The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Review

I picked up 'The Witcher 2' thanks to the 'Games with Gold' promotion on Xbox Live. I'd already heard that the highly acclaimed predecessor was a cult classic in the PC community and so this one must be worth at least a try. It needs to do a lot to impress me as it's sitting in a very crowded market that is dominated by franchises such as 'The Elder Scrolls'. This medieval style RPG is nothing new and so to stand out it will need to be unique and innovative. That's a tall order for Polish studio 'CD Projekt RED', who are only know for this series. Poland isn't a well known exporter of electronics, yet alone games, and so I can't help but feel a little bit skeptical about the final product.

I will be honest though, that skepticism went straight out the window quite quickly. This is a polished RPG from an unexpected source, achieving all things an RPG should in its own way. The developers haven't fallen into the trap of forcing you to play the game their way, and although some of the missions are very linear, there is a deep layer of customisation that allows the player to fine tune their experience. You would be forgiven for thinking that this was a proper open world game as it disguises itself quite well. In reality the map really isn't that big, with only a small portion available to the player through each chapter. That's not to say it doesn't look nice, and the developers have crammed a lot into the space available, but it just ends up looking a bit pathetic when compared to the huge maps of games like 'Skyrim'. In this game the world ends up feeling like three really long missions, which is at least something different, although I'm not sure if I'm totally sold on it. Call me a traditional gamer, but I don't think this system enables the player to fully explore the environment or get the best out of a universe rich with lore.

Yep, my first impressions are that this is going to be my sort of RPG.

Another big point that needed to shine was the combat, which I was told had been completely overhauled for the console release. There usually isn't many components to a hack 'n' slash system, but getting it right has proved to be a challenge for even the most experienced developers, yet alone a group of Poles working in a shed. I will admit that it's not the most refined system, but I think the game gets it about right, for the first half anyway. The second half becomes a system that feels like it should belong in an arcade, almost becoming button mashing at some points, which is a shame as up till then the system was well balanced and integrated. During the prologue the system is even pretty damn punishing, but not frustrating. I liked that a lot, and so I can't see why the developers didn't bother to make the game harder as you went along; that certainly killed any progression the game ever had. That's not the only flaw either, the targeting system has a mind of its own. Now that really does get annoying, and makes the combat system more frustrating than anything else. They got the basics right, but anything else on top is just messy.

Fucking lock on system. Of all the times you choose to not work, now really shouldn't be one of them.

So there are notable flaws that become apparent. Good news is that the plot wasn't one of those. Despite the criticism it's been getting on the internet I think it's a very well written story. Maybe the slow and sometimes variable pace put people off, or maybe it's the stages where the developers allow the story to meander along. I thought those sections were still pretty good and allowed characters to develop in very intriguing ways that held the plot together at crucial times. The standout character is without a doubt the very attractive Triss Merrigold, who the protagonist has somehow managed to nail despite being old enough to be her grandfather. That wasn't a complaint, in fact her sex scenes are some of my personal highlights. She even has a magical ability to instantly remove all of her clothes. Yeah, think you can work out who this game is aimed at. For sex scenes this game is fucking brilliant.

The rest of the scenes vary a little. This isn't helped by protagonist Geralt having Batman disease, where you either whisper words or shout them so nobody can understand you. But I'll lay off Geralt as he's a pretty awesome and believable protagonist, which is all you can ask really. My only main problem is that the storyline tends to blast a load of jargon in your face at random intervals. This means the story is quite hard to follow sometimes, and with the vast selection of characters to memories it can become a bit of a jumbled mess on more than one occasion. The game never likes to make things simple, there's always something trying to become the main focus with every mission, and that means you end up with about 15,000 main antagonists by the end of the game who you have no idea what happened to.

 This game was just borderline pornography at some stages. Still, it's rare that I get sexually excited over a collection of polygons and pixels.

All these characters being built up means you expect a big climax. That doesn't really happen, and the momentum that had been built up from the breathtaking prologue gradually fizzes out to the point of it all being a bit of a letdown. Maybe that's too harsh, it's not necessarily bad, just a little tame when compared to what was being built up to happen. It's also a departure from the rest of the narrative, which is well integrated and provides the player with some memorable moments. I really do like the plot in this one, and I really do like the fact that it's told from the point of view of a minstrel. I know that's a small point but it just adds something extra, making the story feel like a legendary tale. That's also a legendary tale that you can shape, as with any good RPG this game has a choice system that's a more unpredictable system than conventional games, and there are no preset right or wrong choices. I wouldn't say they make a huge deal of difference, but it's implemented enough to make you think about what you're doing, and that's something I love in an RPG. In fact the game makes you think about many things before acting on them. The developers never once hold your hand, and so this is a game where you need to use your initiative, which might mean you need to actually follow the plot at some stages. That for me is a nice touch, and shows the developers actually cared about their final product.

However, it's all very well the plot being nicely executed, but that doesn't really matter when you have a number of glaring flaws in your game that really pissed me off. The first is the map, which every RPG needs to function. This one looks very nice, and I do like the medieval styling to it, but as a map it's totally useless. Want to add custom markers? Well you can't. Want to get directions? Well you can't. Want to find out where you are? We'll only give you a rough idea. There isn't even a way of working out the elevation of waypoints, so you can't find anything. It's made worse by the fact that the game just assumes you know everything. It never tells you anything, and so surprisingly you inevitably get lost on a mission when it doesn't even give you any hints. It's like they assume that after a brief tutorial you can read the minds of the developers, when in reality what they want is far from the logical thing. I like it when my hand isn't held throughout the whole game, I even praised the game for doing this earlier, but there is a limit. These glaring faults make it impossible to have fun whilst playing the game your way. It's such a shame as the game was shaping up nicely, only to ruin its reputation on something that shouldn't be difficult to master.

 That is genuinely a section of the map. How in any way am I supposed to find that useful?

I really wanted to love this game. After the storytelling excellence of the prologue I was expecting a masterclass that never came. The niggling little bugs keep piling up until you can't help prioritising them over the well written plot. As an overall game I thought it was excellent. It was only those simple faults that stopped me from enjoying myself too much. The developers do seem to know what they're doing, and so my hopes are high for the sequel. I like that the game manages to find its own little gap in the market, and I would have to seriously consider my choice if I could buy either this or 'The Elder Scrolls'. The later might be a better example of an RPG, but I found myself enjoying this game more.

Final Score: 84/100   ****

Top 10 UK TV Shows

#10 Mock the Week (2005-) (13 Series)

We begin this list with a basic panel show that revolves around recent events and pure comedy. It never hides its comedy origins and never at any stage attempts to become factual. Its entirety is just comedians showcasing their material through various game modes that loosely tie in with current affairs. This might not make it the most interesting programme on television, but it makes up for that with some hilarious jokes and big personalities that eat away at the thirty minute run time. The glory days were when you had the four regulars that are pictured above, including the quick witted Hugh Dennis and the harsh nature of Frankie Boyle, who when on form is quite possibly the finest comedian around. This is all held together by host Dara O'Briain, whos calm personality allows the show to naturally flow through its various segments.

