Nukid101's Top 10 Disappointments Of 2014: 5 - 1

5) Interstellar

There was a time not too long ago when Christopher Nolan looked almost unstoppable. Why in 2010 he had just made Inception - a potential candidate for being his best film – right after making The Dark Knight, another contender for being his best film. He was considered by many to be the modern Stanley Kubrick, only Nolan’s films actually made a ton of money. With not a single bad film under his belt Nolan was a film critics’ darling and a favourite of millions of filmgoers.

……Then The Dark Knight Rises happened.

After that it’s not quite been the same. While not directing any films between Rises and Interstellar he was attached to such films like Man Of Steel and Transcendence, both of which were awful. Still, many of us hoped that Interstellar – his love letter to the sci-fi genre – would remind us why this man was once the next big thing in Hollywood.

It instead reminded us why he’s no longer the next big thing.

There are really two big reasons Interstellar doesn’t work. The first is a complaint that most people are familiar with when it comes to Nolan, and that’s his penchant to over explain everything. Seriously if you think Hideo Kojima is bad at having too much dialogue, just sit through a Nolan film. He’s definitely a man who likes to have his characters talk about the things going on around him, and in films like Inception I would say this works. Interstellar however is hurt by it.

There are moments in Interstellar that are simply jaw dropping and inspire the same awe films like 2001: A Space Odyssey once inspired…only Stanley Kubrick didn’t ruin much of through long winded explanations about the science behind said moment. I get why Nolan felt he had to do this – the film tries to be very hard science with actual scientific theories as the groundwork for much of the film – but so much weight to the feel is lost because the viewer is taken out of the moment by it. The discussions on science the films brings frankly should’ve been left to discussions of the film, NOT in the film itself.

The second reason this film doesn’t quite work is a bit harder to explain, but it comes down to what the film’s final message is. Not to give too much away, but by the end the film puts force the idea that love in the universe is a power in itself; one that can pierce the boundaries of time and space itself.

Now for a film this isn’t a bad theme at all, as contrary to the hard science fixation of the film it is, and the pieces are here to make it work…but frankly Nolan fails to make it work, and to understand exactly why one must remember who was originally supposed to direct this film: Steven Spielberg.

Both Spielberg and Nolan are great filmmakers…but not for the same reasons. Spielberg is the wizard of whimsy; his films are often enchanting, upbeat and sentimental, so naturally if he’d have directed Interstellar he could’ve knocked themes like the humanistic heart over mind belief or the metaphysical notion of love being a quantifiable force like gravity out of the park.

Instead we have Nolan directing this film, and let me reiterate that he is great at what he does...except Nolan as a director isn’t fun or whimsical, he’s observant, detached and asexual. His films often lack warmth or catharsis because it often seems like Nolan’s films are staring intensely at the shortcomings and ugly sides of all people. Therefore when Nolan tries to be like Speilberg and throw out such heartfelt themes in Interstellar...

...Well, as Moviebob put it, it feels like a fundamentally inhuman alien struggling to grasp basic human emotions. Or to put it more simply Christoper Nolan trying to make a Speilberg movie.

And I’m of mind that he didn’t succeed. Kudos for trying and by no means do I think directors or anybody should just stick in their comfort zones, but for me Nolan’s first attempt at something less psychological and more humanistic didn’t quite work.



4) The Evil Within

It was quite disappointing that The Evil Within failed to live up the expectation surrounding it because it would’ve been the perfect thing to play after Alien: Isolation. Now I adore Alien: Isolation; it’s atmospheric, subtle and nerve-wrecking in how defenceless you are against an unbeatable threat, and it’s the kind of horror that’s been slowly making a return with other titles like Amnesia: The Dark Descent and Outlast.

That said, I still consider myself partial to over the top gore fests like Dead Space and Resident Evil 4 and The Evil Within seemed very reminiscent of those, particularly the latter, which scored extra points from me since Resident Evil 4 is the only RE game I’ve ever liked. Point is after nerve-wreckingly trying to avoid the Xenomorph for several hours, something like The Evil Within where I blow the heads off of everything in front of me was the perfect antithesis to that.

