If you recall from last time, I had actually finished Bayonetta 2, but didn't want to write about it too much without going and replaying the first game. I've now done that, so I'm writing about it.

Bayonetta 2

Bayonetta 2 is a tricky game to write about. Well, it's a tricky game for ME to write about. Because, as I've mentioned before in my blogs, I think I'm a better writer (about games) when I focus on the negative side of games. You know, I just don't think writing, "well the punching is good," and, "I like shooting dudes in this game," makes for interesting blogs. The issue here is that the core of Bayonetta 2 is so fantastic that it pretty much overrides the negative aspects of the game, even if I end up spending more time nitpicking the bad parts of the game.

But that's the thing with Bayonetta 2, well, both of the games, really (though the first has addition issues). The core is great, but everything surrounding it is kinda lackluster. The combat is as smooth and fun as ever. The thrill of narrowly dodging an attack, and having slow motion witch time to pound the enemies to literal bloody pulps is even better this time because I can actually pull it off fairly consistently, unlike in the first game (which is substantially harder, even after playing all of the second game, and going into it feeling like I was good at Bayonetta style fighting). There's a lot of weapon variety, and I think the different weapons are more satisfying, and more useful overall than they were in the first game.

But the fights rarely last very long in Bayonetta 2. In an effort to cater to the people that want scores and ranks for everything, for every little fight, most of the encounters in the game are super short. Not all, and as the game goes on, they tend to get longer, but it's still an issue. The game is so compartmentalized that it forces you out of combat a more than I think it should. I just want to be fighting enemies, I don't want to get into a fight that lasts 40 seconds, then have to wait for the stats screen, then wait for Bayonetta to destroy the barrier preventing her from advancing (either by blowing a kiss or shooting a bunch of bullets in a heart shape), and then move forward until I get to the next encounter.

There's nothing new or different about this type of encounter design, Platinum has been doing it for years, and even then, they more or less took it from the Devil May Cry games (or the later ones, at least (I think, it's been a while since I played DMC 3 or 4)). I was talking with a friend who is playing REVENGEANCE for the first time, and he was complaining about how much of the game was cut-scenes, and how much of it was spent between fights, waiting for more fights. And waiting really is the right word to describe the issues I have with this style of action game that Platinum makes. Too much of it is spent waiting for it to get back to the game play.

That's not to say that I think these games should be nothing but endless fights, far from it. I definitely appreciate down time between fights, and there are hidden things to be found in the levels, which is always a welcome touch. And there's sequences with things like Bayonetta riding a demon horse, or on top of a jet that change what's going on in a refreshing way, but never overstay their welcome (unlike in the first game, where those sequences do go on longer than I thought they should).

It's more the cut-scenes. When the cut-scenes in Bayonetta 2 are good, they're really well made cut-scenes with crazy stuff going on, and well choreographed fights. But any time Bayonetta was fighting enemies in a cut-scene, all I could think was that I would have rather been doing the fight myself, instead of watching it. Conversely, when the cut-scenes in Bayonetta 2 (and especially the first game) are bad, they are REALLY BAD. A lot of them don't even have movement. Seriously, the game will go from a regular cut-scene to these weird things where everything is freeze frame, aside from some odd things like a scarf that might be blowing in the wind. The characters keep talking, but the scene is frozen, but moves forward from one freeze frame to another. It was terrible in the first game, and it's terrible that they brought it back into the second. And then there's the part where there's an overly large amount of unnecessary back story and stuff presented in the form of characters talking for far too long about things that I didn't really care about in the story.

And both games have an annoying kid character that is really important to the story, but also annoying because they're kids. But as much as I don't like the kid as a character in 2, at least he doesn't get in the way of game play like the kid did in the first game, because you have to actively protect her several times there. At least the one in 2 knows how to look after himself.

But let's forget about all that stuff, because in the heat of the moment, whilst fighting those enemies in increasingly ludicrous scenarios, Bayonetta 2 is just an absolute delight to play. I know I already went over how the core of this games makes up for all of its shortcomings, but I have to say it again. This game is a joy to play. I love love love love LOVE playing it. If you have a Wii U, you really should buy this game. If you like Platinum style action games, and would even consider playing the other Wii U exclusives, you should get a Wii U to play this game. I mean, unless you're struggling for money, don't do anything stupid that would prioritize a game over food, or rent. But if you really like these sorts of games, you'll adore this one. It's the best game of this sub-genre of action games that I've ever played.