In recent years it may have taken a downturn, with both the regulars and the guests becoming less and less noteworthy through each series, but switch on an episode from about five years ago and it's a guaranteed laugh. That doesn't make it one of those panel shows that you can play along with, in fact you are very much the audience with this show, making it feel a little bit like a vanity parade on the odd occasion. But that's because this is a show solely designed to showcase comedic material, and although there is a pointless scoring system integrated, it tries to stick well clear of traditional panel shows at every opportunity. For that reason I recommend watching the uncut DVDs which showcase some of the harshest and funniest material this show has to offer. Just a shame then that the success is solely down to the talent of the acts, making this a show nine times out of ten a great watch.

#9 Peep Show (2003-) (8 Series)

Probably the longest running comedy that still manages to be funny and original even after eight series. I'm always left amazed at the fact that this programme manages to top its already high standards with each new episode, and although it's coming to an end fairly shortly, that won't stop it from providing viewers with fresh and consistently humorous material. The key to success is the partnership of David Mitchell and Robert Webb, who construct a well thought through comedy with their use of believable and well constructed characters. This allows the humor to flow naturally from the script, and when coupled with the unique first person style it creates a comedy that stands out from the crowded genre. The show may have never been a hit with the public, but when you have two legends like these at the helm then you know it's going to be a special programme. 
 
#8 Never Mind the Buzzcocks (1996-) (28 Series)

The best example of a show that's taken a huge downturn in recent years, becoming a mere shadow of its former glory. I use to love it when hosts such as Mark Lamarr, who is pictured above, or Simon Amstell used to grace our screens, but now the guest host feature has ran its course after being tortured to the point of frustration, leaving the show hosted by Rhod Gilbert; an excellent comedian and a top bloke, but not a good presenter for what used to be a classic panel show. In the good old days it used to be no name celebrities or just music in general getting blasted by the quick wit of Lamarr or Amstell, and that's what made me fall in love with it. Now we have guests who look like they couldn't give a shit slagging someone off because that's what's included in their paycheck. It's a formula that has proven to work, but now it feels like they're forcing comedy out of a panel show that doesn't deserve that treatment.

Series 27 summed it up for me, and I ended up tearing my hair out over some borderline boring episodes. It was such an awkward atmosphere with guest hosts pandering to the panels every statement whilst simultaneously slagging someone off for no reason. Admittedly in older series you did get one legend changing things for the better like Terry Wogan or John Cooper Clarke, but for the majority of episodes it lost that amateur charm that it always used to have. I hate to see this programme being whored out to the mainstream market just for a few cheap laughs, and the only thing that seems to hold this together is Phil Jupitus, who is far from a comedy mastermind. He ends up being the only shred of decency left in what used to be such a good format.

#7 Top of the Pops (1964-2006) (2219 Episodes)

Now then, now then, now then, sorry I had to justify this pick with that image. That will now haunt your dreams for weeks to come. But despite Jimmy Saville's downturn in recent years he was undeniably the face of 'TOTP' for what seemed like ages. His lack of charisma and thick Yorkshire accent complemented the British style of the show perfectly, and just listening to him destroy the pronunciation of people's names never gets old. Who can blame him? This show was responsible for showcasing some pretty unusual bands, and only when the countdown of this week's chart commenced could you tell that this was meant to be about popular music. For a taste of the British music scene there was nowhere else to go but this Friday night staple.

The layout wasn't anything revolutionary. The show kicked off with the iconic riff of Led Zeppelin's 'Whole Lotta Love', and from there came the increasingly bizarre performances of British pop in a style that made it feel like a live performance. That was a ruse as the show was prerecorded, and that did piss off a few big names in the business. As a result the music featured is not really my sort of thing, and don't even get me started on the dance acts like 'Legs & Co'. When they featured it was a miracle that the thing only lasted for half an hour, but I would be lying if I said they didn't contribute to the unique charm of the show. And that charm is what I love most about this quintessentially British music show. If the Americans had produced it then everything would explode every two seconds and we wouldn't get shit acts performing shit songs every Friday. You just can't hate the amateur feel of it all. I would still prefer to watch this every week than tune into those crappy commercial music channels.

#6 Would I Lie to You (2007-) (8 Series)

In my opinion the most simple yet ingenious panel show that exists. The simple premise is to guess whether the other person is lying after being questioned on their humerus anecdote. The panel don't know what these situations are going to be and so being able to think quickly is of paramount importance. Luckily for the viewer this show has two of the finest comedians as team captains; those being the logical and intelligent David Mitchell and the bawdy and quick witted Lee Mack. Together they combine to carry the show along, and never fail to amuse me with their constant banter. Apparently Alan Carr was meant to be one of the team captains, so thank god he didn't get to ruin an excellent programme.

This is quite the opposite of other panel shows like 'Never Mind the Buzzcocks' in that the panel look like they're genuinely having a good time, and that reflects on the entertaining result. It's a game show that you can join in from home, and as a viewer it's great fun to be a part of. Ignore those criticisms from pathetic excuses of human beings that criticize the lack of female panelists, as that has nothing to do with the quality of the show. A panel show doesn't need gender balance to work, and I see these complaints as an attempt at personal gains rather than what's best for the show. Ignoring those comments this is one of the funniest shows on television, and is always worth a watch.

#5 Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? (1998-2014) (30 Series)

The ultimate game show, even if it isn't very high brow. I could never put my finger on why I love this so much. At the end of the day it's just a standard multiple choice quiz with a maximum jackpot of one million pounds. That's considerably higher than the majority of game shows, but still doesn't explain what makes the programme so brilliant. Maybe it was the fact that this was a big step forward for television despite being a no gimmicks attached clone of many others on the market. There are a few twists along the way that make it fun to play along, and its easily digestible format make it an easy watch, but I think its charm comes from the normality of making ordinary people millionaires. At least with this format you don't make wankers millionaires, unlike the lottery. It's now gone global thanks to the UK version, and it's easy to see why, just a shame its run has ended in its native country. It will be a sorely missed piece of classic Saturday night entertainment.

#4 QI (2003-) (12 Series)

'QI' gets my prestigious award of being the best panel show on television. Not only is it one of the funniest shows on television but it's also full of facts that as the title suggest are quite interesting. I always feel that my knowledge has become much broader after watching just a single episode, and it never fails to satisfy my desire for odd truths and common misconceptions. It's a programme that makes you feel very stupid and very ignorant, yet aims to combat this with a helpful dose of comedy. I only wish the education system was like this, then I might have actually learn something useful and interesting.

Stephen Fry is the charming host, and is joined by regular Alan Davies, who is far from a comedy mastermind, but provides invaluable chemistry with Fry to fit the light hearted nature of the show, becoming a large part of its growing success. The rest of the panel consists of usually all comedians who look like they actually want to be there instead of trying to make a quick buck out of their publicity. This becomes evident in the polished product that is justified by its consistently high ratings. A pleasant panel show that's a class above the rest. It reminds me of sitting in a traditional pub sipping some real ale whilst listening to the regular at the bar come out with some fascinating stories. And that's one of the most pleasant experiences I can think of.

#3 Walking With Dinosaurs (1999) (1 Series)

If I had known what masturbation was when I was a child then I would have done it over this every night. For a child who loved dinosaurs this was pure filth. An astonishing programme that managed to feel like a documentary despite being largely fictional. The scripted events made it an entertaining watch, but never got in the way of the sense of realism, something that was too good to be true when I was about five. You can't really blame me though, just look at those special effects. Even my adult self still pops a boner when I see the quality of those visuals. No other programme has ever made dinosaurs look as real as that; it rivals even blockbuster movies like 'Jurassic Park'. But this might be even better than 'Jurassic Park' as it has the iconic voice of Kenneth Branagh to talk through proceedings like this was a true story. All this from a television show produced in 1999. Just unbelievable.

