Revolve Album Review

Release date: 16th October 2015

Published by Universal and Island Records

The second studio album from John Newman, Revolve is a safely played foray which continues to show off the singer’s strengths in vocals.

Newman shot to fame two years with 2013’s “Love me again”, a wildly popular track in the UK before releasing his first album, Tribute. Revolve is a highly extravagant album when compared with the more down to earth nature of Newman’s first album; this is shown by the glossy, vintage style of the album cover and the overall higher class of life that has been woven into each of the music videos. An introduction track by Idris Elba of all people relays the album’s focus on fast paced songs; there’s an element of motivation and determination that exists in the songs, especially with “Never give it up” and “Something special”. It’s a relatively straightforward theme accompanied by a few songs about love and romance that John has been known to home in on.

One of the biggest additions to John Newman’s repertoire with this album is backing singers; the choir used in some tracks adds an additional layer of depth that builds on Newman’s already strong vocals. Tiring game pairs the singer up with American R&B singer Charlie Wilson and their powerful voices play off each other brilliantly. On the opposite end of the track list, Killing me is one of the best compositions John Newman has ever produced; it seamlessly blends drums, guitar riffs and piano solos into a seriously funky beat that will get everyone up on their feet.

While some song compositions work really well, others feel a bit too similar to each other. “All my heart” for example is very direct in its execution as a fast paced piece of music, but it ends up hitting the same stride and beats as “Blame”, a song which Newman previously produced with Calvin Harris in September 2014. There’s also little in the way of more sombre tracks; “Out of my head” and "Losing Sleep" from Tribute were slower and highly atmospheric pieces that showed Newman could take a wider range of tones with his music. It’s a shame he didn’t push into this area further, instead the lone track from this field is “I’m not your man”, a really calming piece of music which strikes a solid contrast from the other tracks on the album.

Revolve is a mostly familiar album which continues to showcase Newman’s powerful voice without really breaking much new ground. Fans of the British singer will undoubtedly enjoy his newest album, even if it's not particularly ambitious in its direction or focus.

Rating: C

Post-Play: 5 Ways to give Fallout Shelter more substance

1. A scenario game mode based on specific vaults

The Fallout lore has given the fanbase nearly endless amounts of fascinating, absorbing stories, especially where the vaults are concerned. From Vault 87 in Maryland where the forced evolutionary virus was unleashed on the population to Vault 3 in the Mojave where psychopathic raiders forced their way in, there are all kinds of tales which could be incorporated into Fallout Shelter. Following the inclusion of a survival mode, scenarios would be the next logical step. These vaults could offer new challenges for players that tie in with the events of the main series; what if you had to keep order in Vault 34 as dwellers seek to gain access to the overstocked armoury? Or maybe you could work to maintain the sanity of one man trapped in a vault with nothing but a crate of puppets? These kinds of scenarios would take Fallout Shelter far beyond the simple premise of simply making your own vault and would give players a different way to interact with the game.

2. Dweller quests

Sending dwellers out into the wasteland could be expanded by combining it with specific tasks. The ones currently in Fallout Shelter are quite simplistic, ranging from “Collect 1000 Water” to “Level up the Agility of 11 dwellers”. These could blossom in fully fledged quest lines which are unlocked and completed depending on dweller level. Multiple dwellers could be sent on a mission to survey and map the surrounding areas or exterminate a local mole rat infestation. Sending more high level dwellers on each quest increases the chance of success and can reward the vault with a special reduction in incidents or even some special loot. This would develop a greater attachment to your strongest residents, much like the highest ranking soldiers in XCOM and give more purpose to sending your dwellers outside the vault.

3. Tree upgrades for rooms

As with the vault layout and customisation, upgrading rooms is fairly basic; you upgrade a room once to up the resource levels it produces and again to achieve the maximum amount. What if every room had further upgrades that gave it specific benefits? There could be three separate upgrade trees to go down for each production room; efficiency, speed and defence. Efficiency would boost the amount of resources produced, speed would specialise in rushing production in a tight spot and defence would feature automated defences such as turrets and combat robots to assist in warding off any incidents. Players would either focus on one tree or try to find a balance between all three, which would really deepen the uses and functions of each room.

