Welcome all to my ninth list of my anticipated releases of the month. It's weird to think I have been making these lists for almost a year, but here we are. Normally I post this the day before the beginning of the month, but clearly I haven't so I apologize. But now isn't the time to talk about my faults, now is the time to read or skim through my list. But first, the rules I put upon myself on choosing the games.

The game has to be released on at least one of the major systems (PC, PS4, Xbox One, Switch). The game has to be new, so no remasters or re-releases onto new systems. One thing I do count is a game either entering or exiting early access, but that game can only be counted once. If a game does have multiple release dates like Destiny 2 or GTA 5, then I will only count the earliest release date. Finally, it has to be a game, not a DLC. With the rules out of the way, let's look at my top picks for April.

5. Frostpunk

Frostpunk, an upcoming strategy city building game by 11 Bit Studios, tasks you with operating a city in extreme cold while making hard decisions and ultimately keep the population alive. Despite the fact that I am not a big city builder guy, I still find Frostpunk to be fascinating. It's survival steampunk theme looks really cool, the gameplay looks tough yet fun, and the choices I make on how to run my city can make each playthrough feel different and feel like my own. But in the end, what holds me back are my thoughts on the genre. I don't hate city building games by any means, I just find that very few click with me. Still, I hope that this one will click with me when the game comes out on the 24th for PC.

4. Minit

This upcoming Vlambeer game tasks you exploring the world the world in this retro to-down adventure game. Sounds familiar, right? Well Minit gives you only, well, a minute to explore this world until you die and start back at home base. This unique twist on a familiar genre is interesting and one I would like to experience to see if it would work. How far can I go? How much can I do? Is a single minute enough time? These questions and more is what I have for the game (and questions that are probably answered already, but I don't want to look up because I want it to be a surprise). Despite this cool aspect and fun-looking gameplay, I don't feel like their is much else being offered with this game. Still, this does look like a fun little game and it is coming out on the 3rd for PS4, Xbox One, and PC.

3. Extinction

Iron Galaxy's new game Extinction puts you in the shoes as one of the last guardians tasked with protecting cities and people from hundred foot tall monsters called the Ravenii. Extinction looks like a lot of fun. It's cartoonish art style, arcade-y action, destructible environments, and big monsters really appeals to me as something I want to try that I feel like I have never tried before. I've faced tall boss monsters before, but I can't really think of a time when a one hundred foot tall bad guy is actually just a normal enemy and not a boss fight. But what holds me back on this game is the lack of information, mainly on what you do in the game. Obviously the game is mainly about kicking ass and developing new skills to kick more ass, but other than fighting, saving civilians, and picking up missions which I have a feeling will be about kicking ass or saving civilians, I feel like the game as a whole is shallow. As cool as procedural missions sound, I think the missions will be rather basic. But hopefully this game can prove me wrong when it releases on the 10th for PS4, Xbox One, and PC.

2. God of War

SIE Santa Monica Studio's newest game God of War has you back as Kratos, but this time older, wiser, and in Norse mythology instead of Greek mythology as you and your son try to survive in this new Norse world. I have never played a God of War game before, but I can already tell the differences and changes made to the game. It's more mature tone speaks to both story and gameplay, it's narrative is more personal, and the combat is less hack-n-slash. God of War (2018) looks to take the franchise and breath into it darker tones that I feel will enhance the series in every way. So what makes it my number two? What is keeping this game at number two for me is the fact that I haven't played the other God of War games. I know I could just look up what has happened in the previous games and I know that this game is a departure from the other game's narrative, but I still feel like I need to know what Kratos has gone through to get to this point. I thought about putting this game at the top because obviously this is the big release of this month and all, but this is my own list, and I feel like for me to truly enjoy this series I have to go back and play the previous games. Still, I think this will be a fantastic game, probably on of the best PS4 games of 2018, and it releases on the 20th.

1. Sinner: Sacrifice for Redemption

I'm not going to lie when I say that when I first formed this list, Dark Star's Sinner: Sacrifice for Redemption fell into first place more than a choice I made. Obviously I am excited for the game because it wouldn't be in the list if I wasn't. This game fell into first because I believe all of the other games aren't better or worse than each other, but rather they belong perfectly where they belong. for example, I believe that Frostpunk is a number five game not because it is worse than the others, but because I think it fits perfectly into the five spot for my feelings on the city building genre. But the longer I thought about this game being first, the more I realized that I would've put this game first anyways. This game looks to be a cross between Dark Souls with its combat and bosses and Furi with its level structure, two games I love (no, I am not saying Dark Souls just because it is difficult. I too am annoyed by people who say games are Souls-like just because they are hard). But it's more than that. It's level-down system that makes you weaker after each boss sounds intriguing and I want to see if it works, the themes of the seven deadly sins is a great theme, and I am interested to see how they implement new game modes and items into the game. I cannot wait for Sinner: Sacrifice for Redemption when it releases on the 25th for PS4, Xbox One, and PC.

Bonus: Nintendo Labo

I was really close to considering Labo a game for my top five, but I felt like it would be better as a little bonus. Despite the heavy price and the cheap material, I am excited for Nintendo Labo; not for myself but for others to enjoy. I think this product is great for a younger audience as for it combines the fun of video games with the fun of creating things like legos. I think this is such a weird yet cool product, and I hope it will succeed. The variety kit and the robot kit release on the 20th, with new packs not yet announced. (P.S., the link leads to a blog entry I wrote about Nintendo Labo).

Well, that about sums up this list. What are your top five of this month? Put it in the comments down below. Thank you all for reading or skimming my list and come back next month for another list for another month.

As a fan of Far Cry, I cannot wait for the release of Far Cry 5. Because of that, I wanted to go back to all of the Far Cry games and rank them, like I did with the Resident Evil series. Unfortunately, one more parallel can be drawn from that list: an entry in the series that I personally do not like to the point that I write an entry about how why I don't like it. That game: Far Cry 2. I first tried it awhile ago and didn't like, I just came back to it and finished it but didn't like, and now here I am talking about it.

Usually, I like to talk about the positives of a game I dislike, and their are positives to be found in this game. At its core, the game feels like a Far Cry game. The shooting feels good, the graphics are alright, and the freedom to take on missions in whatever way you see fit is in this game. So why is it so bad? Going back to this game, I found that their were a lot of systems that had one or two good little aspects to it, but was surrounded by so many bad aspects that I just couldn't stand playing the game. When I was thinking about writing this, I was going to talk about how this game should be given credit for really starting what we now know as Far Cry, but after thinking about what this game brings new to the table I realized that this game doesn't do much new for the series. I thought how this game brought the freedom of taking on missions in your own way into Far Cry, but then I realized that the first Far Cry had that, and I personally think it did that better than this one. The more I thought about contributions FC2 brought to the series, I realized that it actually originated from the first game. In the end, the only thing I can think of that Far Cry 2 brought to the series was making it open world (and open world elements like gun stores, etc.), and even then it wasn't a radical new step as for the first game had some pretty open levels. Really, the only things I can get out of FC2 that I liked are the fact that it is open world, and only because it got the rest of the series to be open world, and the map system where I could pull up a map without the need to pause the game.

Speaking of doing things usually, I would usually start with the thing I hate the most after talking about the things I like. The issue with that is I hate multiple aspects of this game equally. So I will start with the weapons; more specifically the durability system. When it comes to the weapons, I felt that they were just meh. I felt that no gun truly packed a punch, and none of the weapons were customizeable. But most of my issue with the weaponry lies in the weapon rusting systems.

Generally, I am not a fan of weapon durability in games, but I can usually live with it if it's a good system. Far Cry 2's system is not. By the way, this theme of a system I like surrounded by garbage like I said previously will come up more. Back to the point; the weapon durability system isn't good at all. The weapons rust way too fast, and it's hard to tell when a gun is beginning to break down because the color difference isn't that substantial. Having a clean weapon then picking up an enemy weapon is usually pretty noticeable, but having a clean weapon and using it until it's dirty isn't. On top of that, I feel that weapon jams where happening too soon in a gun's life cycle. I can't say I am entirely opposed to weapons jamming, as for it speaks to its survival aspects, but with them jamming so fast I felt constantly annoyed that it will jam any time soon and I felt like I had to constantly go back to the gun store and get fresh guns. If you were to ask me on what should've been in place, I would say that weapons you pick up from gun stores don't rust and jam, while weapons you pick up from enemies do jam. But the weapon system can be fine if their are enough gun stores and they can be fast-traveled to. Well, that's what leads to the next big issue.