#2 The Inbetweeners (2008-2010) (3 Series)

The most intelligently written comedy in the history of television. It might not seem that way if you're about fifty, but the script hits the mark of the teenage target market to perfection. If you're in secondary school then there really isn't anything more relatable out there. This is achieved by the ordinary characters, who are developed in a way that is quite simply a work of genius. There's Will, who's the nerdy kid that everyone loves to torment. Neil, the simple minded one. Jay, the guy that bullshits about everything. And Simon, who's just an innocent lad trying to fit in with the cool kids. This group is collectively a great analogy of British teenagers, and together their awesome chemistry sets this show up for some brilliant gags

It's almost a crime that so few episodes were actually made, but each one is so well produced that you can watch them over and over again and still laugh at the same old jokes that have become such an amazing comment in the life of a teenager. It disguises itself as a coming of age comedy when in reality it's the amusing tales of a tragic group of friends. The show celebrates the smaller things in life, and never attempts to make any political statements, but that doesn't matter when you have a script as unique and special as the one they have to work with. It was no surprise that the subsequent films were huge hits, despite one being only mediocre, and although the series has now concluded it was great fun to be a part of.

#1 Top Gear (2002-) (22 Series)

Oh yes. What I love most about television is a combination of factual information about cars, offensive jokes, and three middle aged men cocking around. To me that's a beautiful combination, although I can understand why some people simply hate it. That all depends on your opinions about Jeremy Clarkson. I love him, he's just my sort of guy, and his opinionated and loudmouthed antics are what gel the show together. He is accompanied by two brilliant co-hosts in Richard Hammond and James May, and all three are an amazing trio that has produced over twenty seasons of pure entertainment. Watching fast cars being driven by men dicking around has never been so brilliant.

I will also concede that it's a very manly programme that relies on comedic value to draw in fans. This is summed up with the scripted scenes that now plague recent series, and it just needs to stop now. What I really want is a classic cheap car challenge that were common about five years ago. Some of those were television gold, and I implore anyone to watch the US special or the original amphibious cars challenge. Those episodes are absolute classics and sum up what I love best about the show. It's not just me though; 'Top Gear' has become the most watched television show in the world, with around 350 million viewers tuning in each week to watch what has been described as a 'pokey motoring show'. It may be sneered at by the majority of people, but I think it's just fucking brilliant.

Morons of the Internet: Re: Asexblogofonesown (22/01/15)

This is the segment where I scour my favorite forums around the internet and find some particularly interesting articles about current affairs told in the words from some of my favorite human beings.

In this edition we have the return of our opinionated blogger from last time who's been answering a few hate comments after her last post went viral. She's being less of a moron this time, but that won't stop me from giving my own views on what she has to say, after all she still hasn't answered the points that I brought up last time.
____________________________________________________________________________
https://asexblogofonesown.wordpress.com/2015/01/13/a-response-to-some-of-the-nonsense-ive-heard-over-the-past-week-and-a-reading-list-for-all-non-feminists-bleugh/
____________________________________________________________________________

Well apparently it's okay because it was all a bit of a joke. It certainly didn't read like one, especially when you insulted her personal life and then called her 'opinions' insular in your original article. I may have missed the punch line here, but it looks like a personal attack if anything else. She's right that you wouldn't find that sort of behaviour in a high brow newspaper, but that doesn't justify your comments towards Kaley Cuoco; you may not get payed to write, but that doesn't excuse stating absolute bollocks. I don't even care that you wrote in a very ignorant style, because at the end of the day it's your blog. What I do care about is the pathetic arguments you put forward, and what little relevance they had to blatantly attacking Kaley Cuoco.

Of course because the writer is a woman she is being victimised in every way possible. God if only you were a man, then you probably wouldn't make a stupid comment that hinge on the generalisation of a whole gender. As a man I can reliably inform her that what she wrote is not 'banter', as there is a fine line between that and a malicious attack. God knows where she got the other part from. Not only have I never seen men slapping each other on the ass because of some 'banter', but I have never even heard of it. I understand your writing style is meant to be humorous, but you can't expect me to listen to your points seriously when you just make up a load of bollocks like that. It's almost like she's totally misinformed, which I believe was what she was chastising Cuoco over in her previous article. That would make you a hypocritical bitch, and I didn't mean your 'brilliant' kind of bitch either. Oh look at me, I'm all revolutionary. I can change the meanings of words. That's it, fight that evil patriarchy by changing their words.

Oh it seems I was mistaken. I was apparently missing the point. How did I manage that? It must have been the point in your previous article where you said that "it is bad if you say no" when responding to the question of whether Cuoco was a feminist. In my funny little world that doesn't sound like you're permitting her to have her own views, but then I can't read minds so what do I know? Well I do know that if you verbally attack someone on the internet then you can expect some similar comments to be directed at you; after all that's exactly what you started, and so for you to reply in your same stuck up fashion is a little hypocritical. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. But then I forgot you were supposed to be playing the victim to a society that according to you is based on popularity. So what if the sheer volume of people disagree with her; does that instantly make Cuoco in the wrong? It doesn't say much for feminism if popularity is the reasoning behind its message.

Hmm you said that quite firmly. I can't imagine where people get the idea that feminism is promoting women's rights over others. Maybe if she decided to put down her teen fiction and actually read some facts then she might discover with a quick Google search that what she's saying is complete bollocks. For example, these are the various groups of people that call themselves feminists:

You're seriously telling me that all those people believe in equal rights for both men and women. Well how about clicking on 'radical feminism' like I did. I won't go into specifics, and hell neither do you so my reasoning will just be wasted, but a quick little read of that might convince you that your definition of feminism is completely wrong. I'm not claiming that the majority of feminists are like this, in fact I find most are respectable people, but out of all these subdivisions there is a significant number that disprove your point. So for the last time please stop using the umbrella term 'feminism' to generalise a whole philosophy, as otherwise you're creating the same problems that you want to eradicate.

What bad connotations? Oh I don't know, maybe the T shirts that read 'I bathe in male tears' can't exactly be considered good connotations, neither can the mugs that say 'male tears' on them either. There's even individual criticism on some of the pages that I found for my little bit of research, so you can't just live in denial, especially when that is a much more accurate picture than any fictional book will give you. She missed out the part of 'heroic' campaigning when women decided to become a public nuisance, and that didn't even get them the vote. So it's not 'heroic' and poor campaigning. In the end the starving she's talking about meant jack shit. I would also say that they weren't fighting for 'basic' human rights. They've always had human rights, and now they have equal rights. So you trying to justify a modern movement with evidence from the turn of last century is completely irrelevant.

You also say that people who deny that feminism has amazing connotations are 'ignorant', and no reading a biased book of fiction is not a valid argument to back up that statement. It's actually quite ironic that ignorant literally means "lacking knowledge or awareness in general", and I've just been accused of that by a person who lives in denial that a part of her philosophy might not be what she makes it out to be, yet apparently I'm the ignorant one. At least I bothered with a quick search; you obviously didn't as otherwise you would discover that you talk complete bollocks. Maybe she should do some research instead of reading those fucking fictional books. The examples she lists can only be merited as art and not sourced as factual information. Sure her examples might carry tropes and motifs of the time they were set, but that doesn't mean they can be applied to your argument as it occurs in a separate realm of fiction that may only reflect reality; not the other way round.