4. Trading caravans

Obtaining new items from lunchboxes and wastelands expeditions is all well and good, but what if this were taken a step further? We’ve seen all kinds of traders travelling around the wastelands from lowly wanderers to the Crimson Caravan and these could serve as a third avenue for getting better items. Buying and selling items through caravans as you do in the main Fallout games could be worked in as a weekly event; and this can be combined with an element of choice. Supporting one trader over another will cause others to avoid your vault and you may miss out on certain items by alienating specific vendors. The trading caravans could also be applied to different weapon strengths. Melee weapons from Swatters could be more effective against human opponents while energy weapons from the Van Graffs would do better against monsters. The same can be applied to stimpak and radaway suppliers. Players would need to keep a degree of balance in mind to ensure they are fully stocked to deal with any situation that threatens the vault.

5. More vault locations, along with decision points

As mentioned in my review, the location of your vault is very static; a simple mountain layout which can’t be changed or developed. Choosing where in the United States your vault is located as well as whether it is inside a mountain, under the ground or tucked into a city could result in different benefits and drawbacks. For example in XCOM: Enemy Unknown, basing your headquarters in Europe means that laboratories and workshops cost less to maintain. For Fallout Shelter, basing the Vault in the Capital Wasteland could result in more incidents from the outside such as raider attacks, but it can also give a surplus of water thanks to the efforts of Project Purity in Fallout 3. All these different variations could switch things up, significantly increasing the replay value and making the game more dynamic.

These new locations could go hand in hand with decision points, where you have to decide to take one direction over another for your vault. You could choose to use either improved power generators for reduced incidents or improved nuclear reactors for more power and this would impact your dweller’s happiness accordingly. The Fallout series has been known for its elements of player choice and to add this into Shelter would bring the app in line with its main series counterparts.

Those were a few ways that I believe Fallout Shelter could be improved. Do you have any ideas that I missed? Let me know in the comments.

Fallout Shelter Game Review (Android)

Released 

June 14th 2015 (IOS)

August 13th 2015 (Android)

Price 

Free (Microtransactions included)

For the Fallout series, the excitement has never been higher in 2015; with the announcement of the long awaited Fallout 4, Bethesda Game Studios brought their fans together in a frenzy of anticipation. To fill in the wait until November, Bethesda announced the first Fallout title for mobile, Shelter. It’s a competent game that captures the essence of the franchise very well, but it doesn’t quite manage to rise above the simplistic traits of recent mobile games.

In Fallout Shelter, you are the Overseer of a Vault-Tec fallout shelter and it’s your job to keep your dwellers both happy and healthy; to do this you’ll need to manage three main resources; power, food and water which are produced through assigning dwellers to several different jobs in specific rooms which are built over the course of the game. Over time your vault will expand and as your dweller count grows more rooms will be unlocked, including ones which train SPECIAL stats for each dweller. This will call for a greater amount of bottle caps to afford both new rooms and their respective upgrades. The ant farm style of the vault is heavily reminiscent of games like XCOM and FTL and it also utilises the mechanic of combining rooms to yield larger amounts of resources. You’ll also have to protect your dwellers from several threats, from simple fires to powerful Deathclaws; these can occur either randomly or by failing a room rush which is dependent on percentages. This can be one of the more frustrating aspects of the game as percentages can be heavily misleading; you may rush a room at 15% only to trigger an incident that ends up killing off half of your population. The calculation of odds for rush success could have been better balanced to avoid these irritating moments. The player is graded on their performance based on overall dweller happiness with 94% or higher giving the player 140 caps per day. Rounding off the package is the ability to send your dwellers out into the wasteland to scavenge for loot and the lunchbox system. The Vault-Tec lunchboxes can give you rare items and can be attained through completing certain tasks or by paying real money. It’s satisfying to open these up and savour the fine bits of loot you can uncover. Equipping dwellers with stronger weapons, special outfits or upping their SPECIAL stats makes them more likely to survive through incidents and out in the wasteland and you’ll be moving them around constantly over the course of the game with a swipe of a finger.