The map is split up into two parts. These parts can only be accessed one-at-a-time, not as something that unlocks the second half and is attached to the first half. In each half, their are only four gun stores (and one maybe near a bar, but isn't shown on the map) and five fast travel points. And you cannot fast travel to the gun stores, only to the designated fast travel points placed at each corner of the map (roughly) and the center. If you want to break down my weapons, fine; but at least allow me an easy access to the gun stores to pick up the new weaponry. Some of the stores are pretty close to the bus stops, but if I need to go to the southwest part of the map for a mission but the closest gun store to a bus stop (the bus stops are the fast travel stops) is in the northwest part of the map, then I feel like that extra journey to that gun store is too much of a hassle and I end up not doing it. I can get not giving fast travel points at first to force the player to explore the area, but do I really need to experience that same area for the sixth time? Not having more fast travel points was an annoyance, but what I am going to talk about next turned this annoyance into frustration.

In recent Far Cry games, their are tiered enemies. The challenge in the recent games was as you progressed through, different enemy types with better weaponry started to appear. Armored soldiers, flamethrower soldiers, and even helicopters started to appear while the weapons being used by the common soldiers were packing more of a punch. Far Cry 2 does this this to a certain degree. Yes, the enemies have different weapons like assault rifles, snipers, and shotguns, and yes, those guns got better as you progressed through the world (but not cleaner). But instead of new enemy types, this game throws a constant stream of enemies at you in hopes of keeping you constantly engaged, but in the end turned into one of the biggest annoyances I have ever encountered in any game. Remember when I said that gun stores can sometimes be near a bus stop? Well, not only do you have to drive to get over to the store, you have to drive through constant enemies that don't prove to be much of a challenge. Whether it be the vehicles you encounter on the roads that will always be hostile and drive faster than your car, or the many checkpoints that lie on the road that respawn enemies too soon, this game will throw enemies at you until sigh or do a sort of laugh-cry hybrid every time you encounter an enemy along the way to a mission that involves killing more enemies. The game has what I am guessing is around twenty-five checkpoints at each half of the map (fifty-something in total), and all of them lie on the road and all of them have enemies respawn at them way too fast. And just when you think you can out-run the enemies, they will either shoot the car until it gets steamy and slow down or get in their car and catch up to you because their cars are faster than yours. And that isn't counting the random drivers on the road. If you want to restrict fast travel, fine, but don't make every time I travel somewhere a pain. Speaking of pain for both my character and me, let's talk about the hot topic of this game: malaria.

Honestly, I am actually fine with the act of getting malaria pills. If I was given the option to do as many malaria missions as I want, I would just do them all and stack up malaria pills. If they were infinitely generated, that would be alright for me. But of course, Far Cry 2 doesn't do that. Admittedly, having the malaria strike on scripted times was not the worst, although it didn't feel natural. Really, the big issues I had with malaria was that I never knew how many pills I had and I couldn't access the malaria missions whenever I wanted. Like I said, I wish I could stack on malaria, but I couldn't and I didn't know when I would run out, which always lead me to this paranoia of when I would run out. You knew when you would run out and could do a mission directly after running out to stock up, but being forced to do this only when I ran out was annoying, and having a couple of missions only give you one pill meant you had to keep doing it. I can get that the game wants you to have this thought as it could pertain to the thought of running out of life-saving pills in real life, but in real life you could easily pop off the lid and see how many you have left.

The rest of my issues I won't dedicate a whole paragraph each to, but are still issues that are just as bad as the ones stated. I'll start with the high amount of bugs in the game that were at times funny but mostly annoying. The game is almost a decade old, I am going to take a guess that they won't get fixed. The story is pretty bad, but that can be said for all of the Far Cry games so I don't hold this aspect as severely as the others. Despite this, I found the ending to be bad, as for both endings will literally lead to the same exact cutscene, which made either decision pointless. Now I can see the point of saying going back to world after either ending you choose in the recent Far Cry games can also diminish the ending, but having different endings and going back to the world is a lot better than providing different endings, ending on the same note either way, and not going back to the open. Oh yeah, you can't go back to the open world, so anything you want to do you better do before hitting the ending. I can see that the ending doesn't warrant going back, but I'll just refer to what I said earlier about endings for that. The color palette is incredibly dull, something that isn't like every other Far Cry game. It's a common theme I guess for games that take place in Africa to have a dull palette (RE5 for example), but I still feel something could've been done. Having optional missions on top of the normal missions was alright at first as for it was something extra to do, it changed the plot around a bit that strayed from the boring binary APR vs. UFLL, and it didn't really change the main objective. But every optional mission ended with you finding your partner who gave you the mission fighting enemies in which he always died (and I mean dead dead, like he will never be seen again dead), and it was practically impossible to save them. Not only that, picking up optional missions and doing optional missions would sometimes be nowhere near the main one, which meant I had to travel on the roads and it meant I had to keep playing the game. One time, I traveled from a bus stop to an optional mission pickup which required fighting through two checkpoints, which lead to the optional mission being on the same road which meant fighting through the same two checkpoints (they spawn that fast), then the main mission was beyond the optional mission pickup which meant fighting through the same two checkpoints for a third time, then returning back to the bus stop to go back to the center of the map which meant fighting through the same two checkpoints for a fourth time. Fun.

Now, a lot of this can be said to be in the game because the game takes a more survivalist and realistic approach to gameplay. Guns rust in real life (not that fast though), you can catch malaria in real life, and fast traveling isn't a real thing (even though it isn't teleporting, it's just traveling to a point without you being forced to do so). I can respect a game trying to be realistic, but I feel that the game doesn't go all the way with this and I am left on this balance between realistic and video game-y. If this was truly realistic, then why is there a functioning transit system in a war-torn country? Why are there no civilians trapped in this country with you? How can a car be shot up then repaired by tightening a piece in front of the car? This is all nitpicking really, but elements like this made me think that it is like any other open world game while its realistic elements made the game feel more realistic. I found that this balance is terrible because every step of the way I wanted its realistic elements to be dumbed-down. Having elements like fast travel and checkpoints where enemies don't respawn the second you leave is in other games not because it is trying to be less realistic or more realistic, but rather less annoying and more fun. And that is the big issue with this game: it forgot how to be fun. Call me whatever you want for wanting fun over realism, but I think Far Cry 2 does a terrible job at both.

Is Far Cry 2 a hardcore experience in my eyes? No. I would say Far Cry 2 is an endurance experience. It's a game that tests how long you can go with with its systems, but not in a good way. Despite being unique from all of the future Far Cry titles (not in a good way), some core elements of Far Cry, some pretty impressive graphics, bringing the open world to the series, and the map system, Far Cry 2 in my eyes is terrible for so many reasons. Is Far Cry 2 the worst game I have played? Quite possibly. But can I also respect why people love the game? Yes. This game does have some good elements, but for me its like the needle in a crap haystack that can never be found, whether by accident or by design.

This not-so-limited 8th edition of my anticipated releases is brought to you in part by Josef Fares, a man who said "F*ck the Oscars," then proceeds to release his game in the same month as the Oscars.

Welcome back to the March edition of my top five anticipated releases in video games. What does this month bring to the table? Let's find out. But just like any good person would do when playing a multiplayer game and is given an optional tutorial; let's go through the rules.

Rules are fun and for everyone. Here they are: the game has to be released on at least one of the major systems (PC, PS4, Xbox One, Switch). The game has to be new, so no remasters or re-releases onto new systems. One thing I do count is a game either entering or exiting early access, but that game can only be counted once. If a game does have multiple release dates like Destiny 2 or GTA 5, then I will only count the earliest release date. Finally, it has to be a game, not a DLC. With the rules out of the way, let's look at my top picks for March.