So to conclude I will call feminism a dirty word, and especially when it spews out the mouth of a social justice warrior like yourself. As an English literature student I've had the pleasure of reading many of the books you have cited, but I still disagree with you as its clear that the core principals of your philosophy are inconsistent and unsustainable. You can shove as many books in my face as you want, but the fact remains that without any real world evidence your morals are just words on a page. At no point have you justified your argument with reliable information and yet you still talk with the ignorance of someone who thinks they have the moral high ground. In your last article you used the term 'insular'. I think that applies to this one as well.

Top 10 Horror Movies

I will admit that I'm not a huge horror movie fanatic. I don't particularly enjoy the prospect of being scared shitless and so I usually give them a miss. However in this list I have compiled a few films that over the years I have enjoyed watching and would consider them good films in their own right. Here are some that didn't quite make the list:

Rosemary's Baby: One of the better examples of how to work the horror genre. Wouldn't say it has aged well but it's still pretty disturbing.
Nosferatu: I don't think you can include any horror movie list without the inclusion of this film. Without this there simply wouldn't be a horror genre.
Dracula: Bela Lugosi is just absolutely amazing as the infamous gothic villain. It was said that audience members would scream as soon as they saw him for the first time. Of course times have changed, and this flick now looks rather tame.
The Omen: Another unpleasant experience, although it's horror so what do you expect? This is the less famous demonic child film, although it's still pretty damn good.

#10 Poltergeist (1982) (8/10)

'Poltergeist' is the story of a child who is kidnapped by evil spirits through the use of a television. It kicks off this list due to dealing with such a poignant subject in a way that will send shivers down your spine. This film will take you on a heart pounding trip through what is essentially a very simple plot. That simple plot becomes one of the big advantages, and it carries the film into some big, big scares. It's certainly not a film I would watch without the lights on, especially considering the immense tension that comes with every scene. I can't actually think of a film that builds tension any better, and with that comes some huge climaxes.

The beauty of this film is that it took the horror genre from its roots in the wilderness and placed it right in the home where you feel most secure. There are other films on this list that also do that, but not in the same way as this. Aside from the sacres you have a very polished film, crammed with some respectable performances from the cast and some brilliant script writing. I like how it doesn't tend to present the characters as screaming wrecks who lumber around the set in a way that would never be realistic. In this film we get a seemingly real situation being developed by a very realistic cast. You may choose to beleive that the stellar cast were cursed during production, and admittedly there is a suspiciously high death rate in the making of this film, but my money would be on them not wanting to be around for the sequels. And I don't blame them, the rest of this series is horrendous.

#9 Cannibal Holocaust (1980) (8/10)

If you ever feel the need to throw up don't stick two fingers down your throat, just watch this instead. I've had the pleasure of viewing some disturbing and downright disgusting films in my time, but none make me squirm like this one. In actual fact the film was so gory that the director was taken on trial under the impression that he murders his own cast. Just by looking at the image above you can see that the special effects used are quite graphic, and that's nowhere near the worst this film has to offer. Surprisingly there is actually a story attached to this, and rather a good one at that. It revolves around a group of filmmakers who go missing in the Amazon Rainforest, and the found footage is shown to the viewer in chronological order, coining a genre that would dominate horror in the next few decades. The found footage sub-genre would never retain that shock value of this movie, making 'Cannibal Holocaust' both disgusting and innovative.

I personally admire this film; I think the gore is justified by the rather striking plot, and there are serious issues and tropes addressed throughout the run time. It's so much more than a simple snuff film, and their really are some great social commentaries nestled throughout all the stomach churning violence. At various points it does feel like a genuine documentary, which is all a film such as this needs to do in order to please me. It would already be a good horror film thanks to its sheer repulsiveness, and I still wouldn't recommend watching it for those that are squeamish or value animal rights. But if you're a sadistic bastard like myself then you're in for an absolute treat.

#8 Dark Water (2002) (8/10)

No this isn't the crappy American remake, and under no circumstances should you ever watch that pile of shit. As this version is typically Japanese it becomes about five thousand times more fucked up than it needs to be. I'm not saying it's the scariest film of all time, but the intensity of the whole thing is just unbearable at some points. But then what do you expect from the man behind 'The Ring', which I'm sure many people will tell you is pretty fucking scary; and they haven't even seen the Japanese version. This film ramps up traditional horror to a new level, and creates a truly terrifying experience in the process.

As the title suggest this film is centered around dark water, and although that doesn't sound too scary, it is when you add in ghosts and dilapidated apartments. It's an original story that has the quality to carry a film of this proportion, and does so at an almost perfect pace. It never tries to do anything too weird, and anything that it does try and convey it does so with a lot of dramatic effect that just keeps ramping up that tension to the next level. Unlike the American version it will not treat you like an idiot, and it does have cinematic quality, unlike the crappy American remake. I like that the plot requires a little bit of thinking to make sense, and it is proof that when the Japanese aren't trying to be as strange as possible they can produce some seriously good films, especially in the horror genre.

#7 The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) (8/10)

How could I not include the original slasher movie on this list? It may have got a crappy lick of paint in recent years, but the original will always be a genre classic. The story is based on the life and atrocities of notorious serial killer Ed Gein, and that caused this low budget slasher flick to revolutionise a whole genre. The film is set on a group of young adults who accidentally find themselves being terrorized by a family of cannibals. What follows is maybe not as gruesome as you would expect, but big scares are abundant thanks to the no name cast actually performing well above their expectations. Although we all know that most of the atmosphere is created by legendary villian Leatherface, who fills this entire film with his unique persona.

What I love most is that it's actually quite an intelligent film. Director Tobe Hooper knows that he's creating a low budget horror production and so concentrates on essential building blocks rather than anything fancy, creating an intelligent plot that sticks well clear of a cliche ridden mess. It helps that there are some truly horrifying scenes littered throughout its runtime, and this is only amplified with the realistic detail that becomes a core focus of the film. Probably the best move Hooper made was to claim that this was a true story. In reality that's a massive lie; but it was a strategy that ended up making this film what it is today. It's living proof that a film can still be successful even if you don't have a lot of money. All you need is a fresh and original idea for your film to go places.

#6 Psycho (1960) (9/10)

Probably the most famous film on here. Is there any movie fanatic who hasn't seen this one? That shower scene alone has probably become the most iconic scene in the history of Hollywood. It's true that this film might be more of a thriller than a horror, but I decided to include the film on this list anyway as it shows early conventions of what would later become the horror genre; all that separates them is Hitchcock's signature style. You have to bear in mind that this was released in 1960, a time when the most shocking thing in this film was seeing the contents of a toilet being flushed. For its time this was truly barbaric, and although that must seem absurd when compared with films of today you can't deny that it's still crammed full of some very tense scenes. Those tense scenes are aided by a slow paced plot that allows an intricate and intelligent story to be created in a way that only Hitchcock could. He even decides to kill off the main character halfway through, and yet still manages to retain a thoroughly engaging narrative.