And it comes with the original Bayonetta! Which, to be honest, I didn't enjoy as much as I did when I first played the game a couple years ago on 360. I'm glad I did though, because it did do a good job of showing how much better Bayonetta 2 is than the first game. Everything from the technical side of things (Bayonetta 1 seemed to have some frame rate troubles I didn't remember from the 360 version, but I don't know if that's my memory, or the quality of the Wii U port that is at fault) to the pacing, to the use of QTEs is better in Bayonetta 2. In regards to that last one, the first game has several instances of QTEs that if you fail, you die, and it counts as a death toward your overall ranking. The game checkpoints right before the death, but it's still poor design. Bayonetta 2 sticks with keeping the QTEs just for climax and torture attacks, and those just involve mashing a button or rotating a stick to get some bonus points.

One advantage the original does have is that the alternate Nintendo themed outfits are unlocked from the get-go, rather than being unlockables that require hundreds of thousands of in game money to get. I ended up playing most of Bayonetta 1 with the Link outfit, because I enjoyed using the sword as a weapon, and it made the sword look like the Master Sword. Another reason is that Link's hat does a better job of hiding Bayonetta's goofy tall hair in the first game (I prefer her new, shorter hair in Bayonetta 2 a lot), which looks especially dumb in the Samus costume. I might have used the Peach one more, because while I really liked that it turns the giant hair arms and legs (which Bayonetta summons as the final hits in some combos) into Bowser arms and legs (complete with Bowser roars)...she also wears a really short skirt in that outfit. And the way she runs means that it's almost constant upskirts and...well, I don't need to continue on that. Suffice to say I preferred the Link outfit (though in retrospect, I find it a bit odd they didn't go for an old school Link where Link didn't wear pants under his tunic, but let's not get on that subject).

But the biggest issue I had replaying Bayonetta 1, which I already mentioned, is that the game is a lot harder than Bayonetta 2. I enjoy it when games are challenging, but I prefer it to be a reasonable challenge. I think the ideal difficulty is when it feels difficult to succeed, but it's not so difficult that it takes multiple tries. Bayonetta 2 is a lot better at being at that level of difficulty than the first game was. I'm not really sure what it is specifically, though. Part of it is that it's a lot easier to time the witch time dodges than in the first, but even beyond that, Bayonetta 1 is harder. Still fun, but also frustrating at times.

All right, I'm moving on now. I feel like I've gotten rambly and am repeating myself. So I'll repeat myself once more and say Bayonetta 2 is great, and you should play it if you can.

Oh, and the co-op mode! I haven't had a chance to try it yet (mainly because @rmanthorp and I are bad at coordinating things), but there's online co-op. I'd like to try it eventually.

Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare.

I've also been playing the latest Call of Duty game. I really like it. Overall, I'd say it's my favorite Call of Duty campaign. I say "overall" because the Blops games still have the best story, because Treyarch is still the only developer that at least tried to do something with the story, rather than just being predictable at every turn. Which isn't to say the story is overly bad in AW, or anything like that. It's just pretty straightforward. It's presented well, and the performances by the actors involved are good all around. Kevin Spacey is good, but he's not as good as the trio of Ed Harris, Ice Cube, and Gary Oldman that were in Black Ops I (also Sam Worthington).

Conversely, the thing I really hate about AW is that while the character you play as (Mitchell) can talk during cut-scenes, he stays silent in game. It makes no sense whatsoever! It makes me really upset that developers still think things like this are acceptable in this day and age, especially when other CoD games (Blops) had no issues whatsoever with having the playable characters talk whilst being played. It's just a stupid holdover from the older games, and I wish it wasn't the case in this game. Or really, any game, at this point.