5. Q.U.B.E. 2

Q.U.B.E. 2 is the sequel to, you guessed it, Q.U.B.E. in which you are back in a strange block alien landscape solving more puzzles. But more than just new puzzles, Q.U.B.E. 2 is shaping up to be an upgrade in most ways above the first game. A new and deeper narrative (I played Director's Cut, so I'm not just saying this because I didn't experience any story), more mechanics to the puzzles, new environments that are more diverse and run down, and more. Q.U.B.E. has always felt like Portal to me with its style of puzzles and environments, but it also feels unique enough with its mechanics and story to keep it from being a Portal knockoff. To me, I think Q.U.B.E. 2 to Q.U.B.E. is like Portal 2 to Portal, which has got me excited. Hopefully the game delivers more than the first (just like any good sequel should do), but that can only be found out when it releases on March 13th.

4. Warhammer: Vermintide 2

Speaking of sequels to games I have played. And just like Q.U.B.E., Warhammer: Vermintide 2 looks to be an upgrade over the first game. A new enemy faction as well as keeping the old, new and better looking levels, new loot and upgrade system, careers on heroes, and more. Where I saw Q.U.B.E., I see this game like Left 4 Dead without being a direct knockoff. To me, Warhammer: Vermintide 2 to Warhammer: Vermintide is like Left 4 Dead 2 to... you get the point. Still, I am excited to see how this game turns out when it releases on March 8th.

3. A Way Out

A Way Out is an action adventure title being made by yours truly, Josef Fares in which you and a friend play as two escaped convicts from a prison in the 70s. The big reason why I am so interested in this title and why it is on this list is because it is so damn interesting and unique. From the always splitscreen gameplay even if playing online to the fact that only one person has to purchase the game if both want to play, this game is all kinds of crazy but in a great way. I always love games that push the boundaries, and I find it especially funny to see that totally not greedy EA publish a game that can have a one-game-to-two-people buying ratio. But beyond being boundary-pushing, I think its story and setting as well as its varied gameplay can prove to be a great time with a friend. It looks like a great balance between narrative and gameplay, and I cannot wait to get my hands (or have my friend get my hands) on a copy when the game releases on March 22nd.

2. Sea of Thieves

Sea of Thieves is a a first person action adventure game in which you and some buddies (or just you) go as pirates across the seas seeking treasure, with the hurdles including other players seeking that treasure as well. Since this isn't a sequel and I can't relate it to a Valve game, I must talk about things that aren't improvements. That won't be hard, because everything about Sea of Thieves looks and sounds awesome: from the gorgeous visuals and art style to the fun looking gameplay that feels both like a perfect pirate adventure and a great experience generator. Just about everything, from the premise to being shot out of a cannon sounds great about the game. Hopefully, I can have my friends shoot me out of a cannon when the game releases March 20th.

1. Far Cry 5

Far Cry 5 is a first person open world action game in which you try to liberate a county in Montana from crazy religious people. As a fan of the Far Cry series, it's a no brainer that I put this game on top. I have a lot of hope for this game that it will be great, and I don't have a lot of doubt that it will be great. Above all else, I am familiar with the series, so I know what to expect. Still, Far Cry 5 brings meaningful changes that got me to put this game at number one besides the fact that I am a fan. The new setting looks great, new mechanics like a more robust flying system and bigger outposts improve upon the formula, and the new story is one that I already like more than all of the others. Far Cry 5 isn't taking any big leaps, but that was something I loved about the Dishonored series. It didn't try to radically change the game because they knew that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Finally, even though it is a bit unfair considering the other games haven't released their DLC plans if they had any, Far Cry 5's DLC sounds pretty great. From Mars to zombies to Vietnam and even a re-release of Far Cry 3, I can say that Far Cry 5 has a pretty good sounding plan for future content even before the main game even released. You can certainly bet I will be playing this game when it releases on March 27th.

The games I have missed

What's hard about making this list is that their is no perfect place to see every video game release and some games don't announce their game early enough. So here are some games that fit that category. Now these games may or may not have reached my top five list, but they would've at least been strong contenders for my top five.

Mount Your Friends 3D: A Hard Man is Good to Climb

Hunt: Showdown

Papers, Please Short Film (I know it isn't a game release, but it's still worth mentioning)

Deep Rock Galactic

Again, these games may or may not have reached my list. These are just games that are serious contenders for last month's list and/or games that I have been interested in for awhile.

Well, that is it for my top anticipated list for March 2018. What are yours? Put yours in the comments down below and see how they compare. Thanks for checking out my list and I will be back next month for a new list for April.

Recently, The Academy of Interactive Arts and Sciences had their annual D.I.C.E. awards, awarding the best of games released in 2017. Just like I did with the Video Game Awards, I decided to look at the awards dished out and decide whether I agree or disagree with that award being given to that game.

Just like my previous list, I haven't played every single game on this list, but I will try to be as fair as possible with the games I haven't played. I will be going in random order except for game of the year and any very similar awards which I will put next to each other. Let's get into the list.

Racing Game - Mario Kart 8 Deluxe - Disagree

2017 was a very forgettable year for racing games, so it is no surprise the big hit racing game wins this award. Personally, I don't have anything against the game or anything. The only reason why I disagree with this game winning is the fact that this game already released in 2014. Yeah, I know that this one has some new content and whatnot, but I still see this game as a re-release for Switch and not a new game. For that sole reason, I disagree. If this was a new Mario Kart, then I would agree.

Mobile Game - Fire Emblem Heroes - Disagree

I'm not a big mobile game guy, but I disagree with Fire Emblem Heroes winning this category. I haven't played any of the other games and I have only played a tiny bit of Fire Emblem, but knowing Nintendo's track record with phone games and things I have heard about the microtransactions make me lean towards another game. Like I have said, I haven't the games on the list, but I have played the first Monument Valley and enjoyed my time with it. I personally think that Monument Valley 2 should've won this category.

Handheld Game - Metroid: Samus Returns - Agree

This one was hard for me to choose because I just talked about how I disagree with Mario Kart for being a re-release then say I agree with this one. Still, I have heard of more changes to this game than changes to Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, and that mixed with how old the game is makes me think that this is practically a new game. On top of that, I haven't played any of the others but I heard a crazy amount of talk on this game for a handheld game. Normally, I would disagree with a re-release, but I can't with this game.

Family Game - Snipperclips - Disagree

I haven't played any of the games listed, but I have heard great things about Snipperclips and DropMix. Before my final decision, I was going to go with Snipperclips. But while I was writing this category, I thought of a game, or rather a set of games, that were introduced to me this year. The game? Jackbox Party Pack games. I just played the newest fourth edition, and that pack released this year. Because of that, I disagree with the choice and say that Jackbox Party Pack 4 should win this category instead. This game is perfect for all levels of humor and fun: from family to friends and any others. On top of that, I would say out of the three party packs I have tried so far (2,3, and 4), this newest pack has the most consistently solid games. I can see why Jackbox doesn't make the nominations, but I still think this one should be at the top.

Outstanding Achievement in Story - Horizon Zero Dawn - Disagree

The only games I have played on this list is Wolfenstein 2 and Horizon Zero Dawn, and even then I haven't completed Horizon. And while I think the story so far in Horizon is solid, I think the other picks are better. Wolfenstein's story is surprisingly great and I actually care about the characters that reside in that alternate Nazi hellscape, and I have heard outstanding things about how close Night in the Woods hit home. Still, I don't want to discredit Horizon, as for that story is also great. I don't know which game I would choose, but I would've loved to see Wolfenstein win as a dark horse.

Role-Playing Game - Nier: Automata - Agree

One of the big things talked about in 2017 was the re-vitalization of Japanese games in the U.S., and Nier was said to be one of those game. The only game I have played in that list would be Middle Earth: Shadow of War, but I am actively against that game winning that award despite my love for the series (act 4, anyone?) Not only that, I have heard many great things about Nier, a lot more than any of the others listed. Not to say those games are any worse, it's just that people are way more passionate about Nier than any of the other games from what I have seen. Many even say it is a major contender for being the top game of the year. Because of that, I agree with this award choice.