As for content, well it's a bit fucked up. It's not particularly scary at any point, but its realistic premise and solid production mean it's nothing you can't imagine happening in real life. It still has enough credentials to put a chill down your spine, and that is helped in no small part by iconic villain Norman Bates, who becomes something completely disturbing thanks to the charisma and talent of actor Anthony Perkins. That brilliant performance helps to elevate the immense levels of suspense throughout the film, and it's only through this that iconic scenes such as the one pictured above can be created. There's no denying that Hitchcock is the integral part of this complex mechanism; in fact he even managed to produce this on a shoestring budget when he was refused backing due to the films mature content. I'm eternally grateful to him for going his own way, as without his determination we wouldn't have this classic.

#5 A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) (8/10)

Admittedly this did get to number five for one reason alone, and that was because it includes Freddy Krueger. If it wasn't for him then this would just be a standard horror flick. His awesome personality and wisecracking lines set the new bar for horror villains, but none can compare to the eery persona of Krueger. This was another film that was put together with a very limited budget, and although the plot is solid, the iconic villain is what propelled this film to legendary status. It's about as brutal as they get, and there's something incredibly disturbing about a serial killer who murders people in their sleep. The result is a chilling film that will give you nightmares for the rest of your life. A perfectly concocted plot is put to good use and revived what was a very fatigued genre. It's impossible not to love. Just an awesome film from start to finish.

#4 The Exorcist (1973) (8/10)

The story of a mother trying to save her possessed daughter is now such a legendary tale in the world of cinema that it's become synonymous with horror. So disgusting was this film that at the time of release cinemas would offer sick bags to the audience, and there are even reports of people fainting from the shock. It seems amazing that this was allowed to be produced considering ten years prior it was forbidden for bare flesh to be shown in a Hollywood film. With this you get a teenage girl screaming profanities whilst turning her head 360 degrees, haunting the minds of moviegoers for decades to come. It might not seem so unbelievable now thanks to stuff like torture porn, but it's still a great watch. Even if you are disappointment by the horror aspects you can still appreciate what is a feel good story. In fact this is a much more uplifting story than any of that 'Pursuit of Happyness' bullshit that everyone seems to brown nose, that's even despite the fact that happiness is spelt wrong.

Maybe the word 'enjoy' is a term that shouldn't be used with this film. It's one hell of a film, but I would be lying if I said that it was an enjoyable experience. The impeccable special effects and excellent storytelling come together to produce some pretty uncomfortable scenes at various points. This is of course a deliberate technique used by director William Friedkin, who took some real care to produce a well constructed film. It was said that he deliberately refrigerated the set and fired loaded guns without warning to make sure his actors were always uncomfortable on the set. An extreme solution, but one that produced some amazing results, even if the desensitization of the public has lead to that becoming all but obsolete. But screw those people who can't enjoy something because it's old; they don't appreciate great cinema classics such as this one.

#3 Silence of the Lambs (1991) (9/10)

You may have heard this from me before, but there is nobody who can match up to the insane screen presence that Hannibal Lecter manages here. I just find it incredible that actor Anthony Hopkins can completely own a film despite only being in half of it. There is no doubt in my mind that it's one of the all time great performances in cinema, and has made this film such a classic. They say you are what you eat, and Hannibal Lecter is head and shoulders over his competitors. I'm sorry, I have to apologies for that offensively bad joke. But putting puns aside there really is something mesmerizing about the evil doctor, so much so that I would say he becomes the very embodiment of evil itself. He carries not just himself but the film as a whole. Poor Jodie Foster, who puts in a respectable performance, is left looking out of place when compared to Lecter, and she's supposed to be the lead role.

It's a horror film of a higher class, and so will probably alienate the simple minded fans of films like 'Saw'. But movies like that don't have anywhere near the amount of character development and dialogue that this does. Watching this is actually a pleasant, if chilling experience, and doesn't rely on simple shock tactics to get a response. Sure it might be more of a psychological thriller than a true horror film, but I can't think of a better film to sit down too whilst enjoying some fava beans and a nice Chianti. Or go the extra mile; you could really get into the spirit by eating out your own liver.

#2 Alien (1979) (9/10)

The tagline just sums up this film perfectly; 'In space no one can hear you scream'. That alone is enough reason for it to be on this list; it sets the tone for a beautiful fusion of the sci-fi and horror genres that's just so brilliant to watch. Overall I do prefer the sequel 'Aliens', but that takes the form of an action film and so cannot be included here. 'Alien' however is horror to the core, as the malicious xenomorph hunts down the human crew in such a malicious way that it makes this film such an enthralling experience. Famous scenes such as the chest-bursting alien is proof that this is a film designed to scare you, and at points it does get pretty gory.

Star of the show is definitely the xenomorph, which it manages by being in the film for a combined time of around four minutes. An impressive achievement, but then it's much more than a simple villain, more a work of art only possible through the ideas of science fiction. It rightfully deserves to be the only film on this list with a non human villain as its presence gives the film both its suspense and claustrophobic feel. It also has a second mouth, so that's pretty fucking awesome. With this film it became clear that so many ideas could be produced from the realms of science, and I personally thank it for revolutinising one of my favorite genres. 

#1 The Shining (1980) (10/10)

There's just something about haunted hotels run by homicidal maniacs that make such good plot devices for horror films. This is the second of such on this list, and it's the only entry that I would ever consider giving a perfect score. I know I have the tendency to go a bit overboard with Stanley Kubrick films, but trust me, this is one epic film. For starters it runs at such a brilliant pace. It's a slow one, but that reflects the style of the film, sacrificing cheap thrills for a more intelligent plot and a ton of character development. It also does help that both Kubrick and Jack Nicholson are appearing together, which is a pretty epic power couple, and is solely responsible for some pretty epic scenes. I'm pretty sure everyone knows the scene above, or at least one Jack Torrance quote.

Classic Kubrick is how I would sum it all up. He does things his way, and even kills off characters that survived in the book. Some scenes allegedly took hundreds of takes to perfect, and members of the cast were physically bullied to get the best performance out of them. Kubrick wanted to get perfection, and that's how it looks to me. I just love the intense psychological ride that the viewer gets sent on; sometimes it takes more than one sitting to truly comprehend what a masterpiece this really is. Just by looking on the internet you can see some of the crazy theories that surround the making of this film, and you can choose to follow them, but only if you enjoy this piece of art for what it is. And that's one of the greatest films of all time.

Morons of the Internet: Asexblogofonesown (12/01/15)

This is the segment where I scour my favorite forums around the internet and find some particularly interesting articles about current affairs told in the words from some of my favorite human beings.

In this edition we have a fellow blogger who shows us the dangers of putting words in other people's mouths. She's even been kind enough to put it into an open letter for us. Hooray.
_____________________________________________________________________________
https://asexblogofonesown.wordpress.com/2015/01/02/an-open-letter-to-kaley-cuoco-who-has-been-a-bit-of-a-bellend/
_____________________________________________________________________________

Oh that's right, we're not going to call out Kaley Cuoco by sourcing facts. No, in this article we're just going to be an ignorant asshole throughout the whole thing; and trust me, I know how to do that. Just look at that narrow-minded view that if you don't have the same opinions as me then they're obviously worthless. You have the audacity to call Cuoco a 'bellend' for not having the same ideology as you, yet in the same sentence you glorify individuality in terms of gender. The fact that you're condemning another person for being an individual, yet promoting another form of individuality because you agree with it is just the pinnacle of hypocrisy. I just don't understand why you can't be respectful of her perfectly valid opinion. I'm pretty sure I'm right in saying the majority of the world's population aren't feminists and so Cuoco's views aren't exactly anything radical. She's just choosing to exercise her right of free speech, which is something I wish you didn't have to abuse.

