Kill Screen's Top 25 Games of 2015

TW3 has a problem related to gameplay, as other RPGs, the game turns itself too easy at some point (edit: though the expansion turned up the difficulty again to a more proper level). But the core gameplay itself is very good.

W3 actually has pretty deep and rewarding customization in my eyes. Leveling options are limited, well balanced, and your choices make a difference in combat. Leveling up certain signs or stats will make you stronger against humans or monsters, which in turn determines your relative strength in gear vs alchemy.

The issue for some people is that the game doesn't require any of this. You can stay on the main quest path and be properly leveled most of the time. Or get really into the customization and push your limits.

The best way to play it, for me, is to explore everything and always go for the best challenge you can technically beat. And the game does a good job of communicating whether a quest or encounter is impossible for you vs. very challenging vs. moderate challenge. So do that, then come back and plough through some earlier story quests in OP God Mode; it's fun!

In other words, you make your own challenge, but W3 does a good job of letting you do that. Also, don't fast travel, don't play with regenerating health, and turn off the HUD feature that gives you a suggested route to the highlighted quest.
 
Actually...

The battle with Toriel is incredibly easy - just don't do anything in the bullet segment & the bullets will avoid killing you.

The more ya know. I just killed her.

W3 actually has pretty deep and rewarding customization in my eyes. Leveling options are limited, well balanced, and your choices make a difference in combat. Leveling up certain signs or stats will make you stronger against humans or monsters, which in turn determines your relative strength in gear vs alchemy.

The issue for some people is that the game doesn't require any of this. You can stay on the main quest path and be properly leveled most of the time. Or get really into the customization and push your limits.

The best way to play it, for me, is to explore everything and always go for the best challenge you can technically beat. And the game does a good job of communicating whether a quest or encounter is impossible for you vs. very challenging vs. moderate challenge. So do that, then come back and plough through some earlier story quests in OP God Mode; it's fun!

In other words, you make your own challenge, but W3 does a good job of letting you do that. Also, don't fast travel, don't play with regenerating health, and turn off the HUD feature that gives you a suggested route to the highlighted quest.

Good post.
 
Wow, fucking burn.

I need to check out Kill Screen.
You definitely should. It's a great site.
Cool list, some games that I didn't know of. Lol at Neko Atsume making it. I guess that student of mine that kept ironically (or was she?) pushing me to get it had a point after all. Really don't agree with the order of the list though, but okay, horses for courses. The one game that seems criminally overlooked is Splatoon. Like how can you have any kind of pretension and ignore that game.
As far as I remember, they liked Splatoon. Just didn't make the top 25.
 
You definitely should. It's a great site.

As far as I remember, they liked Splatoon. Just didn't make the top 25.

Yup. They liked it.

https://killscreen.com/articles/splatoon-review/

If we’re actually postmodern, the main way we think about art is pastiche. Fredric Jameson put this rather famously in his despondent diagnosis of our so-called “postmodern condition,” Postmodernism: Or, the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism.

What do we mean by pastiche? It’s that fuzzy juncture where collage, imitation, bricolage, and parody meet. Think about it this way: We have decadent media diets, so everything we receive and everything we create gets filtered through and built with pieces of our unnumbered old readings, watchings, listenings. How do you describe a new game to a friend? With other games. There are the easy ones: “It’s like every other Assassin’s Creed, but in Victorian England.” Or, for the more challenging ones, we have recourse to similes: “It’s like a first-person Civ V with a soundtrack like Mega-Man 2 but drawn in the cel-shaded style of Windwaker.” (To my knowledge, this does not actually describe any game, though, if it did, I would play it immediately.)

All this to say that, when an oddity like Splatoon comes into the world and defiantly refuses to settle into genre conventions, we start out trying to understand it as pastiche. I’m going to begin this review by doing just that. But then I want to suggest that this approach is unfair at best, and, at worst, abridges our understanding of the game. What do we lose when we see new work not as free-standing, but as a set of dependencies, never more than the sum of an unlikely set of parts? Splatoon is an object-lesson in answering that question.