And in some ways it was...just a shame the game had to be so bloody generic about it.

You see, I call games like Dead Space and Resident Evil 4 over the top, but one thing that can’t be denied is that both games have identity. Dead Space is a sci-fi horror game that makes you feel like you’re involved firsthand in a sci-fi horror film while still managing to be a game through immersive design and tight controls. Resident Evil 4 could arguably be considered a parody of horror in general – or maybe just the Resident Evil series – with its over the top splatter violence combined with a sense of ironic B-movie camp. You may not like these games, but you can’t deny that they have unique identities.

The Evil Within however lacks any real identity of its own. While my above examples took inspirations and made their own thing, The Evil Within is unfortunately a hodgepodge of various video game horror genres that are shoved in for the sake of saying that they have them. This game would’ve worked if it’d embraced the over the top splatter violence like Resident Evil 4, but no, the game has to shoehorn in stealth missions that are out of place with the rest of the game, just so it can say it’s part of the Outlast crowd as well.

It also tries to move into Silent Hill territory with some mind-fucking sections that strive to confuse the mind with illogical events and impossible geography, but these worked in the better Silent Hill games because the games were more than just surrealism and built themselves around strong characterisation. The Evil Within’s characterisation however it utterly laughable. Much like Far Cry 4 the lack of engaging characters hurts the game immensely due to their inability to make us care about the events of the game. The main protagonist Sebastian is every silent, grizzled, angsty video game protagonist in a nutshell, while the rest of the cast ticks off the rest of the horror cliché sheet.

In short the game is horrendously generic. In fact in this regard the game I’d end up comparing it to the most is L.A. Noire. Like L.A. Noire with...well, Noire The Evil Within doesn’t really know what themes, character motivations or story it wanted to tell, it just knew it wanted to be a horror game, so we just end up with a generic mesh of all different kinds of horror tropes and clichés that never come together to a satisfying whole.



3) Destiny

Y’know, as disappointing as this game was, I can’t deny that it was also quite amusing that it failed so badly.

There were three games this year that were hyped to an extremely ridiculous extent and promised to be the ‘next big thing’ in gaming. These games were Destiny, Titanfall & Watch_Dogs. I was definitely curious about all three, though I knew better than to get as hyped as some people did. I know and have experienced the mistake of overhyping something you’re excited for and always kept my anticipation realistic.

I sadly never got around to actually play Titanfall but I did hear positive things from others who were careful to not overhype the game. I did however play Watch_Dogs and honestly I really liked it. It wasn’t the next big thing and it had a fair few problems, but it also did a lot of things really well. On its own merits it was a strong start of what will inevitably become a franchise (c’mon, it’s Ubisoft. OF COURSE they’ll make a franchise out of this).

But then there’s Destiny……even realistic expectations couldn’t have prepared people for how mediocre his game ended up being.

What’s surprising in Destiny’s failure is that it fails in ways Bungie have always mastered. Now I’m not a Halo fan in the slightest, but I do have a certain amount of respect for it. In particular I always respected Bungie’s dedication to at least making them with meaty campaign missions (well Halo 3 was a bit short…) whilst also giving them robust multiplayer options. It was a series that tried to mark both modes worthwhile, but what they didn’t do was try to force both modes into one entity. Singleplayer was there for the people with no friends, multiplayer was there for the people who wanted to call other players ‘faggot’.

Destiny however DOES try to meld the two together, making something probably more akin to Borderlands, and playing both this year has made it quite clear that I’m not a fan of that certain genre. Mostly because I have no friends, so walking down large open areas where the only thing to do is shoot at gangs of generic enemies is not my cup of tea and not really something to do on your own.