According to you I am also a bellend for simply not being a feminist. I too share similar concerns to Cuoco along with many others, and so your decision to simply mock those perfectly reasonable observations is both moronic and ignorant. By your own logic she is a female who deserves rights and so shouldn't be slagged off by misguided bloggers like yourself because you dictate that thought process to be inferior to your own. Is it really Cuoco that's the bellend? Surely it's the person that believes the world's problems can be solved by equality; something that has only ever existed in the school of philosophy and is essentially impossible to implement without the destruction of civilization itself. Yet instead of countering Cuoco's argument by being reasonable you're going to simply try and win over your biased audience by taking her words completely out of context and at the same time promoting the least sustainable solution it's possible to conjure. Just look at what she does to a seemingly mundane and harmless interview. 

The generalisation and sheer arrogance here is despicable. A huge matter is just glossed over because of course the author is always correct with her superior views, and it's not as if she needs to justify those views to her gullible audience anyway. She's also not very good at defining feminism; there are many humans out there who would like gender equality but aren't feminists because it has always been defined as the promotion of women's rights. Gender equality is just one goal of a much broader philosophy, and so the only thing our blogger defines is egalitarianism. The manipulation here is that she makes it seem like her way is the superior view, when in fact it is based on a misconception. The reality is quite the contrary as a person can agree with the values of something yet disagree with their methods entirely. I find myself in that situation with conservation. I think that we should be funding programmes that help the welfare of animals, yet I simply refuse to give a single penny to PETA who claim to have the same views as me, despite the love of wasting money on advertising and supporting domestic terrorism. Does that make me hate animals? I don't think so, yet apparently this blogger just jumps to the conclusion that Cuoco is against gender equality for not supporting one group of people.

  

We then go onto just another unnecessary and undeserved attack. At no point during the interview did Cuoco ever promote the idea of inequality, and if anything was recognising the many inspirational people who made her life what it is today. She never pretends to have faced inequality and so I find this personal attack rather a disgusting tactic as it seems more out of spite than anything else. We then go onto fail at defining something else, again. This time it's dystopian literature, something which empathy has no role in creating. A dystopian society is caused by the abuse of power and social pressures affecting society, and so the fact that our blogger gets that mixed up with reality is a little concerning. Just because empathy was a key element in one juvenile novel doesn't mean it becomes a convention throughout the whole genre. I guess that's a pretty similar issue to your views on the broad subject of feminism, yet apparently it's Cuoco that's the uneducated one.

As far as I'm aware Cuoco makes an entirely relevant point here that because she has never experienced this issue she cannot relate to it. You put her in a catch 22 here as whatever her response is you're still going to attack her for being middle class, or at least you should do if you're being consistent. It's all very well caring about something, but then acting on that is something entirely different. I don't know if our blogger's goal is to convert Cuoco into some sort of fanatic, but my money would be on this article just being noble words to boost her own ego. Of course you would never get that attitude from someone who has the audacity to call someone "insufferably insular" yet exclaim earlier on that "if you refuse to call yourself a feminist, then you are being a bellend." Right, because that's not hypocritical at all. Insulting Cuoco when if anything you're even worse is just proof of what a deluded person you really are. At least Cuoco acknowledges other opinions and has the sense to see them from a relatively neutral perspective. You on the other hand can't help yourself from having a little pop at someone because their opinion is worthless compared to yours.

Now I don't have a problem with the first paragraph, if anything it raises a fair point, but the second I do. It seems to me that you're trying to dictate Cuoco's life and how she should see the world. I don't know if you remember banging on about dystopian literature earlier, but in case you didn't this is how they're created. So for you to dictate a woman's life based on that is, what's the word I'm looking for? Oh yes, insular. It's especially insular considering you're picking that up from a single word taken completely out of context. 'Serving' is a word with multiple connotations, and so you criticizing her for using it seems absurd when at no point does it read like she's being abused. An example of this would be how Christians believe they serve god. Does that mean they feel god physically abuses them? No of course it doesn't, 'pet'.

The final message is a plea for Cuoco to educate herself with a singular book; although if you can change a person's perspective on feminism through a single book then it doesn't suggest that the philosophy is very strong. But you see I'd like to think I have been educated, at least enough to know what a dystopia is. For that reason I would like to recommend our little blogger to read a singular book, because obviously that's how easily her mind can be influenced. Instead of your usual 'Hunger Games', which is essentially a children's book, I will implore you to read the epic 'Atlas Shrugged', and that's all 1168 pages of it. Now that's a book about equality, and well you never know, it might make you a less insular person. It might even stop you in future from jumping to conclusions and putting words in other people's mouths, especially when in the process you become the biggest hypocrite on the internet. As far as I'm concerned Cuoco is allowed to have her opinions, and they certainly shouldn't be slagged off by some patronising, misleading and parochial bellend such as yourself.

Morons of the Internet: Jessica Valenti (08/01/15)

This is the segment where I scour my favorite forums around the internet and find some particularly interesting articles about current affairs told in the words from some of my favorite human beings.

In this edition we have the return of much loved columnist Jessica Valenti who for some reason thinks her ideas are good for the world. This one is just absolutely mental.

Link:
_______________________________________________________________________
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/04/world-wage-gap-pay-women-
more-men-less
_______________________________________________________________________

Yes that is a good question Valenti, why don't we just pay men less? I've often linked the wage of a person to what sex they are, and so with that sound logic I think this is one of the greatest ideas in existence that in no way stinks of hypocrisy. The problem we obviously have here is that every single woman in the world is underpayed and every single man in the world is overpayed, and so I'm so happy that resident moron Jessica Valenti is here to help with this crucial issue by sharing her wisdom. Even if that wisdom has to be generalising a large issue on a global scale despite the many laws and regulations she would have to break for her solution to work. I mean just look at the indisputable evidence she presents for implementing this radical strategy.

This whole piece is built around the misconception that women are payed less for the same labor than men; at least that is what her manipulative tone is suggesting. This of course is complete bullshit. It has actually been illegal in the USA for unequal pay between genders since 1963, and similar laws also apply to many other countries. So it would be very much appreciated if Valenti didn't base her whole crackpot theory on a generalised statistic that doesn't take into account position of jobs and hours worked. This is probably the reason why this large business is about to become male dominated. You earn what you work for, and sitting there whinging isn't going to help that Valenti.

Now it's this early that Valenti starts talking absolute bollocks. She states that the UK has an equal pay act, which is correct, but then the use of the word 'even' suggests that the USA doesn't. This is complete bullshit and she even recognises the system later on in her own fucking work, proving that she has no idea what she's banging on about. All we get is the fact that she's the victim in this big, horrible world. She proves this with her down right ignorant attitude of "I don't fucking care if you like it". Not being pedantic but isn't that how the problem you're trying to stop occurred in the first place. It's like she's in some dystopian novel and they've just given her absolute power to relentlessly abuse. Two wrongs don't make a right, and surely if this solution was to defeat the idea of injustice then innocent men are being discriminated against because it brings the average down. But I forgot it doesn't work that way, because men are never the victims. Nobody likes the idea of discrimination on themselves, so why the hell is Valenti trying to aggravate that problem even further.