So, what is Splatoon? You might start off by telling your friend, “It’s a third-person action game where you run around, take cover, and shoot stuff,” implying Gears of War, Spec Ops: The Line, or Resident Evil 5 as touchstones. But then you think about it for a second: “It’s not exactly a shooter in that hot-lead-and-chainsaw-guns sense—you’re shooting paint. And you don’t even run that much; you spend a lot of time swimming through ink as a squid, which, I guess, mechanically, is like sprinting with a piece of cover or an invisibility cloak or a Crysis suit, though not quite any of those.” And then it gets more complicated since, more often than not, you’re not shooting to kill (though you do occasionally pop other characters back to a respawn point): You’re shooting to control territory. But it’s not even the Team Fortress 2 or Halo-style capture the flag territory you wrangle by standing in a special spot until a timer pops. Instead, you point out to your friend that it’s like de Blob (“Did you play de Blob?”): You try to paint over as much of the ground as you can, but “I guess actually that’s only in multiplayer—the campaign’s totally different—and, strategically, I mean, it’s the outcome of a whole different set of decisions. Now that I think about it, the single-player has a lot more light puzzle elements, kind of like Metroid Prime, but, yeah, it’s third-person, so it’s not quite the same.” Here, your friend toes the ground and nods patiently.



Visually, Splatoon makes use of an ardently, earnestly ‘90s Gak aesthetic, while kneading in a strange mix of Space Channel 5 and Super Mario Galaxy. (“And squids. Did I mention that you’re humanoid but also a squid?”) Tonally, it’s campy and overwrought: it feels like you’re reading chat transcripts between Mr. Orange from Okami, Lissa’s most unselfconsciously kawaii moments in Fire Emblem Awakening, and Donatello and Leonardo’s verbal alley-oops from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (“Only imagine if you replace all those turtle puns with squid puns, and instead of ‘cowabunga’ you just say ‘chill’ all the time.”) Then you just frankenstein all this together around an old-school stolen princess-type videogame ur-narrative, and voila: Splatoon.

Then comes the moment when you learn how long ago your friend stopped paying attention: “Cool,” they say.

Here we see the problem with pastiche: There’s almost no one for whom this description makes good sense except the person explaining it. And, even if someone happened to have had or seen or played all of the things I just clumped together to try to paint (sorry) a picture of Splatoon, it wouldn’t even get close because Splatoon is also adamantly none of those things individually, nor the sum of their parts.

The reason why I’ve developed such an immense respect for Splatoon is that it’s a huge risk that scarcely comes off as risky. It works with numerous different gameplay vocabularies and assumptions—all those I name-checked above and more—yet brings them together in a way that makes you feel good about being thrown off-balance. We might be able to see it as a pastiche of gameplay conventions (in the same way that everything written after, say, The Epic of Gilgamesh is also a pastiche of past forms), but I think that’s too reductive.



Instead of pastiche, I want to propose a new direction: The sample is probably the best metaphor we have for borrowing directly from the old in order to make the new. Think about Jazz Rap: You take an Art Blakey sample in 5/4, shoehorn it into 4/4, slap a disco beat behind it, and put Q-Tip on the mic. It’s not jazz. It’s not funk. It’s not disco. It’s not rap. “Jazz Rap” really even comes up short on acknowledging the form’s debts. That’s the kind of work Splatoon is doing: borrowing ingredients from numerous different recipes, throwing them into a pot together, and stirring until they stop feeling like separate ideas and begin to become unitary.

Splatoon, then, makes me optimistic about what games can do not with pastiche or duplication-as-serialization, but with sampling. We don’t have a genre convention to slot Splatoon into, and that’s a rare and wonderful thing.
 
I mean, how many reviewers would start their review with this gem:
If we’re actually postmodern, the main way we think about art is pastiche. Fredric Jameson put this rather famously in his despondent diagnosis of our so-called “postmodern condition,” Postmodernism: Or, the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism.
I'm sure a lot of people feel that it's too pretentious, but I love it. Kill Screen is one of the few outlets that expects you to come in with some amount of intelligence, rather than being a mere lowest-common denominator outlet for the masses.
 
I mean, how many reviewers would start their review with this gem:

I'm sure a lot of people feel that it's too pretentious, but I love it. Kill Screen is one of the few outlets that expects you to come in with some amount of intelligence, rather than being a mere lowest-common denominator outlet for the masses.

Exactly.

Imru’ al-Qays;190277306 said:
Kill Screen does the best criticism in the medium. When it's not being pointlessly contrarian (see their Old Hunters review).

I agree.
 
Nice varied list, and I'm always happy to read more discussion of Witcher 3's literary qualities. Still need to play Undertale and Sunless Sea (when I get a new laptop, so maybe the day after tomorrow!). Also, Metamorphabet is the only game I let my 4-year-old play.
 
Imru’ al-Qays;190277306 said:
Kill Screen does the best criticism in the medium. When it's not being pointlessly contrarian (see their Old Hunters review).

I dont think it was contrarian. It looks more like a mediocre player trying to do the hardest content in NG+ while underleveled.
 
