Call Of Duty Goes After PUBG With Blackout!

I was a able to secure a few codes for the ‘Call of Duty: Black Ops 4, Blackout’ private beta that happened over the past weekend, and my initial thoughts are that it is a faster less janky PUBG.  There are some things that set it apart: instead of artillery zones there are zombies, the map is smaller, the times between circles are shorter and there is a lot more loot out there, so supply drops are a lot less interesting, but other than that, it is a lot like PUBG.

The rounds start off a lot faster in Blackout with eighty-eight people dropping in to a map that is probably a quarter of the size of either of the two larger PUBG maps, so there are less empty places to hide right off the bat.  Generally you will be shooting at someone when your boots hit the ground, or you will be the one getting shot at.  However, if you can survive the drop and the initial chaos, the familiar hide and seek gameplay that PUBG is known for starts to materialize.

Though just because Blackout is more PUBG than Fortnite doesn’t mean it should be skipped.  It runs at a much higher framerate than PUBG, it looks a lot better, still not great, but better, and if you prefer the shooting mechanics of Call of Duty over those of PUBG, this will feel better.  It just feels more polished over all.

The question is will I be shelling out $60 for Call of Duty: Black Ops 4?  I don’t think so.  It isn’t that much better than PUBG, and I personally don’t like Call of Duty’s zero recoil tinny sounding gunplay.  Plus, I am not a fan the standard Call of Duty multiplayer, or do I need to play the latest zombie mode, and you know future Blackout maps will be stuck behind a DLC paywall.  Which is something about big budget shooters that I have always hated.  In other words, there is still too much Call of Duty attached to Blackout for me to switch.  So for the time being I will be hunting down my chicken dinners in the jank-filled swamps of PUBG.

Shmee Tries Out Battlefield V!

I have been playing around with the Battlefield V open beta, and I am happy to report that things are shaping up nicely.  V is not a large departure from Battlefield 1.  It is more of an incremental update.  The characters move a little faster, you get to spectate your squad before jumping in behind them and everyone having automatic weapons makes a lot more sense.  There are no loot boxes, but I am sure once the game launches that there will be microtransactions for cosmetic items.

The biggest changes are how health and ammo are doled out.  When you spawn you get about two clips worth of shells for your primary weapon, so to get more you will need to pick up rounds off of dead enemies or have really good support players making sure they are running around dropping crates and throwing ammo packs.  The same thing for health.  It doesn’t regenerate as fast, so you can get health packs off of the other team, or hopefully your medic isn’t out there just going for kills.  There are also stations to pick up health and ammo, so if your team isn’t handing everything out efficiently you can memorize where those stations are and make them part of your route.

For most players I don’t think these changes are too much of an issue since they will be out there running and gunning, but it does force scouts and campers to have to relocate to go get ammo more often, or have a squad that can keep them in mind and continue to circle back to drop off supplies for them, so while I can tell you there are still plenty of snipers in Battlefield V, it doesn’t seem as bad as the snipe-fest that is Battlefield 1.

If you were hoping for something totally different for Battlefield V, you may be disappointed, but if you just needed some things tweaked and a bunch of new maps, I think you will be very happy when Battlefield V comes out this November.  It will definitely be on my short list, though I have a feeling Red Dead Redemption 2 will occupy my life for the foreseeable future.

With The Division, Ubisoft Continues To Have Problems With Tone

A while ago I complained that Ghost Recon: Wildlands has a tone issue.  It is a very serious setting, but in all actuality it is a co-op version of Grand Theft Auto: Bolivia, but with higher powered weapons.  The Division has the same problem: New York is a wasteland after almost being wiped out by a bio-terror attack, and people are struggling to survive.  Which is a great setting for a third person looter similar to Borderlands, but with cover based shooting.  I mean someone has to go in and murder all those people that are looting and then take all their stuff for themselves.

The Division is all about getting better items so you can shoot bigger bad guys and then in turn get better items.  All the while your character gets more and more ridiculous.  I mean look at this majestic neon trash Mounty:

She has matching neon striped guns and backpack, with purple headphones, and not seen, yellow shoes that she got from giving a sick homeless person a can of pop (like in the real world, the only reason to help the needy is to get cool clothes).  She might look odd now, but trust me, she could be crazier, and yes that icon by her gun does mean she has a turret that shoots taser bullets.

Listen, The Division is a fun game, and looter genre has a great loop.  Getting guns and gear with bigger numbers and cooler abilities is very fun and addicting.  I am just tired of Ubisoft making these super serious worlds and putting silly games in them.  If you are going to have a looter in New York why not do a future version of The Warriors, and then have a bunch of crazy themed gangs (The Division’s flame thrower wielding Cleaners not withstanding).  That way the player will at least feel good about what he is doing in a trashed version of the Big Apple, but no, we get a sad and haunting story mixed with zany gameplay, again.  Ubisoft’s games are good, but they just need to stop trying to be so serious.

Shmee Inspects Hearts Of Stone In The Witcher 3!

Apparently some time ago I purchased The Witcher 3: Hearts of Stone.  I don’t remember doing this.  I do remember getting Blood and Wine so that I could tool around the Duchy of Toussaint (still need to finish it), but at some point Hearts of Stone must have been cheap as well.  Which is good, because while there is not a ton of content in Hearts of Stone, it is one of The Witcher 3’s better stories, and that is saying something.

The expansion starts how most Witcher quests do, with a job: To take down a ‘frog prince’ that is eating foolish women in the sewer system of Oxenfurt.  The man who gives Geralt this missive is Olgierd von Everec, who is a terrible human being, but soon after dealing with this ‘frog’ you are roped in to granting Olgierd three wishes by the mysterious Mirror Master.  Every wish is more difficult to grant than the last.

It is a fun ten-ish hour quest, and you will meet some of Garalt’s old friends, as well as make some new ones, but by far the best part is figuring out what is going on with Olgierd and Mirror Master.  It is strange to say the least.  Is Mirror Master some sort of djinn?  Just some powerful jerk?  And why is Olgierd, the willfully evil curmudgeon that he is.  Depending on your choices you will figure all this out.

The bosses they have added for Hearts of Stone are some of the best too.  The ‘frog prince’ really changes up how most fights work, and there is a wraith towards the end that really threw me for a loop for a while.  Garalt will also get a ton of cool new gear, and depending on your last choice of the expansion, two of the best swords in the game.

All in all Hearts of Stone is a great addition to The Witcher 3, and well worth the ten plus hours you are going to put in to it, but it isn’t a transformative experience, so if you didn’t like The Witcher 3, you will not like this.  It is just more of what made the game great, and that is all I wanted.

Ummm I Guess The Rest Of E3 2018 Was On Cruise Control…

I watched most of E3’s press conferences yesterday, and I was not overly impressed.  Square-Enix should have just skipped it, their 30 minute presentation pretty much only announced a new Dragon’s Quest game, and Ubisoft hit cut and paste from last year.  Which left Sony, and while Sony’s show was at least interesting, and it had this awesome trailer:

The rest of it was stuff we expected or that we had seen before, but with Sony’s amazing production values that at least made the show worth watching.

I am not sure what happened yesterday, last years pressers were so good, but this year, barring Microsoft and Bethesda on Sunday, the shows could have just been boiled down to a couple of new trailers.  It would have saved us all a bunch of time that is for sure.  Oh well, at least there are a ton of good games on the horizon, and I can’t wait to play them.