About that law you were ignoring earlier; well it seems the only person with any sense in this article has just called you out on it. Fatima Goss Graves might just be the only person with any sense here as she politely informs Valenti that she's a fucking lunatic and her ideas are just ridiculous. Now I would have thought that being told your theory is the world's most stupid idea by an expert would be the end of that argument, especially after highlighting some massive flaws with the plan. But Valenti doesn't get the obvious message and unfortunately carries on.

Here we are feminists, this is your own making. An influential figure in your philosophy is a women who would quite happily break the law only so she can be a bit of a bitch. What a role model. The law is obviously there to stop inequality ever happening and so surely going ahead and erasing it would be suicidal. But I guess that's the price you pay for living in the free world dear. Although a down side to that is Valenti is quite entitled to ramble on profusely about her idiotic opinions, namely how wages are a gender issue, and then acting on that complete generalisation. It's okay though as she's quite up for "privileging the marginalised", which if I'm not mistaken is exactly the problem we're trying to erase here, but yay for hypocrisy. In my funny little world I though privileging people and equality were the complete opposite, but then I guess that's because I'm not a complete moron. 

And then just to top it all off we finish with the most stupid paragraph of anything I've ever read. Apparently Valenti is not giving women "special treatment", when she quite clearly is as every single woman is getting an undeserved pay increase because she commanded it; you even said that yourself in the last sentence of the previous fucking paragraph. That would also apply to the not "punishing men" part, which is also complete bollocks as she's deducting every single man's wage because of an invalid statistic. And apparently this isn't a radical idea, when I believe if you look up the definition of 'radical' then you'll find out that your theories are indeed the very epitome of the word 'radical'. Just unbelievable. She has no idea what she's saying and can't even string a sentence together without talking absolute bullshit. 

The whole article is just a fucking joke. Valenti is clearly making this point as it only benefits her own self centered needs, and this is backed up with a fuck load of hypocrisy. It's like she's suggesting that being born a man is a choice, and when you become this man you instantly get showered with all the world's riches that have been unfairly stolen from the pockets of every single woman and not at all by working hard and getting better jobs. Your radical theories to subsidies this lunacy only prove how much of an idiot you really are. I'll finish by compromising with you Valenti. I'll argue for a bill that tries to tackle the homicide rate, which is greatly favored towards women. Because of this I have a new radical theory that suggest that all men murder various innocent women in order to bring the averages to an equal level. Yeah, I think I'm starting to get the hang of this Valenti.

Top 10 Worst Video Games of 2014

#10 Assassin's Creed: Unity

What Ubisoft have done here is essentially ruin what on paper looked to be a great game. For starters it looks very nice. The setting is the usual fascinating world that the 'Assassin's Creed' franchise has always given us. And in top form there aren't many games that can beat this series. I'm not even fussed that all the playable characters are male, because you really need to reconsider your life if that affects you. What are they going to be moaning about next? How outraged they are at how FIFA has all male characters. But aside from people whinging about superficial bollocks like that there is a serious problem with this game. For starters the story is an uninspired mess that never feels unpredictable at any stage. And the missions are sometimes intolerable with Ubisoft dictating how you must play the game their way. Sometimes the developers forbid you from being an actual human being and punish you for having free will. How dare you try a mission your way. You will always be Ubisoft's puppet, and them forcing you to play their way is really starting to annoy me.

Then there's the more publicly widespread problems that have caused a media backlash. The consumers aren't lying either, this game is sometimes so glitchy that it is borderline unplayable. Something that is totally unacceptable from one of the best funded titles of the year. Ten studios worked on this and it still plays like an absolute dog. I've seen walkthroughs where the performance goes down to a scarcely believable six frames per second, and that's not including the countless glitches a player may experience along the way. And what do Ubisoft do to combat this; like the dicks they are they ban all review copies so players didn't find out until they bought the game. What fucking scumbags. Of course they would eventually release a patch that was a temporary fix, and that patch ended up being only a few gigabytes hinting that there is probably something fundamentally wrong with their game. And we haven't even got onto the micro-transactions yet, which is a bit of a middle finger from the developers with a 'release now patch it later' attitude. It's true that Assassin's Creed might be running out of steam, but maybe if they put a little bit more care into it and stopped rushing the games to be released annually then disasters like this wouldn't happen. 

#9 The Sims 4

Wow, this a huge disappointment. Somehow EA managed to take a huge step back in a series that was bordering on perfection. The once complex gameplay of a personal favorite series of mine has now been dumbed down to such a pathetic level that it actually insults me. No longer is there an open world; now the game constricts your options to a preset section of land that takes the franchise all the way back to its roots. Of course then it was a technical limitation and not just the developers being lazy. To combat this restricted world EA have included a new emotional system or some bollocks like that, which is essentially just an improved version of what they already had. Their original system worked absolutely fine and this new one makes such a miniscule difference that marketing a whole game around it seems absurd.

That's not to say there weren't some positive points about this new entry. For one there was a hilarious upscaling tool that the player could abuse and make toilets larger than the actual house. That was good fun, but the rest is just a bitter disappointment. It didn't help that EA decided to ban all review copies, parting thousands of people with their money when they had no idea of the lackluster experience that was waiting for them. Of course EA just wanted to hide the fact that they had removed key features like swimming pools and whole stages of the life cycle. I don't think that bothered the filthy rich pockets of EA who had just sold out one of their most loved franchises. And because they've removed the pool features we can't take them swimming and remove the steps to get out. Those were the days.  
 
#8 Driveclub

This narrowly won the worst racer of the year thanks to 'The Crew' being saved by a brilliant modification system. The only thing this game has going for it is that it actually looks quite pretty. Of course you won't be caring about that when you realise how shit the actual gameplay is, especially when compared to a far superior racer like Forza. To put it into perspective Forza has an extensive choice from hundreds of cars to race with from all over the world; however in Driveclub we get a grand total of less than sixty, with the majority being from Europe, which is a fucking joke in comparison. Then there's the customisation, which is virtually non existent, and couple this with generic gameplay and you have a very limited and dissapointing racer.

My other gripes concern the realism of this game, especially the damage system which is so badly done it's actually quite hilarious sometimes. This isn't helped by the ludicrous AI that stick to their racing lines like glue. Any attempt at an overtake and you'll end up flipping uncontrollably in the air, because the physics engine is predictably shit. This is just laughable when you compare it to the polished AI in Forza or Gran Turismo. My advice would be to stick clear of single player altogether as it's clearly no fun. But then the problem with that is that the servers don't fucking work so you can't play multiplayer either. In the end my only advice would just be not to buy this lifeless racer that wouldn't even please the most impressionable of twats. Surely even they can't defend what might just be the most boring game of all time.

#7 Deus Ex: The Fall

For some reason this mobile game ended up getting a full retail release on the PC, and I still can't work out why. We already have 'Deus Ex: Human Revolution' on the PC, which is coincidentally what this game is based on. So why would I pay again for a game that's just been designed for a different console when the same and more advanced game I already have is optimised for that system? So as you can see it doesn't make sense to release it, and it doesn't make sense to port it to the PC. And so surely doing so would result in a terrible game, which it inevitably did.