I dont think it was contrarian. It looks more like a mediocre player trying to do the hardest content in NG+ while underleveled.
I think that Old Hunters review and their Undertale review were the only "bad" reviews I've read on the site recently. They're just really poorly written and thought out.
 
One of the core problems with MGS5 is that it's kind of shitty. I imagine that one detail keeps it from winning some of the year end lists.

I'm playing MGS5 right now and both loving and hating it. The gameplay is sublime, but the fact that the game has gone out of its way to make me feel trapped in a soulless neoliberal hellscape where my money disappears from my account when the servers go down for maintenance and I have to figure out well in advance how to opt out of the multiplayer or I might lose my resources definitely puts a damper on things.

I kind of get it, and it's admirable after a fashion to use game mechanics to represent the corrupting, precarizing effects of capitalism. But it's still a lot more stressful than it should be.
 
Yup, their top 2 match mine.

Everybody's Gone to the Rapture is absolutely fantastic. Yes, it's slow. Yes, it's a little too "open world" than it probably should be. But its atmosphere, writing, voice acting and music are absolutely second to none.
 
Imru’ al-Qays;190304798 said:
I'm playing MGS5 right now and both loving and hating it. The gameplay is sublime, but the fact that the game has gone out of its way to make me feel trapped in a soulless neoliberal hellscape where my money disappears from my account when the servers go down for maintenance and I have to figure out well in advance how to opt out of the multiplayer or I might lose my resources definitely puts a damper on things.

I kind of get it, and it's admirable after a fashion to use game mechanics to represent the corrupting, precarizing effects of capitalism. But it's still a lot more stressful than it should be.

I was kind of being a bit cutesy, but even still, I feel the game is not very good. Story and characters are rubbish, and while the controls are impeccable, the mission structure is repetitive and gets boring... And then they lock a lot of the weapon research behind the extension bases which they use to push microtransactions. I wouldn't put this within a 5 mile radius of a top ten list.
 
I was kind of being a bit cutesy, but even still, I feel the game is not very good. Story and characters are rubbish, and while the controls are impeccable, the mission structure is repetitive and gets boring... And then they lock a lot of the weapon research behind the extension bases which they use to push microtransactions. I wouldn't put this within a 5 mile radius of a top ten list.

Precisely. The mechanics and controls are great, but the game does nothing with them(inventive scenarios, boss fights, difficult enemies, etc.) Nearly every other area of the game is mediocre to poor.
 
The problem with MGSV for me was that no section of the game was as inventive, intricate and as memorable as Camp Omega from freaking Ground Zeroes. That's a real disappointment.
 
I enjoy lists that bring games I've never heard of (whether it's something I'm interested in or not) to my attention, such as Neko Atsume and Panoramical.
 
Fuck that. Best music of the year, best sound design, zen like sensiblities, and not giving two fucks about playtesters and Sony demands. Those devs made something personal and special.

Don't disagree with that, but it was still a complete slog for me. Can respect the devs for doing what they wanted to but I just couldn't bring myself to finish it.
 
What about the writing is awful?

Have you taken a look at the Splatoon review posted above? Couldn't get more than 2 paragraphs in before being overwhelmed by how overwrought and pretentious it is. Like a tryhard college English major's first published article.
 
Have you taken a look at the Splatoon review posted above? Couldn't get more than 2 paragraphs in before being overwhelmed by how overwrought and pretentious it is. Like a tryhard college English major's first published article.
Using advanced vocabulary and making analogies that aren't gaming related = pretentious?

Come on now
 
Using advanced vocabulary and making analogies that aren't gaming related = pretentious?

Come on now

When they have a 10 paragraph review where only 1/10th of it is devoted to mechanic discussion, I generally tune out. Reminds me of the Tim Rogers reviews of days old, except instead of talking about himself, it's throwing off rapid-fire analogies and vapid references.
 
there's stuff on the site that's difficult to read/hard to stomach, but their goal is really great, don't really expect all the content on the site to be a gem

https://killscreen.submittable.com/submit/4576
Also this
All of our articles should be readable by (and interesting to) someone who does not play videogames. That means no jargon, either academic or otherwise, and a constant deference paid to hooking the reader and keeping her attention. Believe it or not, not everyone knows what a platformer or an RPG is. Think about how a smart general interest publication—like The Awl or Wired—might cover your same topic.
 
When they have a 10 paragraph review where only 1/10th of it is devoted to mechanic discussion, I generally tune out. Reminds me of the Tim Rogers reviews of days old, except instead of talking about himself, it's throwing off rapid-fire analogies and vapid references.