All the ingredients of a great Fallout mobile title are accounted for, but the game is lacking when it comes to long-term engagement. The biggest issue I have with Fallout Shelter is that once you’ve reached the dweller cap of 200, there’s nothing left to do. Some players may be interested in obtaining all the rare weapons, outfits and special dwellers, but otherwise you won’t find much to stick around for. Even the deathclaw attacks become relatively easy with a strong weapon set and well stocked supply of stimpaks. In terms of design, Fallout Shelter does feel like a missed opportunity in many ways; there are no specific upgrades that make rooms better or worse than any other and many of the facets of the vaults in the franchise have been omitted completely. Where are the cloning labs? The robot repair centres or an overseer’s office? Why is there no variation in vault locations besides a simple mountain? It makes the photo option a bit pointless if there’s very little to customise in the player’s personal vault. If Bethesda really wanted to push the boat out with Fallout Shelter, they could have given players the freedom to do what they want with the Vault they created. Other building sims like Jurassic Park Operation Genesis (It’s fairly old but still awesome!) allowed players to just break down the security fences and let the dinosaurs go on a rampage; the same mindset could be applied to Fallout Shelter with Vault-Tec’s sinister experiments that are a common fixture in the series.

That’s not to say that it’s all bad; the core interface is very user friendly and accessible despite some issues which I’ll talk about in a bit and if there’s one thing that I can really praise Fallout Shelter for, it’s the good attitude it shows towards mobile business practices. When the game uses timers, it does so in a sensible way when dwellers are training their SPECIAL stats. There are no virtual currencies locked behind paywalls to speed up progress and the microtransactions for lunch boxes can be completely ignored as one lunchbox is dished out per week alongside completing tasks. It doesn’t halt or disrespect the player by asking them to pay real money, nor does it demand a constant internet connection and that is an encouraging change from other popular mobile titles.

The Fallout series has been known for its deep and endlessly replayable role playing mechanics, but for its debut on the mobile platform, Shelter doesn’t make much of an impact, opting to go down the simplistic route instead of working towards engaging long term fans of the series. Fallout Shelter had an opportunity to bring new gameplay mechanics to the common base management formula, but ultimately there really isn’t that much to it. Most of the time you’ll just be tapping on the screen to collect resources, check up on your dwellers and rush rooms. It’s a bit of a wasted opportunity when you have vault incidents and all you have to do is move a few denizens to the right room at the right time. It would have been far more engaging to have a series of small mini-games that tie in with the role-playing the series is known for. For example, what if a targeting game with VATS (Vault-Tec-Assisted-Targeting-System) took place in a raider or deathclaw attack? The game doesn’t really have too much in the way of progression either; aside from upgrading rooms it doesn’t feel like your vault is really growing or changing in any way besides statistics which caused a fair bit of disconnect with me.

The controls could also use a bit of tuning up as well; for the most part, they’re really simple and accessible, but there will often be times where you’ll try to tap on a room, only to move deeper your view into the vault. Or when you attempt to select a dweller to issue a stimpak but instead you click on a different room; this can be fairly annoying when you’re in the middle of an incident and are trying to keep your dwellers from dying at the hands of Deathclaws and Raiders. Fallout Shelter’s mostly shallow mechanics may succeed at bringing in the casual crowd, but for long term fans of the series it’s fairly disappointing that Bethesda didn’t go the extra mile, even with app updates adding a new mechanic or two to the game.

While the core gameplay of Fallout Shelter does falter, its presentation is as effective and engaging as mobile games come. The art style is really charming to look at, nailing the futuristic fifties setting of the franchise, the small sprites of Vault dwellers, enemies and the way the different rooms operate all feature some nice looking animations. There’s also some rather humorous quips from the game’s writing from the conversations the dwellers have to the diaries written by any would be wanderers you send to explore the wastes. A simple arrangement of low-key jazz tunes strikes a light-hearted tone, while the sounds of the rooms working away add a touch of productivity to the proceedings. Fallout Shelter may or may not have a few winks and nods to the upcoming Fallout 4 as well; something which began with the addition of Piper, a character from the new game’s Boston setting. Even if you aren’t fully engaged as a player with Fallout Shelter, you’ll definitely appreciate the effort that went into the visuals and art style.

Fallout Shelter makes a welcome change from other mobile titles by removing several egregious trends that have held the format back; but with that said it still comes off as rather basic and bare-bones. It’s enough to stave the wait for Fallout 4, but it isn’t something that will keep you engaged forever.

