A Few Thoughts on SOMA

It's October, so I decided to take this opportunity to catch up on a few scary games I've been planning to play. These articles won't be full blown reviews - more like rants, really.

First up is SOMA by Frictional Games, the creators of the famous Amnesia: The Dark Descent. Amnesia played a major role in bringing horror games back into the scene but its sequel, developed by The Chinese Room, disappointed a lot of fans. Now that Frictional itself has taken the reigns again, can they measure up to their prior achievement? 

I won't leave you in suspense - the answer's no.

I don't always agree with the general consensus, but in SOMA's case, I think the critics' and audience's overall impressions are pretty spot-on: The game has great writing and visuals and deals with some powerful uncomfortable themes, but it's bogged down by problems with its gameplay. 

I won't get too deep into spoiler territory, but as its marketing material shows, SOMA is set in a more futuristic time era. In your journey, you'll be met with robots and AIs, some of which believe they are human, and others were human once. As the border between an AI and a human being becomes more and more blurred, you're presented with the notion of copying someone's "brain" leading to two "instances" of a person. Is the copy a real person? Is it the same person? For the questions and uncomfortable scenarios it presents, SOMA is well worth checking out. It also has varied and beautiful setpieces, with a lot of time spent on the ocean floor to my surprise. In those regards, I'd say it's ahead of Amnesia.

But that's about the only thing it has over Amnesia.

Amnesia and SOMA both include large areas to explore with the threat of monsters, but the exploration in SOMA is endlessly more frustrating and less rewarding. It all starts with the mechanics. Amnesia and SOMA both have a 'sanity' mechanic, but only Amnesia has real 'health.' You could check out your menu at any time to observe both in Amnesia. Additionally, you had much more influence on your sanity in Amnesia as well. How? The answer is light. To contextualize, standing in the dark slowly drained your sanity and the game offered tools to combat this:
Tinderboxes and lamp oil. A tinderbox would allow you to ignite a light source like a candle permanently, but it was fixed in place. Lamp oil gave you a mobile light, but the oil would run out eventually. This added a dynamic where light would protect you from the dark, but it would also allow monsters to see you more easily.

Not only did the sanity mechanic allow for many interesting risk/reward considerations, it also made the exploration more rewarding. Exploring the sprawling, huge areas before making progress could improve your chances of survival by finding precious medicine, tinderboxes or lamp oil. To bring it back to SOMA, there's none of that. You have a flashlight which never runs out, and although you can suffer some kind of sanity damage, you can only repair it by single use interactable objects placed in significant areas. This also takes away the elegant logic of Daniel (from Amnesia) recovering his sanity because he solved a puzzle or made significant progress, though I can't get into exactly how SOMA justifies it without spoilers. But the point here is that there's only one reward for thorough exploration: more story. It's not an insignificant reward if you're hooked on the world of SOMA, but the lack of immediate connection with the gameplay made it less impactful than finding a few tinderboxes and a note detailing Daniel's backstory.

But having just story as a reward for exploration isn't necessarily a flaw, if only the exploration itself wasn't so frustrating. Where SOMA really falls flat on its face is the monsters. Though their designs are cool and they'll certainly give you a fright the first few times you see them, the means to avoid them will soon turn them into nuisances. The rules for the monsters are generally:

1. Don't look at them.
2. Don't make any noise around them.

That's really scary at first, but the monsters are mobile enough - some of them teleport - that you'll encounter them very often. The charm of hiding in a corner for a minute until a monster passes wears off really fast. SOMA doesn't offer dedicated hiding spots or doors that need to be broken down like Amnesia, and most monsters will catch you if they're after you, so it feels like there's little to no room for strategy beyond just quietly waiting. This turns a thorough search of a complex area from a tense rewarding experience into a frustrating waiting game. Additionally, when you're caught, the monster usually leaves you for dead, giving you a second chance to escape. You only die if you're caught twice in a short time or at certain story moments. This might remove even more of the tension for some players, though it was ironically probably implemented to prevent frustration.