This comment is using language I don't understand. What does vapid mean?

Your use of language is way too florid for my tastes.
 
Have you taken a look at the Splatoon review posted above? Couldn't get more than 2 paragraphs in before being overwhelmed by how overwrought and pretentious it is. Like a tryhard college English major's first published article.
Yeah, I read it. I commented on it above:

I mean, how many reviewers would start their review with this gem:
If we’re actually postmodern, the main way we think about art is pastiche. Fredric Jameson put this rather famously in his despondent diagnosis of our so-called “postmodern condition,” Postmodernism: Or, the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism.

I'm sure a lot of people feel that it's too pretentious, but I love it. Kill Screen is one of the few outlets that expects you to come in with some amount of intelligence, rather than being a mere lowest-common denominator outlet for the masses.
I'm not sure what you're expecting from Erik Fredner. The dude is a Ph.D candidate in English. His writing is going to be a fair bit above the low bar that many others set.
When they have a 10 paragraph review where only 1/10th of it is devoted to mechanic discussion, I generally tune out. Reminds me of the Tim Rogers reviews of days old, except instead of talking about himself, it's throwing off rapid-fire analogies and vapid references.
Thank God for that. There are other places to get purely (or more) technical reviews. Kill Screen isn't it. Just because you don't like this kind of critique doesn't mean it's not worthwhile stuff. It's great to have an outlet that's interested in examining games from a cultural and artistic perspective.

I've said this before, but many people (maybe not you) whine about games not being treated as serious artistic endeavors. And then when someone comes along who wants to treat them as such, they beat them off with accusations of pretension.
 
Also this


All of our articles should be readable by (and interesting to) someone who does not play videogames. That means no jargon, either academic or otherwise, and a constant deference paid to hooking the reader and keeping her attention. Believe it or not, not everyone knows what a platformer or an RPG is. Think about how a smart general interest publication—like The Awl or Wired—might cover your same topic.

What I don't get about this is, why review games for people who don't play videogames? I can understand having anecdotal articles, but reviews on the other hand? Maybe if they stuck to games of the 'artsy' type for lack of a better term (which I see they cover more than most traditional gaming sites, and I would agree this is the best way to review those types of games), but why Bloodborne, Witcher 3, Xenoblade X? Not exactly the first games you'd show if you want to bring the non-playing masses into the fold.

I've said this before, but many people (maybe not you) whine about games not being treated as serious artistic endeavors. And then when someone comes along who wants to treat them as such, they beat them off with accusations of pretension.

Heh, definitely not me. I won't deny that games can't be art, but I'm one of those gameplay-first types... Arcade-style games like fighters/shmups/platformers, retro games, RPGs with in-depth battle systems being my fave... So yeah, I can at least agree that I'm not in the target market for this site.
 
What I don't get about this is, why review games for people who don't play videogames? I can understand having anecdotal articles, but reviews on the other hand? Maybe if they stuck to games of the artsy/'non-game' type (which I see they cover more than most traditional gaming sites), but why Bloodborne, Witcher 3, Xenoblade X? Not exactly the first games you'd show if you want to bring the non-playing masses into the fold.
Why not? There are youtube channels like Every Frame A Painting that discuss and break cinematography and film design for people who aren't film makers and might not know about those things. Or Game Maker's Toolkit that discusses game design in ways that a layperson could understand. There are magazines like Popular Science and Wired that talk about science and tech topics for people who might not be enthusiasts of those fields

So why not review games for people who might not play video games? If anything, that tone and approach can make it easier for someone like that to become interested and want to try those games

Personal anecdote, I write about games, and my family like reading my stuff, but they have no idea what stuff like turn-based means or what a roguelike is or what Souls-inspired action-adventure game means. More accessible articles that don't assume the reader knows the jargon and terms of video games means people without that knowledge can actually understand what makes games unique and interesting

So that's why
 
What I don't get about this is, why review games for people who don't play videogames? I can understand having anecdotal articles, but reviews on the other hand? Maybe if they stuck to games of the 'artsy' type for lack of a better term (which I see they cover more than most traditional gaming sites, and I would agree this is the best way to review those types of games), but why Bloodborne, Witcher 3, Xenoblade X? Not exactly the first games you'd show if you want to bring the non-playing masses into the fold.

Why does it matter. They obviously have some editorial intent that you're not grasping here. You don't like it, plenty of people in this thread do.

You mentioned that you can understand anecdotal articles, but isn't a review just an a large anecdote of a person's experience with a game?
 
Top Bottom