Rating: 6.5/10

The problem with Ubisoft games today

Assassin’s Creed Syndicate, the ninth main entry in the series, has recently arrived in the hands of gamers worldwide; yet despite the game being seen as a marked improvement over Unity, there’s an air of apathy and disinterest surrounding the game. It was recently announced that the game has had the worst launch in the series history in the UK (Quite ironic considering the game takes place in London) according to Destructoid, despite reaching number one in the charts. The gaming community has been growing tired of the franchise for a few years now and this raises another question about AAA development at Ubisoft; have their franchises blended in to soulless open world shells comprised of checklists and completion lists? While there are a few unique ideas that come out of the corporation, such as Valiant Hearts: The Great War and Grow Home, most of their AAA games are suffering of late. Here are a few of my own reasons as to why this is the case.

1. Sequels that step backwards, rather than move forwards

It is more difficult than ever to go bigger, to progress forward with every new release, and nowhere is that more evident than in modern video game development. Because of this we’ve seen the annual cycle become widely used to turn a consistent profit and as a result, innovation has suffered. For seven years now, the Assassin’s Creed series has taken the biggest blow from this, with Unity and Rogue in particular suffering in 2014. Unity was not only a fairly sizeable step back from 2013’s pirate focused Black Flag, but it was also released in a buggy state that put a lot of people off. Rogue on the other hand was simply competent and nothing more; a heavily muted farewell to the Colonial era that began with Assassin’s Creed III in 2012. The expectation to progress, to really take a franchise to the next level has become more difficult and less desirable with every passing year. Far Cry has also suffered, though to a lesser extent than Assassin’s Creed. Far Cry 4, which came out last year didn’t receive as much high praise as its predecessor did, and felt like more of an incremental upgrade than a direct sequel. Now we’re seeing the next Far Cry with the caveman focused “Primal”, which is set to release early in 2016. While it may make sense in terms of raking in profits, it would greatly benefit Ubisoft’s franchises if they gave each entry an extra year or so.

2. Reusing and repackaging systems from several franchises

The other major problem with AAA development at Ubisoft is that franchises have begun to blend into each other with similar game mechanics. The most prominent feature which has entered Far Cry and most recently Watch Dogs is the idea of surveying or activating something to plot points on the map. In another case the stealth system from Splinter Cell games has found its way into Assassin’s Creed; this includes crouched movement and outlines that display the last spot the player was discovered. By blending game mechanics in different franchises, Ubisoft titles may end up all feeling the same and this will make the community even less excited than they are currently for Assassin’s Creed: Syndicate. The incremental release cycle has also exposed some deficiencies in mission design which is really holding Ubisoft back from other open world franchises. Stealth missions where you must tail and eavesdrop on targets with instant fail states in Assassin’s Creed, on-rails sections which take control away from the player in Ghost Recon and missions where you find yourself doing busy work with no real payoff in WatchDogs. For every “Kick the Hornet’s Nest” from 2012’s Far Cry 3 we now have five dull tailing missions with little to no spark or imagination. A lack of creativity in this area has left Ubisoft titles feeling less and less memorable by the year; each of Ubisoft’s major franchise needs to work to form its own identity, while also coming up with some unique mission designs to engage the player more effectively.

3. UPLAY and digital rights management

While I didn’t think much of it when playing their games on console, Ubisoft has had a rough reputation with PC players for many years; lacklustre PC ports and graphical downgrades are small potatoes compared to Ubisoft’s highly intrusive and highly undesirable restrictions caused by UPLAY and Digital Rights Management. It all started back in 2009 when the “service” was first implemented alongside the release of Assassin’s Creed II. Hundreds of fans were eager to try out the game on PC, only the find the game was rendered unplayable because of the Ubisoft’s restrictions on UPLAY servers. If the servers were down, then you couldn’t play the game, there were no ifs or buts about it. Some PC players felt so cheated by this that they continue to look upon Ubisoft with disdain and suspicion every time they have a major release. It’s become a constant fixture in nearly every game published by the company and to this day Ubisoft still isn’t budging, despite the overwhelmingly negative reception; they claim that having UPLAY engaged at all times cuts down on piracy when really all they’re doing is alienating those who do want to support the company by putting down money for a new release. It’s an obstacle that continues to get in the way of PC players enjoyment of Ubisoft titles and while the company did scrap the controversial online passes in their games, they still have a ways to go before they earn the full respect of the PC community.