Immersive Reality Technical Achievement and Immersive Reality Game of the Year - Lone Echo/Echo Arena - Agree

I decided to combine the two because my thoughts are the same for both. The only game I have played between the two lists is Robo Recall because I just got VR, but I wouldn't go to bat with it. On the other hand, I have heard great things about Lone Echo/Echo Arena. A great story, multiplayer that is fun and free, and the biggest thing: not a shooter game. From what I have seen and heard about the game, I believe this is the right direction for VR. Games like these make the platform great and will lead to future bigger and better VR titles and a wider audience.

Game Design and Game Direction - Breath of the Wild - Agree

Call me lazy and call me a terrible games journalist, but I personally don't think about these awards too much. I understand their importance, but I have never been a good judge on these two topics. For Breath of the Wild on both awards, I think that game is made well, which is why I agree with these awards.

Fighting Game - Injustice 2 - Agree

I'm not a big fighting game guy, but of all of the games on the list I am most willing to try Injustice 2. I give props to Arms for being unique and Tekken 7 for being great (from what I have heard), but in the end I think Injustice 2 is the fighting game of the year. It's barrier to entry is low, its story mode is said to be good, the combat looks like a lot of fun, and the heroes look pretty cool. Again, I am not a fighting game guy, but the fact that I actually want to play this game says something to me about the game.

Strategy/Simulation Game - Mario + Rabbids: Kingdom Battle - Disagree

This game also won best strategy game in the VGA awards, and my thoughts on the game are still the same. I respect the different ways this game spins the turn-based tactical genre and I respect the fact that it is a surprisingly fun product and not some dumb simple strategy game I thought it was going to be. But still, that game runs on for way too long and their are some restrictions to team building that makes me believe another game should've won. Which game? I actually don't know, but I heard good things about War of the Chosen despite being DLC.

D.I.C.E. Sprite Award - Snipperclips - Disagree

The D.I.C.E. Sprite Award is an award given to a game that had a small staff and budget yet was risky and innovative. While I bet Snipperclips fits the mold, I just think the other game fits that mold better. Everything was the only game I played on this list, but it was a game that to me that was literally jaw dropping and its philosophy blended well into the experience. Even games I haven't played like Night in the Woods and Pyre fit the mold better than Snipperclips in my opinion. Still, I don't think Snipperclips doesn't belong on this list and I can see how this game won.

Outstanding Achievement in Online Gameplay - PUBG - Agree

Seeing PUBG win this category win is by no means a surprise. This game pretty much started a new multiplayer game movement into battle royale. Normally, I actually would've disagreed with this game because it isn't really anything new. To me, this is essentially a cleaner version of King of the Kill, I mean the guy who made PUBG, Brendan Greene, helped develop King of the Kill. In the end, I agree with this because all of the other picks aren't anything new either. In the end, this category is more just best multiplayer and not innovations in online play, and because of that I think PUBG winning makes the most sense.

Achievement in Art Direction and Achievement in Animation - Cuphead - Agree

I put the two together because my answer is the same for both: it isn't even close. Cuphead's art style is talked about to kingdom come, but that's because it's so damn good that it could be considered the best art in the decade. It's no shocker this game won those categories, and that is all I have to say about those two.

Action Game - PUBG - Agree

Yeah, this is a great action game. The tense action and incredible feeling of winning is amazing in the game, and losing is a quick process to get you back into the game. I would like to praise Cuphead a bit for being a great gameplay game. I thought the heavy focus would lead to a game that isn't great gameplay-wise, but the gameplay in Cuphead is a lot of fun and was a bigger surprise to me than the art being good. But in the end, I think PUBG is still a better action game.

Sports Game - FIFA 18 - Disagree

I'm not a big sports guy, so I don't have a lot of words for this category. I didn't play any of these games, but I still wish one of the two golf games won. I say that because the other three games are just yearly-released sports games in my eyes. I know some of them have campaigns that are said to be pretty good, but the yearly release stigma still lingers with me with FIFA, which is why I disagree.

Adventure Game - Breath of the Wild - Agree

This to me is as shocking as Cuphead winning art awards. What makes BOTW is the exploration and adventure aspects, so it's no surprise that it wins this category. I don't have much else to say about it, because the gameplay speaks for itself. So moving on.

Technical Achievement - Horizon Zero Dawn - Disagree

I'm not an expert on this award, so I could totally be wrong on this, but I didn't feel like this game was technically amazing. I would say that for Guerrilla's first open world game, it was great. But the game kind of feels like another open world game, no more or less technically able. I think a game like Hellblade was a better technical game as for it pushes how we can convey such things as mental illness. I could be totally wrong on the topic, but I don't see any big unique thing technically with Horizon.

Sound Design - Super Mario Odyssey - Agree

I just say agree because I actually don't know who should win. When thinking about sound design, I always thought Mario had great sound design, but sound design is an award to me that can only really be decided if I played all of the games on the nomination list, which I didn't. So I will go with Mario Odyssey and move onto the next award.

Original Music Composition - Cuphead - Agree

I absolutely love Cuphead's music and I am glad to see it win an award. Not only is it fantastic music that I actually listen to along side the rest of my music (the only video game album I do this with), it is music that can actually blend in with other upbeat jazz music. If I were to play songs mixed with this soundtrack and non-Cuphead jazz to listeners who haven't played the game, I guarantee I can fool them into believing the Cuphead songs are not a video game soundtrack. It's universal, it's great, and it got a well-deserved award.

Character - Senua in Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice - Agree

The only characters I have experienced are Aloy from Horizon and Chloe from previous Uncharted games, but I wouldn't go to bat for them. Just like sound design, I feel I need to experience the game to fully understand the characters, which is why I am going to agree with their choice.

Game of the Year - Breath of the Wild - Agree

Shocker. The game winning every GOTY award under the sun won another. Still, it won for a reason: it's a damn good game. Despite lacking in certain areas, as a whole package it is an amazing game and is one of the best ways to launch a system. The game gives you freedom, gives you a great sense of self discovery, fills the world with things to do, and only takes from you your time (which is time well spent) and all of the awards it can take.

Well, that is my list. Now it is time to stop looking at the past and start looking into the future. Let's hope 2018 turns out to be a great year for gaming, just like 2017.

Despite the game coming out soon, Konami decided to run another Metal Gear Survive beta. And me being me, I decided to play said beta and talk about. So here are my thoughts on MGS beta. But before that, let's talk about what is the game.

For those who don't know, Metal Gear Survive is an upcoming third-person action game in which you are thrown into an alternate dimension filled with zombies. Essentially, it is just a third-person action tower defense zombie game.

I have never played a Metal Gear game before, but I do know of the whole Kojima-Konami dispute. Even though I think Konami taking Metal Gear from Kojima and then turning around and making this title is dirty, I didn't let that mindset affect my experience. So this will be the first and last time I talk about Kojima and Konami, partly because I didn't let that affect my experience and partly because I have no experience with Metal Gear. Let's get on with my thoughts.

For those who just want to know how I feel, I will say that overall I kinda like the game, but with caveats. The biggest thing I had against the beta was that it was only one mode, which was a wave-based defense mode in which you defend a single point from three waves of zombies. This mode got old pretty quick, but I don't hold this against the game because I know there will be more content than just this. Even though it is the same mode and the repetition settled in a little too fast for my taste, I still would say I enjoyed the gameplay as well as the mode.

When it comes to the gameplay, I would say it wast mostly pretty fun. From gameplay videos I have seen, it seems for the most part to imitate Metal Gear Solid 5 gameplay for reference. I'm guessing there isn't much changed from MGS5, but as a first time player of Metal Gear games I would say I enjoy it. My other guess is that their is some changes in terms of weapons and combat to fit the zombie gameplay, so I would that is worth talking about. I actually enjoy the zombie combat. Melee weapons feel well balanced and melee combat against zombies was more challenging than I thought, which I like. Setting up a fence and poking zombies through it was surprisingly fun and effective. As for gunplay, I would say their was nothing that stood out to me. Guns did gun things, which I am fine with, but I will say deciding between first-person and third-person aiming is an added bonus.