That about sums it up, I think! Ignoring the frustrating monsters, the game has plenty of interesting puzzles and cool areas to explore. The game actually has a version that excludes the monsters, which you may want to try. That doesn't really solve the problem, though; with no looming threat at all, the tension is completely gone. SOMA does need monsters, it just needs better ones.

To summarize this incoherent rant, SOMA is a horror game with interesting themes, beautiful setpieces and interesting puzzles, but the experience is ruined in part by obnoxious monsters who will initially scare you but eventually do nothing but slow you down and block your progress. The monsters and exploration are a huge step down from its predecessor Amnesia: The Dark Descent, even if it is the latter's superior in terms of story and themes.

Life is Strange's Ending: A Meeting With Fate & Contrivance #2 (SPOILERS)

A little while ago, I wrote a blog post about Life is Strange's ending and why I believed it to be contrived.

I have received a fair amount of feedback in the meantime, some good and some bad. A lot of people feel that, between the recurring visions of the tornado and the obvious damage done to nature, the way the ending is resolved is actually quite natural. I still disagree, as I already covered that topic in my first post, but I understand that this isn't set in stone.

With that said, I'm still going to offer my suggestion for how I would've handled the ending. Apparently, it's fairly common for people to describe ways to 'fix the ending,' but I'd still like to get my own thoughts in on the topic.

Let me start with my premise. The final choice should not have been between Chloe and Arcadia Bay, but between Chloe and Max. 

source: VG247

Let's examine a few facts that might support this idea. While it is true that Max's powers seem to have adverse effects on nature, another negative effect is much more apparent - namely, the effect it has on Max herself. Trying to go further back than a short amount literally causes Max to exclaim that trying 'hurts too much,' and her power regularly results in her getting nosebleeds and headaches throughout the game. Indeed, while the effects on nature seem inconsistent and hardly more than background events, the damage to Max is a constant, obvious threat.

And on top of the aforementioned implications, let's not forget how the narrative of the game flows. Many of the choices you make are actually choices between Max or Chloe's well-being. For example, the very first major choice involving Chloe is either taking the blame for the pot in her room, or making her take the blame herself. Chloe will also regularly force Max to choose between her and her other friends - discouraging her from answering Kate on the phone, for example.

You might argue that, consequently, the ending makes some sense: Chloe regularly asks you to make sacrifices for her, and then, you have to choose between her or making the ultimate sacrifice. And while I understand the idea of sacrificing Arcadia Bay, this choice seems out of place when compared to all the others. Note that almost all the other choices are directly related to Max's personal situation; choosing between Chloe and Kate, or Chloe and David, or Chloe and Warren. All of these choices are essentially overwritten, thrown out the window, by this one final choice. It seems like little more than a way to force what was a complex branching story into two arbitrary branches, which is why I still hold that the choice and its consequences were contrived.

And as mentioned before, there are more facts backing this up than something as floaty or unsubstantial as the "flow of the narrative." The effects of Max's powers, and how they reflect much more clearly on her own health than on the environment, are an important argument here. In fact, the damage to nature - as mentioned - happened regardless of how much or little you use your time rewinding powers. In fact, even in the "alternate timeline" you create in Episode 3 where Chloe's dad never died and Max never experienced the event that made her discover her powers, there are still beached whales and similar signs of a damaged natural world. So, to summarize, because this conflict develops outside of your control, forcing you to make a choice based on it is a contrivance. What have you been shaping throughout the entire story? Max and Chloe. Compared to that, Arcadia Bay is just a backdrop. As a result, I come back to my premise: Between the implied damage to Max, the elusive and uncontrollable nature of the "fated hurricane" and how many choices and scenes are about Max and Chloe, a more fitting final choice would have had you choosing between the two of them. 

Either way, that's my two cents. I took way too long about finishing this fairly brief critique, but I hope I've offered some insight. I'm well aware that there might be things I have missed, and that there is room for other perspectives, so please feel free to respond to this blog with your criticism.