4. A general lack of heart, soul and sometimes effort

Despite the large amount of work that goes into creating each game world in Ubisoft’s franchises, some have become quite static in the way they deal with open world gameplay. It’s argued by some that Assassin’s Creed now boils down to a static map with a series of tick boxes and checklists that stand in for its. I mentioned before that Ubisoft’s recent titles have tended to step backwards rather than move forwards; compounding this irksome trait is the unshakeable feeling that Ubisoft titles don’t really do too much to fix things that have dogged their biggest franchises over the years. With every yearly iteration of Assassin’s Creed, we see a few flaws and negative aspects about gameplay mechanics pop up, particularly where parkour, stealth and enemy AI are concerned. Rarely are these issues ever dealt with fully which again brings up the yearly cycle; it’s just not enough time to polish off the game and more often than not it feels like the corporation is hammering out sequels without giving developers the time they need to make real progress.

Another issue is that Ubisoft’s narratives and game worlds just don’t have very much personality anymore; the characters in the stories are fairly one note and it’s becoming trickier to get invested. Again, this is down to franchise fatigue and the fact that Ubisoft’s biggest competitors, most notably Saint’s Row and Grand Theft Auto do far more than just make the worlds big and beautiful to look at. Assassin’s Creed Unity didn’t do too well in this regard, relying on the tired story of a father’s assassination and making the romance between Arno and Elise too basic and underwhelming. Some players even cried foul of Ubisoft’s refusal to use French actors for a game set in Revolutionary Paris, which made the overall story even more jarring. Ubisoft needs to discover a way to spice things up, something which will set their game worlds and stories apart and bring them back to the same quality of their earlier games.

5. Distracting business practices

Season passes, multiple editions and microtransactions; these have all become common place in several of Ubisoft’s biggest franchises. If we go back two or more years, these kinds of practices were either far less irritating or practically non-existent. We didn’t have to worry about which version to get or how microtransactions would be incorporated; it was buy the game and jump into it, nothing more and nothing less. Today these practices serve as obstacles that hinder the fans from getting into AAA games that Ubisoft releases. How can we become immersed in the beautiful game worlds the developers create if we’ve got credit packs and other in game currencies getting in the way? Why should we care about what we’re doing in the game when the game is offering microtransactions to get it done faster? Microtransactions began to creep into Ubisoft titles with Assassin’s Creed: Black Flag in 2013 and once again they have made their way into the recently released Syndicate. Like Black Flag, the microtransactions are intended to apparently “save time and accelerate progress” which disrupts and interferes with the game’s flow for the third year running. Winning back the engagement and enjoyment of players with microtransactions is a pretty lacklustre way of going about things and at the moment, it looks like they won’t be going away anytime soon.

What do you think about the state of Ubisoft nowadays? Have they lost their touch or are you still enjoying their games year after year? Let me know in the comments.

Controversy Clocking Episode 4: The Microtransaction Infestation

2015 in gaming has been a pretty solid year; so far we’ve seen the likes of The Witcher 3 and Metal Gear Solid 5 dominate the sales and critics, showing everyone how franchises can progress forward. Now that we’re heading into the holiday season, there are plenty of big names arriving in time for Christmas; Halo 5, Black Ops 3, Star Wars Battlefront, Assassin’s Creed Syndicate, Fallout 4, Just Cause 3, Starcraft II: Legacy of the Void and Rise of the Tomb Raider and the list goes on. While excitement levels remain high, there is one thing that some of these games have in common, something which is putting a bit of a dampener on things. You guessed it; microtransactions.

The little payments are quite literally everywhere nowadays; almost every AAA release has to have them and they just keep getting worse every year. Metal Gear Solid 5's so called "base insurance", Halo 5's requisition packs, Rise of the Tomb Raider’s cheat cards, Assassin’s Creed Syndicate; they all have microtransactions. It doesn’t matter what kind of defence the developer throws our way, they are a massive detriment to the industry and always will be. So why do they still exist? Well because people keep paying for them.