When it comes to the defense aspect of the game, again it felt pretty good. Just like I said earlier, putting up a fence in front of a zombie path and poking zombies through the fence was pretty neat. I actually didn't use a lot of traps and buildings, just mostly fences. I found that building some of the more exotic traps like a shock floor or a turret would use materials I don't have a lot of, so I mostly abstained from most items. Still, I did use some of them, and I think the harder levels could call for them. One big thing I have against the traps and buildings is how dumb the zombies are. I could set up a fence in the middle of a path with a ton of space on either side of the fence, but the zombies would just go straight for the fence. Speaking of dumb zombies, the game will direct a path for the zombies to go to your base, and they will stick to that path. For example, one of the areas actually had a shortcut for the zombies to go through that also had no defenses to it, but the zombies would just follow the path that was longer and blocked off by a fence. This predictability was at times nice when the game got a bit harder and you can know where they are going, but for the most part boring when you have no stray zombie that makes you have to focus on your defenses and the strays.

Well, I talked about zombies a bit, so I might as well spend a whole paragraph on them. I actually quite like the zombie types. The different types of zombies I encountered were pretty varied and enjoyable. From the normal shambling zombie and armored variant, to the bomber type that are pretty hard to take down because their only weak spot are the legs. I feel that the zombies are the perfect level of varied. I also think their look is unique and cool, with the exception of the bomber who looks like a large ugly flower with a body attached. Still, the crystal head is a pretty cool look in my opinion. I also think their attack patterns are also good and gives a challenge even to a group of normal zombies.

When it comes to the game mode, I think it is pretty fun. It's as simple as you think: defend an object from being damaged while it does things using traps and weapons. The way to get the highest score is to speed up the mining process using kuban and generally defend it. What makes it enjoyable is that it isn't straight defense from beginning to end. around five minutes are given to you in between rounds to explore the surrounding area (you can start early if you want), and in that exploring the game spawns in special items for you to retrieve if you want. These items include ammo refills, traps, and even a mech-like object that is a lot of fun to use. The issues I had with the mode was how nothing would change at all if you played on the same map and difficulty, and how little changed between the different difficulties. This is what makes the gameplay so far pretty repetitive, but I also know this isn't the only game mode in the game, so I can't judge this aspect too hard until the product releases.

I would say that my favorite aspect with the game is the sense of progression with your character. At the end of each round, win or loss, you get various materials and even some blueprints to new defenses or weapons. Building these materials allows for better weaponry and better defenses, which then allows for higher level play and so on. I found this style of play to be quite enjoyable. Maybe I should try out Monster Hunter then. As for the level, the game's currency is called kuban and ranking up is actually spending kuban. I actually like leveling up at my own pace, but I also fear of microtransactions like kuban boosters or straight kuban when my level gets really high. So far, I get a lot of kuban and this isn't an issue, but I could see it being one later down the line. Another aspect I loved about the game was the loading area. It's kind of funny to say, but the loading area was at times even more fun than game itself. This is because the loading area is just a giant blank room only filled with a couple of circular areas where you select various things. But what makes it so fun is that the game allows you to do anything in it and gives unlimited resources to do so. You want to plant a ton of fences? Do it. Shoot your gun until you break your mouse or your controller? The game isn't stopping you. And select items like the shotgun making people trip when shot makes running around the area pretty funny. It's also helpful for knowing what an item is and what it will do. So if you have some friends to play the game with, maybe don't rush into the main game so fast.

I talked about some of my favorite aspects, so it's worth talking about some of my least favorite aspects as well. One of those aspects was the difficulty. The game is difficult in a way where playing co-op felt almost mandatory. Single player is doable, but the game feels like it was designed to demote that style of play. Also, playing solo was less fun. That can be said for every game, but the game just felt like I was by myself managing a busy restaurant more than a fun challenge to try it solo. But again, this is just a beta and I am sure their will be gameplay that caters to solo play. The other issue I had with the game was some confusing stuff that isn't explained to you well. Their were a couple of things I was confused with at the beginning, like how to plant traps or how the storage system works (do you lose items when you die, do I access material I gained at the end of a match in the game, how does ammo carry into each game, stuff like that). But the game did a poor job explaining how things work in the game. And what's worse is that the game offers a tutorial section, which is just one really long list that feels out of order and hard to access.

In the end, I would say that my time with the game is actually pretty good. I had my doubts, but I think this game will shape up to be a viable game. I wouldn't say it is great though, and I don't think their is any way Konami or even Kojima could make this game great. It just feels like a zombie spinoff of the main game, because it is essentially a zombie spinoff of the main game. Do I think the game is worth forty dollars? If enough content is in the game, yeah. But is this a game I will be getting when released? No, probably not. Since the game is releasing really soon, not much is going to change from now until then, and I will say that my experience with the game was good, but not good enough for me to buy the game on day one. Despite that, I will still probably buy the game later on down the line. Of what I have played so far, I think if you and some friends are looking for a co-op experience, then this is a viable option. But like I have said before, I have only played one mode. What the rest of the game will be like can only truly be discovered when the full game releases on February 21st.

Recently, I got my hands on an alpha key for the upcoming game Hunt: Showdown, the upcoming shooter game from Crytek. By now, I have around six hours under my belt and a mind full of thoughts about this game. And me being me, I just had to write about said thoughts. So here are my thoughts on Hunt: Showdown.

I didn't even know what this game really was until playing it for the first time, so before getting into my thoughts I should explain what the game is for those who don't know what this game really is. Hunt: Showdown is an upcoming FPS multiplayer game that takes place in the late 19th. You (and a partner if you choose) play as a bounty hunter tasked with running around the Louisiana swamps in search of a large monster. Your goal is to track down the large beast, kill it, banish the beast (to hell I suppose), and extract with material you picked up from the dead body. The way you track down this monster is by finding clues around the map, and those clues can be found with hunter's vision. Simple, right? Well, it turns out nine other players (one being an ally if you choose) are in the same match as you trying to do the same thing, but one thing they are not is friendly. Also, banishing the boss takes two minutes, and during those two minutes you have to stay near the body and everyone knows where you are. The world is also filled with zombie-like creatures, but they are mostly avoidable. Oh yeah, one more thing. If you die, you lose your character. Any loot he had and any rank he had disappears. Not to fear though, as for their is a general rank as well as your money that won't go away every time you die. Your general rank unlocks items in the shop, which can be bought and equipped to characters. But remember, even bought items that you equip to characters will disappear if that character dies. The closest analogy I can come up with for this game is like The Division's survival mode mixed with elements of Escape From Tarkov.

When I first started to understand the full premise of this game, I kept trying to think that this is a battle royale game, and was leaving the game a little disappointed for its lack of tension. The big reason I love PUBG so much is for its incredible tension. For me, by the time I hit final ten my heart is beating louder than a drum next to a mic. I love this tension so much, as for winning with that much tension makes me feel like the king of the world and losing makes me want to jump right back into the game and experience that tension even more. With Hunt, I got a little tension from the banishing to the extraction, but that was it. But a little more gameplay and I realized something: this isn't a battle royale game. It's a shooter where you don't spawn if you die, but you don't have to die for the game to end. After this realization, my enjoyment with this game shot up and I can say that this is one of the most fun multiplayer games I have played since PUBG.

Hunt: Showdown may not be as tension-filled as PUBG, but it is just as hardcore, if not more so. Teamwork is key in the game, and sound is one of the most important aspects in the game. Teamwork is key as for interactions with other players plays out like interactions with others in PUBG. Treating everyone as hostile, surprise attacks, and calling out positions of enemies are a few aspects that makes teamwork between you and your teammate vital. As for sound, it is one of the most important aspects of the game. Just like in PUBG, shots heard in the distance is a good way to judge how close others are, but Hunt takes it one step further with aural queues. The area is filled with items that will make noise when you are near it, such as horses, dogs, glass on the floor, crows, horseshoes on a string hanging from a doorway, and more. Also, the chat is a proximity chat, and everyone can hear you speak. On the other hand, the game has some simple systems like health, items, character building, and more. I find that the aspects that are hardcore makes a more enjoyable experience while the aspects that aren't hardcore keeps the game from having annoying systems. Hunt's hardcore and simple aspects blend to make a great multiplayer experience that rests between the simple multiplayer game like Call of Duty and the complex multiplayer games like Escape From Tarkov, and this is one of the many things I love about the game.

