box and a mannequin and that there was no way for me to get out of that predicament without ending the game and then reloading. I have not encountered any of the exploits that I read about being deployed online but I also avoid The Dark Zone more than other players as this is truly a lawless area were players run amok.
Ubisoft has said they plan to address the issues and they also have upcoming DLC which will expand upon the universe. For now The Division is a very impressive game in that it provides a fantastic an open world scenario filled with numerous challenges and a great level of visual detail. I found myself to of been drawn into the game and it is managed to maintain my interest ever since release and also has me thinking about the game and strategizing even when I’m not playing. Hopefully the necessary updates and features will continue to, so this game can reach its full potential.
http://sknr.net/2016/05/13/tom-clancys-division/
One of the great things about the game is the ability to join other players to complete your missions. At the start of a mission, players have the option to be matched up with other players but of course the difficulty will ramp up based on the number of players that are currently assigned. The level of difficulty can be extreme but the enjoyment rewards of successfully completing the mission of this magnitude are worth it.
There was a lot of complaining online from gamers about the delays that the game had coming to market and I would say that the time has definitely been well spent. It is a deeply immersive game that is very impressive to look at in terms of the detail that Ubisoft has put into re-creating the city. The enemies are diverse and challenging and the storyline is extremely engaging.
I am not a huge fan of micromanagement in terms of having to sort out my gear and tactful upgrades I’ve always been more in favor of finding and using an item rather than crafting and purchasing because I do not like to have to decide what is worth keeping and what is worth discarding or selling. The great thing is the game gives me the ability to play in my comfort zone but also step outside it and take some new paths to enhance my loadout.
There are unfortunately a few bugs in the game as I remember one early mission in a department store were encountering a flamethrower equipped enemy on a staircase I backed up and dispatched them with a volley from my assault rifle. My triumph was short-lived as I found that I become wedged between an ankle high box and a mannequin and that there was no way for me to get out of that predicament without ending the game and then reloading. I have not encountered any of the exploits that I read about being deployed online but I also avoid The Dark Zone more than other players as this is truly a lawless area were players run amok.
Ubisoft has said they plan to address the issues and they also have upcoming DLC which will expand upon the universe. For now The Division is a very impressive game in that it provides a fantastic an open world scenario filled with numerous challenges and a great level of visual detail. I found myself to of been drawn into the game and it is managed to maintain my interest ever since release and also has me thinking about the game and strategizing even when I’m not playing. Hopefully the necessary updates and features will continue to, so this game can reach its full potential.
http://sknr.net/2016/05/13/tom-clancys-division/