While most uses of microtransactions are inherently bad, there are a few cases where they are used well; the first two titles that pop into my head are Team Fortress 2 and Guild Wars 2, games which give more than take away. TF2 gives constant item drops as you play as well as a crafting system where you can make rare items yourself. As for Guild Wars 2, not only is the game free of subscription fees, but the microtransactions are restricted to cosmetic items only. Neither of these games becomes unbalanced either; there’s no unfair advantage given to the player who puts down real money. Meanwhile Square Enix has announced that Rise of the Tomb Raider’s “cheat cards” will offer things like bullet resistance and big head mode to players.

The common gamer doesn’t think much of microtransactions; I would argue that the usual thought that goes through consumers is “Oh it’s only a little bit of money. I’ll just buy a pack or two to save myself some time”. What people don’t realise is that every time someone puts down some money for these little things, even in small amounts, it gives them an excuse to keep putting them in games and making them stingier in the process.

Microtransactions have taken the place of cheat codes; it used to be as simple as putting in a cheat code; now you put in your credit card instead. In other cases they bait you into paying out real money to avoid the grind. I once paid out a tenner for battle packs in Mass Effect 3 multiplayer through the PlayStation Store, but when I tried to open one of the packs, an error occurred and the pack wouldn’t open, meaning I’d just wasted about a fiver. Was I able to get a refund? Of course not. Just like pre-orders, once you part with your money it can’t be returned; that was the moment where I decided no, I wouldn’t hand over any more money in this way. I would pay for the game (and possibly some downloadable content if it was good value for money) and that would be the end of it, nothing extra.

The most recent and most egregious case of microtransactions in gaming has come from PayDay 2. Released in 2012, developer Overkill went on record to say that there would not be microtransactions in the game. Yet just a few days ago, they went right ahead and put them in anyway with the recent Crimefest update. The community has been pretty angry for the past week, claiming that the developer has abandoned their once respectable focus on their customers. Payday 2 and Destiny are two fairly large games which added micro transactions after a period of time; what’s to stop other companies from doing the same thing? Activision came out to say that they could “make hundreds of millions” in Destiny off of emotes and other silly little things; and what about Star Wars Battlefront? DICE has said that the game won’t have any battle packs at launch, but as we all know by now, they’ve been at the mercy of their publisher for several years and may be forced to add the battle packs later.

The aftermath

Ultimately micro transactions are a problem which will be surprisingly resilient in the years to come; no matter how much condemnation they receive, it won’t completely stop everyone from buying them. If this really is the only way for game companies to turn up a profit, then this isn’t the way to go about it. These days a game needs more than just the best graphics, design and gameplay, it needs to have the strongest ethics and business practices. If all companies treated their customers right and eliminated these mini-payments, amongst the other things I have talked about, they would earn the desired sales figures, not force them out of people by nickling and diming them wherever possible. I suppose the only thing anyone can do is just refuse to buy them. Maybe if enough people do this, then the micro transactions will eventually go away.

Light up the Dark Album Review

Release Date: 18^th September 2015

Published by Parlophone Records

Gabrielle Aplin’s latest album is a progressive one in many ways, one that moves into new territory while downplaying the subdued style of her first studio album. After a two year gap, the young artist has entered the realm of indie pop and neo soul with successful results.

Since her small beginnings doing covers on YouTube, Aplin has risen to a great deal of fame in the UK, her soothing voice delivering a slower and more methodical style that satisfied those looking for more mellow compositions. This was especially prevalent in her debut album, English Rain, which was certified gold after selling 100,000 copies. Released in May 2013, Gabrielle Aplin homed in on folk and pop pieces to start off her career with songs such as Salvation, Home and Panic Cord all proving to be very popular amongst a general audience.

Light up the Dark, which Aplin produced alongside fellow British producer Luke Potashnick is far more upbeat and soulful than anything she has done before. It also boasts a very jazzy look and style, with a black and white filter applied to both the art work and several music videos. There’s a greater emphasis on guitar riffs alongside a more lively use of the piano. The primary singles on the album; Sweet Nothing and the titular Light up the Dark are incredibly energetic pieces that are sure to strike a chord with general audiences as well as fans of the indie scene. Overall, it’s a strong step up from the simpler tunes that Aplin has stuck with over the past few years.