It is admittedly probably more enjoyable as a multiplayer game, but that doesn’t excuse the fact that the singleplayer is just an incredibly dull slog of an experience. It also doesn’t excuse the absolutely lazy and pathetically short story the game gives us. Christ, this game had little to no interest in actually investing you in this world or its characters, and most of its actual ‘mthos’ was just stuff recycled from Halo.

It does seem like most of its content is inevitably gonna be DLC expansions, so the game is also guilty of being incomplete. It’s also guilty of needing constant online connection during playthrough…even if you’re just playing yourself. Correct me if I’m wrong, but a year ago wasn’t ‘always online’ a buzz word in gaming? What, were people too busy harassing Feminists to be bothered by this now?

But let’s not forget this game’s biggest crime. This game has Peter Dinklage in it…and he’s awful in it!.

Now I don’t blame the D-man. He’s an amazing actor and he’d have made gold with the right material, but considering what he had to work with I doubt anybody could’ve made that interesting. Really the only reason Peter Dinklage was cast in this game seems to have been for stunt casting alone; get a famous actor and have him say a few lines, and bingo you’ve gotten coverage. I wouldn’t have minded really if he’d just been used really well. Kevin Spacey was arguably stunt casting in Call Of Duty: Advanced Warfare too, but at least he was used well in that game!

So that’s why Destiny was a letdown, but again there’s something amusing about its failings. It’s amusing that a game that was hyped to death failed so spectacularly. Perhaps this’ll teach triple A companies to not overhype their products and let their quality and good word of mouth speak for themselves.

……Oh who am I kidding, of course they’ll do this again one day.



2) Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes

This entry however...makes me quite sad.

Anyone who knows me well knows that I ADORE Metal Gear Solid. In fact it is my favourite video game franchise, at least at the moment. It is the franchise whose games I’ve consistently loved and adored. I consider Metal Gear Solid 1, 2 & 3 to be three of the greatest video games ever made, and Metal Gear Rising is at the moment my favourite spectacle fighters of all time too. Hell I even adore Metal Gear Solid 4: Sons Of The Patriots even though I’ll concede it had flaws.

It’s an acquired taste, I’ll give you that. It may have seemed hypocritical of me to bash on Nolan’s penchant for over explaining things when Kojima is almost as bad, but...to me, Kojima is one of the few people who can make it actually work, and my theory for this is that everything Kojima does in his games is filled with unrestrained passion, unlike the dryer and more reserved work of Nolan. I’m being honest when I say that I never felt bored during any Codec scenes in his games, which is a testament to the series strong characterisation and untamed passion.

Whether it’s playing homages to action films he adores, to deconstructing said films, to having serious and socially relevant conversations about modern warfare, Kojima is a creator who wears his influences and his feelings on his sleeves, and he has no reservation in sharing them. Why in the very same series we have one entry that is a love letter to 60s spy and actions flicks...while another is a complete deconstruction of the entirety of video gaming. He has created a world in Metal Gear that utterly embraces its own surrealism while STILL managing to be relevant to events in our own world, and I find it impossible not to embrace it all.

So quite clearly I’m a massive fan of the series...but even I can’t defend Ground Zeroes.

Anyone who at least knows about this game can guess why this got on my disappointment list, so I’ll keep the explanation brief. Ground Zeroes isn’t disappointing because it’s a bad game – in fact in terms of gameplay it’s debatably an improvement to previous game – but because Ground Zeroes isn’t even a game. It’s a tech demo for The Phantom Pain sold nearly the same as a new, actual video game is sold for.

There’s no other words to describe it people. Ground Zeroes is pretty much just advertisement for the actual MGSV. I say this not only because of it’s incredibly short length of about two hours, but because the game has no actual story to it. I have no issues with short games at all – I’ll take a great short game over a bad long game any day – but the problem with Ground Zeroes is that its short length is not used to tell an interesting story but to at best set things up for The Phantom Pain.