I mean, I understand if a game is low budget, and there isn't enough money to hire a voice cast. But this is Call of Duty. This is the biggest franchise in video games, for better or for worse. It's not a budget issue, it's a design issue. Bad design. I'm being serious, it only drives home the fact that this is a video game, and breaks the immersion when Mitchell should be responding, but doesn't because some people still think the character you play as shouldn't be talking.

However, at the end of the day, CoD is about shooting people, not talking, and it does get that part of it right. And with all the fancy future stuff in this game, it's really fun. Double jumping and air dashing is fun, using slow motion is fun, threat grenades are cool, fun stuff is fun. That was a poorly written sentence, I'm sorry. Anyway, there's also a lot of different types of things to add more variety, like vehicles, different gadgets for different missions, and even a stealth mission where the game literally turns into Splinter Cell, but with Scorpion's spear attack.

I'm not even joking, there's a part in a mission where you have to hide in a bush, push a button to whistle, which attracts a guard. At which point you use a grappling spearing to pull the guard in, and kill him. It's great.

Though, I do have a few issues with some of the future stuff in the game. Specifically, the gun that "prints ammo." I'm sure someone came up with that because 3D printing is cool and hip write now, but really, let's be real. That makes absolutely zero sense. First off, I don't think you could simply 3D print a bullet. Bullets have gunpowder in them. And are metal. I'm not sure off hand, but I'm going to say that the metaling point for most metals is higher than that for the plastic you see used in 3D printers, so that gun would have to have a really hot smelter thing in it.

But the real problem is that you can't just 3D print something out of thin air. You can't just spontaneously create matter out of nothing, so the gun couldn't just create ammo forever like it does in the game (or at least in the campaign it seemed to be doing that). You'd have to be carrying the same weight in raw materials as you would for the end bullets, so it makes absolutely no sense at all to do that when you could just carry bullets in there, even assuming that it would be possible for a gun to create its own bullets.

I know this isn't something I should get worked up about, but it's just so absurd in a game that at least tries to make itself seem plausible that I couldn't not mention it. I also think the sonic shotgun is absurd in that it doesn't seem any better or like it does anything that a regular shotgun wouldn't do, but it at least seems like something that could be feasible. Also, I really like the sounds it makes.

Speaking of, this game has really good sound design. Lots of future-y sounding future stuff. I'd never played a CoD game with headphones on before, but good use of headphone-y surround-y type stuff. As you can see, I'm well versed in discussing audio things, so I'm just going to move on.

The multiplayer is really good too. You might even say the real draw of the game, but I don't want to make any controversial statements about Call of Duty. Or, at least, it's good if you like playing Call of Duty online. I can see how the quick deaths could turn a lot of people away. And even if my case, it almost does some of the time.

But, this time I actually have friends to play with! Well, internet friends, at least (I kid). But seriously, having friends to talk with whilst playing CoD goes a long way to making it more fun. Even if what we're talking about has little or nothing to do with the actual game. Scratch that, ESPECIALLY if it has nothing to do with the game. At that point, it basically just becomes talk about nonsense whilst shooting is going on in the background.

This is nothing new, but I haven't played games whilst talking with people online in a very long time. I mean, not counting Destiny slightly earlier this year, obviously. I did during the one year I paid for Xbox Live Gold, but that was it until I got my new headset. Really glad I got it.

I don't really have much to say about the multiplayer itself. I mean, it's mostly just running around shooting people. I try to play the modes where my dying doesn't directly give points to the other team, and I've grown quite fond of Uplink. It's basically basketball, but with more shooting and dunking gives more points (two versus one for throwing the ball in). I find that a bit odd, given that I've missed every time I try to throw it in. That's probably just because I have lousy aim, though.

There is also a Horde Mode equivalent in the game, because I guess no CoD game can release now without a third mode. It's not very good, and it has the distinct feeling of having been thrown in just to satisfy a checklist. I mean, nothing about it seems broken, or terrible, it's just boring. And heartless.

I never liked the Zombies mode in the Treyarch games, but at least that mode had heart, and personality. And stuff that wasn't in the main game. Levels, assets, voice acting, mechanics, weapons, enemies, and probably other stuff that was made specifically for that mode. This co-op mode just uses the same maps from the competitive mode, and enemies from the campaign. No voice acting, no story, nothing. Everything about it feels cheap, and lazy. And like I said, it's not very good.