The more peaceful and lyric based style hasn’t been abandoned completely in Light up the Dark, as shown by the likes of Heavy Heart and The House we never built, but Aplin builds upon what came before with the addition of more instruments such as percussion and a light touch of drums, as well as stretching her vocals further with higher notes. The one caveat to the album is that there’s little in the way of emotive, sombre tracks that were so widely enjoyed in the previous album.

Ultimately Light up the Dark may not fully entice those who found themselves drawn to Aplin at the start, but it shows that she is willing to grow and expand as an artist.

Rating: B

The Martian Movie Review

Released: October 2^nd 2015 (General Release)

Directed by: Ridley Scott

Starring: Matt Damon, Jessica Chastain, Kate Mara, Kristen Wiig, Sean Bean, Jeff Daniels, and Chiwetel Ejiofer

Runtime: 141 Minutes

Certificate: 12A

The inhospitable surface of Mars is a stunning backdrop for Ridley Scott’s newest outing, The Martian; Scott has distinguished himself as a strong contributor to science fiction and he does it again here with what can easily be considered one of his best films.

Based on the novel of the same name by Andy Weir, The Martian follows the NASA crew of Ares III as they carry out a mission on Mars; but when a raging dust storm compromises the mission, Botanist Mark Watney (Matt Damon) is left behind in the confusion. Wasting no time with exposition or side plots, The Martian flings the viewer straight into the action which cuts between Watney’s survival on Mars and NASA’s efforts to “bring him home” as the tagline states. The most surprising thing about The Martian though is that it’s a very light hearted movie; if you were expecting a bleak and serious struggle for survival along the lines of Cast Away then you’ll be just as pleasantly surprised as I was. There’s a great variety of humour mixed into just about every aspect of the film which strikes a stark contrast against the difficulty of Watley’s predicament. A great sense of progression over the film’s runtime is also present as plans come to fruition and Watley makes further progress in his efforts to stay alive. When NASA, the Ares III crew and other organisations all come together, it’s incredibly gratifying and the film’s final moments are laced with an uplifting and hopeful tone.

The characters that comprise The Martian are relatively straightforward and simple, but they interact with each other in a very natural way, something which hasn’t really been seen in Ridley Scott’s science fiction films since the 1979 film Alien. At the centre is Matt Damon, who turns in a very likeable and charismatic performance as Mark Watney; as the film goes on, his constant narrations and quips draw the audience in, cluing them in to the scientific undertones while keeping the plot moving at a steady pace. The side characters; comprised of the NASA employees on Earth and the crew of the Aeres are equally well defined. Jessica Chastain strikes a particularly good balance between her authority as the mission commander and responsibility for her fellow crew mates. The likes of Jeff Daniels, Chiwetel Ejiofer and Sean Bean are also very convincing in their portrayals of Teddy Sanders, Vincent Kapoor and Mitch Henderson respectively. The characters of The Martian ultimately feel real, and that’s a more effective tool to make the audience root for them than any other.

To make its special effects more authentic and engaging, The Martian features input and contributions from NASA and it really shows; the film boasts one of the most fully featured and realised portrayals of space travel yet seen in a modern science fiction. The way the Aeres III crew operates, not to mention the methods Watley uses to produce food and stay alive seem quite plausible, creating a sense of wonder in the audience. There really isn’t a single area of the film which is lacking in terms of visuals, from the cinematography to the use of on-set filming. Wadi Rum in Jordan was used to replicate the surface of Mars and it looks incredibly believable; this is aided by the sweeping camerawork where we look across the vast and beautiful landscapes. The Martian also makes use of a varied and fitting soundtrack, with serene background tracks placed against classic disco tunes which adds to the light-hearted tone. Rounding off the package is a collection of special effects for the scenes in outer space and these boast an enormous sense of scale that can stand alongside the likes of other films in the genre such as Gravity and Interstellar.

All in all, The Martian comes together brilliantly; its refreshingly light-hearted tone, relatable characters and top notch effects make it one of the best films of the year and a solid return to form for Ridley Scott. With luck, the director will have more strong sci-fi stories in store for us for the foreseeable future.