And that’s inexcusable. No, you don’t sell a fucking demo for nearly the same price as an actual video game! Jesus, hasn’t the industry gotten enough bullshit already?! Frankly because of this demo’s success I wouldn’t be surprised if other companies try this. It’s just an absolutely insulting cash grab, and what makes it even more upsetting is that Konami and Kojima did this before with Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons Of Liberty, but there they sold it with Zone Of The Enders. That was a great move because buyers got a full game with it and gave a game that many would’ve ignored a chance at success.

So if you ever wanted to hear my feelings towards Ground Zeroes, there you have it. The best I can say about this whole mess is that at least The Phantom Pain is probably gonna be amazing.



1) Assassin’s Creed Unity

Anybody surprised?

I’m sorta on and off when it comes to the Assassin’s Creed franchise. Some of the entries have bored me to tears and I’m not the biggest fan of its gameplay, but when one game has interesting enough characters and an engaging enough narrative I can really get into them. The exception to either case was Black Flag which might as well have not been an AC game since it worked because it was a fun as hell pirate game.

Any cynicism I may have had for the series was initially put to the side when I heard that Assassin’s Creed Unity was gonna take place during the French Revolution, and I got very excited for this game. A lot of people agreed with me that the French Revolution was the perfect setting for an AC game since it was such a violent and chaotic time as an entire country was overthrown and changed violently.

So I waited eagerly for this one, despite the bumpy road. First we found out about its lack of choice to play as a female character in multiplayer, and outrage I supported. I get that making a female player model is likely quite a lot of work, but to me doing such a thing should’ve been a decision at the start. Let’s not forget that the Assassin’s Creed franchise prides itself for its historical accuracy, but anybody who knows a lick about the French Revolution knows how important women were during the period, as several played crucial figures ranging from outspoken activist and writer Olympe De Gouges to famous assassin Charlotte Corday.

And then there was the ‘30fps is more ‘cinematic’’ quote......yea the Bullshit Alarm went off like fireworks then.

Despite all that though, I had hopes for this game. Admittedly somewhat realistic but still optimistic that the game would be good. Obviously though it didn’t meet those expectations by a long stretch, so what happened?

Many things frankly, but most importantly the game is objectively broken.

Fittingly considering my number one disappointment from last year, Unity is a glitchy, broken, unplayable on PC mess of a game that clearly needed to have been worked on for much longer, but no, Ubisoft are insistent on churning one out every year so they sold us a broken product. That is absolutely inexcusable; people can go on about the ‘evils of feminism’ or the ‘lack of objective reviews’ all they want, but frankly releasing games that are clearly unfinished and cannot be played on certain systems is possibly the worst thing you could do in the industry.

One could spend hours talking about the often hilarious broken parts of the game, so instead I’ll focus on the other things the game messes up. Even if you looked past the games many glitches, the game is still lacking as an AC game. What is commendable about the franchise is how it has always tied and woven real life events with the events of game, giving you some feeling of being involved with the history of the world. Unity however poorly uses its setting and treats much of the real life events as side stuff, only marginally connected to the story and instead focuses on the revenge story of Arno and Elise.

Admittedly Arno and Elise are good characters, but seeing the potential wasted in this game is infuriating. Arguably the most interesting and best suited period for this series is not given the examination it deserves, and that’s such a waste. It’s also debatably inaccurate. Believe it or not French Politicians were angered by this game for portraying much of the revolutionists as being barbaric and evil, while the Monarchist are given a more noble and fairer portrayal. I’m not knowledgeable enough on the matter to answer yes or no on this, but I can see where they’re coming from, and it just makes the situation even worse.

Honestly I was surprised Assassin’s Creed: Victory got announced as quick as it did, but I guess Ubisoft are just hoping to sweep this disaster under the rug and continue to make a game every year still. Perfect. Admittedly Victorian London is another great setting for the series, but...I have little to no trust in Ubisoft now. Sadly I’ll be going into that game fully prepared for an unfinished game with wasted potential.

---

And that’s my first countdown done. Stay tuned for more when we can finally start getting through the positives!