So that's Call of Duty Advanced Warfare. I really like it, and I'm going to keep playing it. I think I'm level 41 or 42 right now. And I think I'll go through with Prestiging after I hit the cap, which I've not done before. I hit the cap in Blops 1, but I didn't want to lose all my unlocks, so I didn't. I didn't play enough Blops II to get near the cap.

Also, as a one last thing, I wish I could have pink camo and gun paints in this game. I've grown quite fond of making my customizable video game characters pink to some extent. Also, I feel like the lower resolution of these shared images is really started to be a drag. This looks blurry and terrible. Well, maybe not terrible, but not great either.

Sports Friends

Hey, remember when I didn't have anything to write about this in my PS+ catch up for that month because I hadn't played it? Well, I've played it now! My sister came over for a few hours yesterday, and we spent some time playing Sports Friends (among other things). Well, we played a bunch of Super Pole Riders and Johan Sebastian Joust. We didn't play Hokra because that requires four players, and I was pretty sure my sister wasn't going to like Bara Bari Ball, so we didn't even try.

Both of those are really fun. And really stupid. Especially Joust with only two people. My living room is large enough that we were able to move around a bit, but also small enough that I had to remind her several times to be careful so we wouldn't crash into everything (and nothing was crashed into). With only two people, it turns into kind of a duel, or even a dance between the two. Circling each other, trying to make a grab for the other controller. Then again, given the size difference (I'm quite a bit older and fairly larger than her), I kinda had to go easy on her, but not too much. That said, I'd still like to try this in a larger space, and with more people at some point.

I also really like the variety of announcers and music for Joust, especially if you put in the code(s) for the Bastion and Stanley's Parable announcers. My sister (who has never heard of Bastion) thought that music and the western-y sounding music were hilarious in how out of place they were with the game (and I'm inclined to agree). And one of the announcers speaks in Brazilian Portuguese, which was funny to listen to exactly once, like many things in a language you don't know any words of.

Super Pole Riders, on the other hand, is a much less physical experience, but still really fun. The physics are goofy and dumb, and we had a lot of fun playing that. I don't really have anything nuanced to say about it.

And that's about it for what I've been playing lately. Not counting some of this month's PS+ games, but I'll save discussion of those for after I've played as many of them as I can. Well, I've been playing a bit of Mario Kart 8 again, and I'll likely keep playing it as the first DLC pack (not counting the Mercedes stuff) is out this week. I'm hopeful that Link is better than Waluigi so I can play as him instead of going back to Waluigi. Not that I don't like Waluigi, I'm not a monster. More that I play to win.

Assassin's Creed Unity is out this week. I'll most likely be buying and playing that. I love me some Assassin's Creed, and the French in me means that I have to play a big budget game set in the French Revolution. Not that I've ever been to France or anything, I just kinda feel a weird connection to it. I dunno.

I had been thinking about getting the AC Xbox One bundle, since apparently all the Sunset Overdrive ones are sold out, and might not get restocked. But I have a couple friends that want to play the co-op with me, so I'll be playing on PS4. Hopefully the co-op is decent, because I don't want to miss out on getting a free Xbox One game ("free") just to play a couple lousy co-op missions. Also I hope they're good because I hope the game is good, but you know.

But the point I had been trying to make is that I've come around (again) and want an Xbox One (again). Last time (I blogged), I think I had decided that the economic side of things didn't make sense for me to be getting an Xbox One. Well, of course logic didn't last long, and now I really want one again. But like I said, the good bundle is sold out, and I'm not getting the AC one if I'm not going to be playing it on Xbox. So right now...I guess logic did win, because I'm not getting one unless there's a really good deal, or the Sunset bundle comes back in stock. Logic wins?

And that's it! Come back next time where I'll write about Assassin's Creed Unity Probably! Or maybe Far Cry 4 as well, depending on how long it takes me to write the blog, I dunno. Could even include Dragon Age Inquisition then. Well, probably not, because I'm still not 100% sold on that game, and even if I get it, I'll probably wait until after I'm done with AC and Far Cry.