The name Hunt: Showdown has two parts to it: Hunt, and Showdown. Obviously, the showdown is between players and the hunt is for the beast. But after playing this game for awhile the names also speaks to the two different genres this game can be defined. When you are in a showdown, it's action like PUBG. But when you are on the hunt and more specifically when you are fighting the beast, the game turns from action to survival horror. I wouldn't say it's the scariest thing you will ever experience. Rather, I would say the experience I had with the beasts would be brief moments of panic as I fill the beast with bullets. The game mode I have played the most would be the spider at night, and fighting a spider that can climb on walls, is incredibly fast, and in the dark can be pretty tense at times. But what is the best is after the boss fight. You started with fighting other players like an action game, which then turned into fighting a beast like a horror game. It's at this point where the two fighting types merge and you have to fight against human players but with the fact that they know where you are. For the most part, they don't attack during the banishment. Instead, people usually attack when you are trying to make your way to extraction. Mix that with a swamp-like atmosphere filled with brush, and you have your biggest moment of tension, which again doesn't quite reach PUBG levels for me. The action of fighting others and the horror of not knowing where or when they attack while they know exactly where you are.

But those two things aren't the only thing I like about the game. I love the game's setting, as for the swamp and the buildings make a good horror environment and guerrilla-style fighting that I enjoy. The time period is also something I love, as for it mixes well with the swamp environment and the weapons and items used are a lot of fun. The monsters add a bit of fun to the mix so you aren't spending all of your time finding clues and looking for people. Finally, I personally think the recruit system is perfect the way it is as for it feels fair instead of keeping the same character and having him have high stats. Their are many more aspects that I like about this game that I just can't put into word, but their are also issues worth addressing that I can put into word.

The biggest issues I had with the game can be excused by the fact that this is an alpha, but they are still worth stating. The game runs horribly, and loading times are pretty bad for a game with only ten players in a match. Their aren't any graphical settings other than resolution, something that should be there considering how poorly the game runs. Once you are in matchmaking, their is no way of backing out unless the servers are full, sound sometimes doesn't work at the beginning of a match, sometimes I will spawn without a partner despite queuing with one, and more. Fortunately, this is all stuff that can be fixed by release. As for any personal flaws with the game, I would say their needs to be separate modes for duos and solo players. Maybe some people like to play solo, but punishing them by putting them against duos isn't fair and could possibly turn away some people. As for improvements, I would say increase the abilities of the hunter vision, and add more monsters and more modes, but I am sure these things will come true by release date.

In the end, I think Hunt: Showdown is a great multiplayer experience for those looking for a somewhat hardcore FPS multiplayer shooter. Despite some flaws with the game (most of them being technical flaws), I had a great time with the game and will definitely pick up a copy when the game comes out. I don't think it will shake up the industry like PUBG did, but I don't think it needs to. If you can get your hands on a key, then I highly recommend playing the game. If not, then The Division's survival mode can be an adequate substitute for now until the game comes out. In the end, this is just an alpha and things can change. But other than cleaning up the game and adding more content, I think the game is great the way it is now and they shouldn't change up the formula too much.

Over the course of a couple of months, I played every mainline Resident Evil game starting from 4. As a person who tries to write, I just had to rank them. So here is my list, which judging other RE ranking lists is pretty disagreeable.

Before getting into the list, here are the rules of this list. This list consists of six games: Resident Evil 4-7, and Resident Evil Revelations 1 and 2. I will only be considering the main campaign of each game, so no DLC and no raid/mercenaries/ other game modes. Well, that's about it for rules, so let's get into the list.

6. Resident Evil 6

By far the easiest part about making this list was put Resident Evil 6 at the end. Not only is this the worst Resident Evil games I have ever played; it's also one of the worst games I have ever played. The game had so many flaws that I made a whole entry talking about how much I hate the game. Some of the points I touched on in my RE6 entry include: making four mini campaigns for mass appeal only to appeal to no one, a terrible inventory and health system that was perfected in previous RE games, constant cutscenes and quick time events, a bad skill system, and more. If you are going through the RE series like me, then I would advise at the very least setting the difficulty to easy to get through the game faster. That's what I did, and I have never done that for any game. The only somewhat okay part was the Leon campaign, which even that was hardly bearable by the end. This was the only truly terrible experience I had with the RE series, thank God. Let's move on to the next game, shall we?

5. Resident Evil 5

No, I didn't put this here just to say that RE6 is six and RE5 is five. I know this one is loved by many, but whenever I played this one I felt mediocre about the game. I loved how it played similar to Resident Evil 4, but that is about all of the love I have for the game. I have noticed throughout the series that most games have a horror-like part (usually the beginning) and a more action-oriented part (towards the end). This was action from beginning to end, which proved to be rather repetitive. On top of that, the inventory system with the sharing aspect was annoying at best, the A.I. partner was incompetent (a theme that I felt was in most of the RE games I played), and the setting just felt bland. Yes, I did play this game solo, and yes, I know that playing with a friend is a much better experience so I am told. But if the only way to have true fun with the game has to be with someone else, then I think that is poor game design for those want to play solo or doesn't have any friends with the game. My overall experience with the game felt serviceable but dull.

4. Resident Evil Revelations 2

The next two games were the hardest part about this list, because of how similar this game and number three are. Every good or bad aspect of one game perfectly balanced good or bad aspects of the other game. Ultimately, I felt Revelations 1 was slightly better than this game. I'll talk about why under the number three spot, so I'll just talk about what I liked and didn't like about this game. I liked the abandoned soviet island look of the environments and the Saw-like approach to the story and level design was something I enjoyed, but I felt that it made the game feel a little less like a Resident Evil game. I didn't like partner-swapping aspect as for it added an extra annoyance in finding items and getting to certain areas, but I felt the partner was better than the partners in other RE games as for it had a few moments of fun and was a person I didn't have to worry about. Having two half-stories with Barry and Jill was something I personally didn't like. Ultimately, I found my experience with the game to be pretty good, especially after playing RE6.

3. Resident Evil Revelations

Like I said earlier, Revelations and Revelations 2 were really close, but it was the first one that ultimately pulled ahead. What made this one better to me? Like I said, every good or bad aspect was balanced by the other game's good or bad aspects. In the end though, I felt the aspects of this game were slightly better or not as bad as the other. For example, while I liked the look of the environments of the second game slightly more than the abandoned ship of the first game, I felt the first game's environment was slightly scarier and had tighter corridors, something that feels more like a Resident Evil game than the second game. While the A.I. partner is slightly better in the second, not having to switch back and forth between the two is better. On top of that, I think the plot of the first game felt more developed and the characters feel more fleshed out. In the end, I think the first game was ever so slightly better, but this game isn't so close the next game on my list.

2. Resident Evil 4

Isn't it funny how the first game I played in my series is so high up? I guess it's hard to make it better considering how great this game is. The setting and environments are great, the aiming made each interaction with enemies a bit scarier as for it is harder to kill them, the inventory system as well as the weapons are the best in the series, and more. What holds this game back for me? For starters, the headshot mutation mechanic. I think having some headshots mutate the enemy into a more powerful enemy is brilliant. I think forcing me to decide whether I want to shoot the enemy in the body with more bullets or in the head with the possibility of mutation makes each interaction a choice, and I love that. The issue I have with it is the fact that for me at least, it didn't matter where I shot them because their heads popped anyways. It broke the whole choice aspect for me, which was a big bummer. Also, I personally felt that mutations happened too often. The second thing that holds me back on this game was that it went on for too long. Their are too many plot development points throughout the game that made the plot wander and I felt done with the gameplay five hours before the game actually ended. Still, in the end I had a great experience with the game and I think it is a great RE game to play even if you aren't playing through all of them.