Life is Strange's Ending: A Meeting With Fate & Contrivance #1 (SPOILERS)

I recently took some time to complete Life is Strange, a narrative game not unlike those developed by TellTale. I was generally quite impressed with the game, but the ending left me a little disappointed. In this piece, I'll explain my problems with the finale to Dontnod's successful narrative project.

To establish the most important details, in Life is Strange the player takes on the role of Max Caulfield, a photography student who somehow gains the power to reverse time. This power manifests itself when Max witnesses an old friend get shot, and she uses it to save her from this fate.

From this point onwards, Max uses her power almost constantly in the story. Personally, I rather liked the concept; being a student in photography, her passion was always capturing the moment in a way she envisioned, and limited time reversal added to that in an interesting way. To me, it didn't matter so much that the game never properly explained where this power came from; but it also made it very hard to swallow how the game decided to resolve the ending.

Throughout the story, Max and her friend Chloe - the person she saved - are on the trail of a missing student called Rachel Amber. Her disappearance is suspicious, to say the least, and ties in with repeated hints that there is a darkness, a storm brooding within Arcadia Bay, and the Blackwell Academy where Max studies. A conspiracy between certain students, teachers and influential families. This concept is further supported by repeated visions Max has of a huge tornado seemingly consuming Arcadia Bay. 

All of this reaches its peak when all the player's preconceptions are overturned, and the identity of the darkness lurking in Arcadia Bay is revealed as Mr. Jefferson, a teacher at Blackwell. As it turns out, he's been kidnapping students, involving them in bizarre photoshoots and then murdering them. So consider my surprise when Mr. Jefferson was caught very early in Episode 5, and an actual real tornado then shows up to wreak havoc on Arcadia Bay. So, all of the dialogue about the Prescott family, the students that went missing, the 'lurking darkness,' the brooding storm - it all boils down to an actual tornado just appearing out of nowhere. And not just that, but according to the game, it's Max's fault. 

Even though Max had her first vision of the storm and tornado before she even discovered her power, in the final minutes of Episode 5 you're told that averting Chloe's fate is the cause of all this. Because Max saved her, the powers-that-be decided that Arcadia Bay should be destroyed by a tornado.

To be fair, the game takes several moments to demonstrate that Max's powers may have an adverse effect on the world. Starting with out of season snow and dead birds, moving on to dead whales and a double moon, it can't be said that the eventual tornado came out of nowhere. But with that said, several characters in the story can live or die - Kate and Frank, for example. But regardless of whether they live or not, nature still gets messed up. Why is it that rescuing Chloe was seemingly all it took to completely unbalance nature? It's completely contrived, and for one specific reason: the final choice.

You either go back to the moment Max saved Chloe, and let her die to prevent the tornado from happening, or watch the tornado tear Arcadia Bay apart killing who-knows-how-many people. Outside its context, the choice is actually incredibly powerful; save the few you know, or the many you don't? But the fact that it all boils down to a tornado you supposedly caused using your unexplained power - that really took the emotion out of the choice for me. The game essentially used a Diabolus Ex Machina, and then said 'Look at this. This contrived conflict is your fault.' I sacrificed Arcadia Bay in favor of Chloe because I felt that choice best reflected my defiance of this supposed "responsibility."

So, to summarize; the game hints at an underlying mystery or conflict you're solving - a conspiracy between unknown powers - along with strange occurences in the natural world. You wouldn't be foolish for thinking the two were related, but as soon as the story's major conflict - the disappearance of Rachel Amber and the masterminds behind it - is resolved, an actual tornado shows up to wreck the city for no real reason - just because you saved someone at the start of the game. Since your power is not properly explained, it can also not resolve this plot hole. 

In my next piece, I'm going to write what I initially expected the final choice to be and why I feel that would've suited the story better.

As always, nothing I've written here is fact or truth. Please feel free to respond if there's something I've overlooked. Feedback is always appreciated, even if it's harsh! See you in the next one!

Correction (23-01-16): It was pointed out that Life is Strange is not Dontnod's first project, so I changed the opening line a bit to reflect the facts.