Firstly the controls are so basic and limited that it's actually quite offensive. Nothing feels natural and your character lumbers around the map like some ugly paraplegic. There isn't even a jump button. That's how limited the game is; they couldn't even be bothered to allow your character to jump. In a stealth game I would say that's pretty important. The rest of the controls don't respond half the time, and when you're not cursing at them you're cursing at the god awful menus that simply navigating is like trying to crack the enigma code. And through all of this it still feels like a mobile game. What was the point in releasing this for the ultimate console if you can't even be bothered to adapt it? Fucking hopeless.

#6 Dungeon Keeper Mobile

Oh what a surprise, EA ruining yet another much loved franchise thanks to their selfish love of money. Instead of making a worthy successor to the classic 'Dungeon Keeper' we get a mobile game that's micro-transaction hell. Now I hate mobile games, but these ones that use in game currency to play the damn thing really piss me off. Especially when the game uses micro-transactions for everything; even building a simple tunnel costs real money, sometimes hundreds of pounds could be spent on furnishing just one room. It's a fucking joke.

What EA have given us here is the video gaming equivalent of the Nigerian lottery. It's not very fun to play when you've just realised that your hard earned cash is being stolen right in front of your very eyes to a bunch of petty crooks. Although this time the crooks then force you to rate their app five stars as any other ratings won't show on the app store, conning more people of yet more money. Just another example of EA being fucking disgusting wankers, and probably bordering on criminal. In fact scamming is the only purpose of this game. The only element of gameplay in the whole thing is essentially just superficial rubbish that has been added as an afterthought. So thanks EA, thanks for ruining yet another well respected franchise for a chance at getting a quick buck to fill your filthy rich pockets.

#5 BlackSoul

To be honest I just dislike horror games in general, and I especially despise horror games that have been made incredibly poorly. 'BlackSoul' was the epitome of this bad design with its ridiculously buggy gameplay and aesthetic features that make it look like a particularly ugly genital wart. Its shoddy quality runs through everything, and when your not being plagued by technical issues the whole premise of the game is just really fucking boring. It tries to play on features from horror games of yesteryear, but ends up spitting on their grave with all these so called 'classic' features either not working or culminating in a disorganised mess.

Everything this does is just astonishingly bad. It's just no fun at any stage, and it even becomes frustrating after the six millionth glitch of that level has taken place. That's assuming there are levels, although I for one couldn't work out a premise throughout the whole thing. I think it was something to do with being in a haunted house in the English countryside and killing things, but that in itself is quite a difficult task as nothing fucking works. Admittedly it is free, but how it can ever be considered a game is a joke. The fact that a real person thought this was a marketable product is just laughable, and the results are just downright offensive.

#4 Basement Crawl

And here we have the game that sums up the PS4's crap year. Sony might have released more content for their console but when the result is this I'm really not interested. A 'Bomberman' clone that ends up feeling a million times worse than the original is not my idea of a fun game. Especially when that's all there is too it. In a full video game release the developers managed to add three maps and one game mode to an already terrible game. That's something that might have been acceptable in 1908, but in 2014 that's just astonishingly poor quality. You can't even customise that limited experience either. There aren't even any options that let you change anything about the game; you either play the game their way or not at all. You're not even allowed to change the duration of matches meaning you end up with an overall experience that gets boring incredibly quickly. And that's all assuming the multiplayer features actually work, which doesn't happen most of the time.

#3 Goat Simulator

'Goat Simulator' was a rather love or hate game that ended up becoming what I despise most about modern PC gaming. I dub this sort of title a 'PewDiePie' game as it only gains popularity by getting coverage from an annoying YouTube personality that just so happens to have a 'funny' voice. Because the game is meant to be humorous the YouTube personality gets a lot of playtime out of making endless montages of their hilarious moments despite the fact that there isn't anything else meritable out of a poorly made game. Of course people idolize annoying bellends like this and so this game goes viral, becoming an instant success overnight despite the fact that nobody has been told about the incredibly poor content. The problem now is that developers who want some quick cash will now purposely make terrible games like 'Goat Simulator' to get this sort of coverage, and we're now seeing this with a growing number of deliberately poor attempts to make a video game.

'Goat Simulator' is the epitome of my analogy, and unfortunately this trend is set to increase with the amount of sales this game picked up. The whole thing is just a stupid and pointless mess where the only goal is to cause as much damage as possible to your very small and limited environment. That is genuinely the only loose connection this game ever makes to having any sort of premise or relevant gameplay. The rest is just a mix of glitches and novelty features that soon wear out thanks to the whole game's shoddy quality. I just hate the fact that a game was made to such a poor standard in order to become successful, and I hope that's a trend that soon stops as it is slowly killing the gaming industries credibility.

#2 Rambo: The Video Game

It seems amazing that a game like this can be released at full retail price in 2014. 'Rambo' is not only the worst use of a movie license ever but also a rail shooter, something that you'll commonly find in 1980's arcades, which are not famed for their high quality games. Why this game needs to exist is also another questionable matter since the movies were released over thirty years ago and there isn't a big call for a game type that also died out decades ago, so why now? It could maybe be forgiven if the gameplay elements were actually quite fun, but that's not the case when everything is linked together with quick time events, meaning the game is essentially button mashing at designated points throughout the whole thing. Where's the fun in a terribly constructed game that is accompanied by a hole filled storyline? I just don't understand why this sort of crap gets released.

Furthermore the thing looks disgusting. Just by glancing at that screenshot I think I'm about to throw up. It actually looks like footage from the original film, and it might just be as the audio too sounds like it was ripped straight from a tape player. I wouldn't even care about that if they just got the basics right, but pointless violence, terrible dialogue and some horrendous storytelling are just not acceptable on any game. It takes everything bad about the movie franchise and chucks it together with a huge bucket of shit to produce something that at no point feels fun or at least a little bit entertaining. All this from a game that costs full retail price. Even bargain bins would reject this shite.

#1 Sonic Boom: Rise of Lyric

A timely reminder of why we all hate Sonic. There is no hope for humanity if games like this keep being produced. It easily took the worst game of the year award when it turned an already poor franchise into one of the worst things I have ever experienced. Dull isn't a strong enough word to describe the sheer emptiness of such an annoying game. It's like the developers can't even be bothered anymore. Sonic himself has even given up, he no longer travels at running pace; it's now more a lethargic jog through levels of huge scale mediocrity. Nothing this game does offers any kind of excitement, especially the basic and repetitive combat that makes you feel like ending your life. Couple this with the large roster of annoyingly unfunny and tedious twats and you have a game that makes 'Rambo: The Video Game' seem like 'GTA'.

It's not even a Sonic game anymore, it just can't be. It tries, but it's been made so poorly that fast paced levels are no longer possible due to constant framerate issues and large parts of the story can be skipped by a simple glitch. The performance is so poor that you've often run past the stuff at a slow pace before it even appears, which in a game that revolves around running is pretty much suicide. But the worst sin for me is that this game isn't anything; it has no purpose, and never attempts to have one. It tries to do so many things and ends up failing miserably at them all. Firstly it tries to be a platformer. Then it wants to be an action game. Then it tries to be a 'Temple Run' clone before it finally ends up trying to be a free roam game. It really is quite special how it manages to fail at every single one of those so badly. For that reason it just has to be the worst game of the year. And please Sonic; just. Fuck. Off.