1. Resident Evil 7(very slight spoilers)

Yes, I like RE7 more than RE4. In the end, I think RE7 is the game that takes all of the elements I like about RE, adds in some extra mechanics like the first-person perspective, and blends them to make a pretty damn great Resident Evil game. While I think the style of gameplay RE4 made is fun, I think going back to the more classic RE style of gameplay is better. On top of that, I think the Baker family is more interesting than a lot of the characters I have experienced throughout the game, and showing their more human side towards the end gives the family more personality. I thought the gameplay was the right amount of scary, the bayou environment is a great setting, and the game ran for the perfect length. For those reasons and many more, I think that RE7 is the best RE game in the franchise (at least from Four on).

Well, that is my list. I am sure your list is different than mine, so do put in your top picks in the comments below. Thanks for reading my list (or skimming through my choices), and let's hope for that RE7 PC VR update (even though I am doubtful at this point).

New month, somewhat new year, and a new list of my top picks for this month. It's weird to think that this is the seventh time I have made a top five games list, but that is neither here nor there. Let's look at my top picks of video games for the shortest month of the year, but before that let's get into the rule.

Rules are fun and for everyone. Here they are: the game has to be released on at least on of the major systems (PC, PS4, Xbox One, Switch). The game has to be new, so no remasters or re-releases onto new systems. One thing I do count is a game either entering or exiting early access, but that game can only be counted once. If a game does have multiple release dates like Destiny 2 or GTA 5, then I will only count the earliest release date. Finally, it has to be a game, not a DLC. With the rules out of the way, let's look at my top picks for February.

5. Kingdom Come: Deliverance

Kingdom Come: Deliverance is an open-world RPG game in which you play as a blacksmith's son out for vengeance for his parents' deaths during the Holy Roman Empire. When I think of medieval open-world RPG games, I think of The Witcher or Skyrim, but what makes this game special and one big reason I am looking forward to it is for its realism. It strips away all of the mystical stuff and instead focuses on telling a realistic story and creating a world once lived. But this game isn't just a realistic game. Non-linear missions with consequences based on choices, plenty of activities to do in this world, and more are in this stunning world waiting to be interacted with. What holds me back on this game is the gameplay itself, as for the controls look rather clunky and despite my praise for its realism in its history, I think some of that realism like health can be rather annoying. Still, I hold high hopes for this game and will check it out when it releases on the 13th.

4. Fe

Fe is an action-adventure game in which you play as a fox-like creature exploring the Nordic woods and is trying to stop an evil force known as the Silent Ones from destroying the harmony of the woods. What I love about Fe is its hands-off approach to the game. I think that some of the best moments you can have in any video game aren't ones made by the developer, but by self discovery. One of my favorite video game moments didn't come from a cutscene or a story sequence, but from discovering the true scale of the game Everything. This hands-off approach as well as its interesting world, art style, and song mechanics blend to make an experience that is both unique and amazing. Whether or not the game will be a great experience will be determined on the 16th when the game releases for Switch, Xbox, PS4, and PC.

3. Aegis Defenders

Aegis Defenders is a 2d platformer-tower defense hybrid in which you play as four characters in search of a device that can save their village from an evil empire. It's been awhile since I have played a TD game, but at the same time I don't want to play another basic TD game. So having an alternative TD game like this game is refreshing to me. But more than the TD is the environmentally-diverse world, different characters and the ability to swap between them, the ability for co-op, the ability to combine items from different characters, and more. Hopefully the blend of platforming and tower defense is a good blend, but that can only be found out when the game releases on the 8th.

2. Metal Gear Survive

Metal Gear Survive is a survival action-adventure game that branches off the story of Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain. I know that some are mad about this game considering the title was taken away from Hideo Kojima (I don't have history with the franchise but even I am mad about that). Despite this, I still think this game has potential to be fun. Such aspects like base building and exploration are things I love to do (Slime Rancher, anyone?) But it is the co-op that will keep me interested in the game, as for I think this could be a solid game with one or more friends. What holds this game back from being number one besides the number one game looking great to me are the microtransactions. I am not as exasperated as I used to be on microtransactions, and I can live with unnecessary ones. As long as they aren't necessary, I will be fine with the game; I only put this because I don't know how severe they are. We will find out about what can be bought with real money when the game releases on the 21st, and hopefully it won't weigh down on the game too heavily.

1. Dandara

Dandara is a 2d metroidvania game about a world being oppressed and a heroine known as Dandara being awoken to save this world with one twist: Dandara doesn't walk around, but hops onto salt piles. Normally, I am not into these kind of games, or at least I don't hold as much interest in these games as others. But I have been playing a lot of Dead Cells, and I have had a blast with the game. I know it isn't the same exact, but my view on the genre has shifted. On top of that, I think the world and the movement style looks like a blast to play. I can't wait to get my hands on this game when it releases on the 6th for both major systems and mobile phones.

Special: Bayonetta One and Two, Assassin's Creed: Origins Discovery Tour, and Shadow of the Colossus

For my special list(a section where the items listed do not count towards my list), I have a whopping four games. I wanted to mention Bayonetta One and Two as well as Shadow of the Colossus, as for they are games that would've made this list if it wasn't for the fact that they are re-releases. I haven't played any of those games, but I look forward into getting into them. As for AC: Origins Discovery Tour, I just wanted to give it a shoutout because I think it is a really cool piece of content as well as a neat way of learning about the time period.

Well, that is the list. What are your top five? Put them in the comments and see how they compare. Anyways, thanks for looking at my list and I will see you on the next one, next month.

On January 17th, 2018, Nintendo announced a new way to play their system. Is it VR? It's got to be VR. Wait, it's not? Wait, stop. CARDBOARD?! Probably the wildest video game announcement of 2018, Nintendo Labo plays perfectly with the offbeat aspect Nintendo has with the Switch; something I secretly love about Nintendo. For awhile, I didn't know what to think about this strange new product, but now I have collected my thoughts and I can say that I am excited to see what is to come with this product, even though I am probably not going to buy it myself.

I'm sure you have heard this one: Sony is making VR, Microsoft is making 4K console gaming, and Nintendo is playing around with cardboard. It's rather funny to see how Sony and Microsoft is looking into the future of video games and technology; and then there is Nintendo trying to sell you expensive cardboard and say how it's the next step in the evolution of Nintendo gaming. There is some cool stuff happening with the controllers and their sensors with Labo, but it's safe to say that what they are doing isn't cutting edge. Despite this, I actually think what Nintendo is doing is far more interesting than what Sony and Microsoft are doing. To me, VR and 4K upgrades are cool, but they are par for the course. They are expected upgrades to their systems that aren't surprising. On the other side of the coin, you have Nintendo releasing something totally out of left field that isn't really innovating, but is something that is pure. Labo isn't about innovation, it's about creativity. It's like legos: it's just overpriced plastic bricks, but it's about what you can do with the bricks that makes lego so great. Not only that, Labo is teaching kids how to create. Sure, Sony trying to immerse you into the game or Microsoft making games run smoother and look better may be steps forward in the industry, but Nintendo mixing video games with a toy experience and allowing them to use their creative side to mix the two to me is much more important.

It goes without saying Nintendo Labo is meant for kids. How often can we say that about video game products now? Sure, games come out that are child-friendly and some only meant for children, but in my opinion I feel that the video game industry has almost forgotten about the kids. So to see a kid-friendly company come out with a product meant just for kids is heart-warming. So to see some people get mad about the fact that the product isn't meant for them makes me a little mad, because heaven forbid not everything is made for you. I am actually happy that this product isn't meant for everyone. I think that if this product was meant for adults and kids, then it would have to be only half as good for both parties instead of being great for one type of person. The Switch may prove me wrong in my thinking of who this product belongs to, but I think appealing to everyone works with everything. In the end, I am just happy to see kid-friendly video game products on the market.

