Changes in Games

I've been playing Clair Obscur: Expedition 33. It's a recent darling among reviewers, and not without reason. The game is good to play. Mind you, I do struggle on and off with the QTE mechanics that are mixed in with the turn-based combat. It's engaging, though.

There's a lot of heart and emotion in the story that is well-delivered. I have seen clips of DA: Veilguard scenes (but haven't played the whole game, so those are just snippets) that are embarrassingly stilted and clearly scripted. Clair Obscur's dialog has pretty much never hit me that way. Most of it feels so very natural, especially the shock and loss experienced in the first act of the game - and there's plenty of it given the sort of bleak premise of the game.

I don't want to say anything to spoil it for someone who may play, but the wrap of Act 2 and beginning of Act 3 really takes a turn. There are so many reveals there that answer most of the lingering questions (and raise a few more) that the story almost feels like it's starting anew. Also, with the entire map available, there's less linear guidance of where to go, which can lead to some suddenly difficult encounters even with the unlocked damage-per-strike cap ability you get. A number of the encounters have felt like you either put together a build that totally overkills what's in front of you in one attack (which is increasingly possible) or you get stomped flat yourself. Technically, the system makes a lot of these fights possible even at lower levels if you click with the defense system and can dodge/parry everything, but without an effort to make characters deal more damage, you'll be stuck plinking away for 20-30 minutes. I'm not sure I have that kind of focus these days.

That's not to say the game becomes bad in Act 3, just different in several ways. It is still an excellent game and highly remarkable for the (relatively) small development team and (relatively) low price point. I'd readily recommend it to most and would not be surprised if it netted Game of the Year awards.

-

On the other side of things, I've been in a Stars Without Number game for a bit now. The big change there is a player leaving, who happens to have been in the captain role of the group. On a personal level, I wish they were staying, but totally understand needing to reorganize things in life. I've done that myself and never fault anyone for it.

It does seriously change the dynamics of the PCs in-game, though. We have yet to see how that shakes out, precisely, but I do not want to have to spend time reining in one of the stronger egos in the group, as that isn't particularly fun for me.

We're also at a point of deciding what to do next, now that immediate crises have been averted. It was pointed out that a number of the ships in the fleet have some plot associated with them to engage with as a "dungeon" of sorts. That's great, but we're also presented with bigger problems too. Sort of.

I mean, the campaign concept presents the "Infestation" as a constant, looming threat like the Cylons of (new) Battlestar Galactica. In practice, though, we were immediately given information that they knew where the fleet was after a jump meant to shake off pursuit and they did not immediately attack. That totally nerfs the Cylon-like threat because they would attack whenever they showed up. So... if they know where we are anyway and only individuals among them are engaging in terrorist actions, there doesn't seem to be much pressure to flee. That's... good, I guess? Sort of contrary to the campaign pitch, but we'd probably be getting even less done if we had to rally the fleet and jump to a new place every few sessions.

So preventing open war with them and getting the fleet population sustainable are perhaps the two most massive goals at this point. While you could argue they are the long-term goals of the campaign, for the PCs, it's a bit awkward to say "let's put that on the back burner and go do some smaller mission." Ideally, any little mission taken up should be working toward one or both of those goals in some way. 

Pirate hunting? Arguably that could gain resources to assist the fleet. 

Investigation missing people on factory ship? That seems a bit questionable to me, though could benefit the fleet in some sense. Actually, if I'm being purely analytical, missing people means fewer mouths to feed, so stopping that could be detrimental on some level. But we're not eeeeevil.

Tracking governmental opposition? Might help our standing in the fleet, but really doesn't do much toward either primary problem.

So.. not sure how things will play out there...