Rating: 4.5/5 Stars

Controversy Clocking Episode 3: Deus Ex Mankind Divided and toxic pre-order culture

Pre-orders have come under a lot of scrutiny in recent years. What was once a way to guarantee a copy of a highly anticipated game on day one has turned into a point of scepticism and suspicion. When a major title announces its pre-order scheme nowadays, many questions are asked; are the game companies being truthful in their representation of the final product? How is content divided among all the retailers and online stores which will distribute the title? Are aspects of the game being cut out and restricted to people who pay early? These questions have prompted many individuals, most notably YouTuber TotalBiscuit to stop pre-ordering all together (Which he discusses in the video above). Frankly there’s not much trust or indeed any reasonable benefit to pre-orders anymore; so where did they go wrong? It all comes down to the drive for profits.

There was a time when pre-orders were so simple; I remember purchasing InFamous for the PS3 back in 2009, the game came with an access code for the Uncharted 2 multiplayer beta. That was it; there was only one piece of downloadable content restricted to pre-orders, the Gigawatt blade, and that was a tiny portion of the entire game which could easily be skipped without feeling cheated. Nowadays, there are pre-order incentives everywhere and each retailer absolutely has to have their own little slice of content to boost their personal sales. Watch Dogs was one of the biggest examples of this; nine, count them, NINE different versions of the game went up for sale at several different retailers, meaning that no matter which edition you chose, you were going to lose out on some content. On top of that, Ubisoft also put out a season pass for downloadable content that we knew nothing about. Of course all the content from each of these editions was eventually released onto digital marketplaces for consumers to buy for an additional set of fees. It’s clear what their goals were from the offset and apparently it paid off; Watch Dogs became the most successful new IP in Ubisoft’s history, breaking the record for day one sales. If this proves anything, it’s that pre-order culture is still very much alive and well, even as it continues to degenerate into one of the biggest money-making ploys in gaming.

The most recent case of pre-order rubbish in the games industry stems from the upcoming Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. “Augment your pre-order” was a horrendous system; encouraging consumers to pre-order and then tell everyone else to do the same in order to gradually unlock what they called tier bonuses, which included extra missions and the worst of all, getting the game five days early. Rarely has there ever been a point where content has been split up so vigorously whilst hype culture is exploited to the highest level. It was done solely to maximise profits before the game was even out and it’s quite shocking that anyone would actually buy into this practice. The practice on the whole was almost like an infestation, ripping off one consumer, before spreading to others and the only way to be guaranteed every bit of content was to pay out an insulting one hundred and fifty dollars for the Collector’s Edition. Suffice it to say, consumers and critics of the industry were furious and demanded the system to be cancelled.

Pre-orders on the whole have become a pretty poor value for all consumers; in the case of games like Watch Dogs, most were practically forced to put down more money to get the extra content that was left out of the version they pre-ordered via digital means, whereas with other titles like Halo: The Master Chief Collection, hundreds of customers were left with a broken game and had no real opportunity to get their money back. The bottom line is that they have your money already, so why should they care if it negatively impacts you in terms of value? Getting the game on day one is a small benefit, compared to the numerous opportunities it gives companies to rip you off. It’s gotten to the point where the only reason why people pre-order is to get access to this additional content and little else.

The aftermath

Thankfully, game developers and publishers are listening, now more than ever. Nowhere has that been more evident than this year. Following the largely negative feedback, Square Enix and Eidos Montreal have cancelled the “Augment your pre-order” scheme, offering all content with a single pre-order rather than splitting the content up. It feels like consumers are finally having a proper voice against the practices that are plaguing the game industry. With that said, pre-orders are still a very controversial topic as when you hand companies your money early on, it’s practically a free pass for them to cut content and throw in other bad practices. There won’t ever be a time when all consumers are completely informed about the ways game companies treat their customers but this has been a step in the right direction. Another positive change that happened recently was a new law in the UK; the Consumer Rights Act will now ensure that full refunds can be given for faulty or unsatisfactory digital goods purchase for thirty days after purchase. Other countries where games are sold should seriously consider this kind of law as it will significantly cut down on the times companies can get away with shipping broken products to market.