No product is perfect, and Labo unfortunately hits some major snags mainly with the material and the price. When it comes to material, it really speaks for itself. On one hand, I like the cardboard for the creation aspect. Having people build the device instead of it shipping pre-made is what makes this product great. On the other hand, cardboard is fragile. Even something like water could destroy the product. I wish they used a better material that can also be built and played around with like cardboard. The other big issue with this product is the price. For seventy dollars, you get five different toy-cons, as well as the games to play with said toy-cons. Now seventy dollars for five games and cardboard may seem like a good deal, but with a material that can break easily and the games being rather one-note makes the prices seem like a bit much. But that's just the tip of the iceberg. For eighty dollars, you can get the robot kit. Just one kit with one game. Sure the kit is bigger and the game seems less like a demo and will probably have more replayability then the others, but I still think this is too pricey. On top of that, Nintendo is also selling a ten dollar customization kit that includes stickers, stencil kits, and tape(it's weird to say that a large video game company will be selling tape in the near future). This price is more fair, but it also seems like something that should be packed with the other toy-cons. In the end, I feel these aspects weigh down on the product, but not enough to dampen my spirits for it.

When thinking about the title for this entry, I wanted to describe my feelings for the product. This product is weird, it is gimmicky, and it is creative. But the best way to describe this product is the last thing I put on that list: it's Nintendo. Leave it to Nintendo to come out with a product like this, and whether you think that is a good thing or a bad thing is up to you. Not only that, I think this product speaks as a metaphor of Nintendo: it's not perfect and it isn't conventional to the video game industry, but it is something that shows how great the industry can be and is something that we need. It's Nintendo that makes video games a fun thing to do and not a business venture. It's Labo that shows us the creative side of video games and being pretty isn't always the best. Labo's cardboard and Nintendo's graphics may be crude, but it isn't about the looks. It's about the creativity, the personalities, and of course the games. I'm not saying Nintendo is an angelic company that does everything right and never does things for the money, but they are the ones that separate from the rest and delivers products that show how cool video games can be.

The biggest thing I wish this product did was temporarily turn me into a young child again so I could truly enjoy this product. This is not to say I wouldn't enjoy this product now, but I feel my enjoyment wouldn't nearly be as great as it would be if I was a child experiencing these products. Because of this, I probably won't pick up one of these sets. Despite this, I am still happy that someone else will find great enjoyment out of this product.

It may take some missteps along the way and will probably take some more in the future, but Nintendo Labo is a product that to me feels more wholesome and pure than most other things coming out in the video game industry. It isn't about looking pretty. It isn't about putting you into a VR landscape. It's about showing kids how creative you can be. It's about trying new ways of playing your console, not testing its graphical limits. It's about showing a unique way of improving the video game industry and saying that prettiness doesn't entirely mean improvement. And to me, all of this speaks to a product I think we need.

This weekend, the upcoming sports game Laser League launched into an open beta, and I decided to give it a try. Other than a quick little read in the GameInformer magazine, I had no clue what this game was before playing it. As it stands, I currently have around two hours into the game and I have tried every thing the game has to offer so far, and I wanted to talk about my initial impressions with the game. So, here they are.

Before getting my impressions, it's good to know what the premise of the game is. Laser League is a competitive multiplayer top-down sports game in which you play in a team of one or two others, and it is your job to eliminate the other team in the ring. The way to do this is by activating lasers that you can pass through but your opponents can't. It's up to your team to make the opponents hit your lasers while dodging their lasers. Other things to know about the game includes the ability to run into the wall and teleport to the other side of the rectangular arena and each team member can choose between six different classes that include temporary invincibility, a shield bash that sends others flying, a sword that can kill others, an ability to hack other lasers, a shock ability that leaves opponents temporarily stunned, and a sniping ability that involves dashing into opponents and killing them. Also, some abilities like reversing the flow of lasers, changing the speed of lasers, and more occasionally spawn into the game.

To win a round, a team has to kill the other team without allowing them to revive their fallen opponents. First to three rounds wins a match, in which the losers are given the ability to change their class. The first team to win two matches wins the game.

The first impression I got with this game before really even playing it was the comparisons I made with this game and Rocket League. It's not because the gameplay is the same, but for other reasons. Maybe it's both games ending with league, maybe it's the neon colors and utopian vibe, maybe it's the sports atmosphere, I don't know. The comparison between this game and Rocket League was one that kept with me throughout my time with the game, and is something I make comparisons to with a lot of my other impressions with the game. So if you see a lot of Rocket League talk, then don't be surprised.

The next biggest thing that stuck out to me with this game at first was its over-complication on a simple formula. When I started the game, I thought the classes were dumb and added complication to a game that should stick with its simplicity. Just make dudes hit your walls, that's it. To me, adding classes to Laser League is like adding classes to Rocket League. It's an unnecessary addition to make your game seem more complex when in fact the best part of the game is its simplicity; its easy-to-pick-up-hard-to-master aspect. But the more I play the game, the more I see how necessary it is to have abilities in the game. If the entire game was just dodging lasers, then all skill and strategy would be thrown out the door and what would remain is a game of who can activate the laser first and how well you can dodge lasers. The abilities shake things up makes you think about what moves you can make. For example, if I play as the sniper class, I will guard over the fallen opponent so then the living opponent can't revive him. Or if I am playing as a thief, I will try to hack lasers near the opponents or hack ones that go over the fallen opponent. The abilities are important, and building your team with different abilities can mean the difference between a win and a loss. It's not like other games where everyone can play as the same class; variety is key to winning. Fortunately, all but one of the classes to me are viable and I don't feel I need to conform and stick to one single class. The more I play the game, the more I respect the classes. Despite this, I still wish their was a mode in which everyone is given the same three abilities instead of having to choose only one. Still, the class system is something that was at first an over-complication but now is a necessity for strategy and skill.

I would say the best part about this game is the aesthetic, not to say anything else about this game is bad. The gameplay is fun and its premise is great, but I feel they nail the aesthetic they were trying to reach. The outfits, neon colors, darkly lit arenas full of holograms, even the team names and logos feel right at home in this future utopian tron-like style.

When it comes to the gameplay and the sport being played, I would say it's pretty fun. The game is similar to playing Rocket League in its simplicity and addictiveness. It's something that is really easy to grasp, but hard to master. One thing that actually makes this game better than Rocket League are the controls, which are incredibly simple. Other than the chat and emoji buttons, all of the main gameplay buttons are movement buttons, a sprint button, and an ability button. Having these simple controls makes it easy for anyone to pick up and play, which is great.

The simplicity isn't the only similarity to Rocket League though. When it comes to matchmaking, both offer games in terms of team size, with Laser League only offering a 2v2 and a 3v3 mode, with 3v3 being the default match. When it comes to the team size, I actually thought having one less member was better. 3v3 felt chaotic to me, while 2v2 felt like I could properly strategize on taking out the other team.

Unfortunately, every game has flaws, and this game is no exception. And what's even more unfortunate is that the big flaw with this game is one that affects my gameplay experience and may keep me from really getting into the game: the special moments. This flaw stems from my comparison to Rocket League, but I feel even without the comparison this would affect me anyways. What do I mean by the special moments? What I mean is that nothing I do in this game feels great. If I threw a tomahawk across the map and hit someone in Call of Duty, I would be flipping out. Whenever I get a crazy or even a normal goal in Rocket League, I feel at the very least satisfied. Whenever I do something crazy in this game, the biggest reaction I would have would be me saying "that was cool I guess." Normally, this would be something small and insignificant, but I feel that this game would strive on these great moments. One of the biggest things that makes Rocket League a blast to play and even watch are the crazy goals, and that is lost in this game. I actually had my craziest moment I probably will ever have in the game when I got a double kill with the sniper class in a 2v2 game, a one-in-a-million shot. The moment was absolutely crazy, but I didn't feel nearly as great as doing any of the tasks previously stated. This small aspect holds me back from truly loving the game, but that doesn't mean I don't have a good time with the game.

In the end, I think this is a game worth checking out. I think its premise is great and its gameplay is fun and worth checking out. Do I think this game competes with others like Rocket League and will be the next big e-sport? No, but I would love to see e-sports of this game. Still, I think this game is a fun one and has a chance at being a timeless multiplayer game like PUBG, Rocket League, CS:GO, and others. But in the end, this is a beta and only time will tell what is to come of this game.