Trans Women Are Not "Biologically Male"

I'm fucking sick of people thinking sociology has a place in science. I've analysed fifteen million examples of when that's happened on this blog, but here we have possibly the worst yet. Oh yes, here we have someone who genuinely thinks that biological sex is a social construct. Jesus Christ, this is a hard watch.

1) "This video is not for people who disagree with me." Well who the fuck is it for then? To massage your own ego? It doesn't say much for your debating skills if you have to exclude people who have different opinions. The simple response to the opposition is 'do some research'. Funnily enough that's the pathetic standard of argument throughout the whole video.

2) Just as a little side note, in no way is sex a social construct. In what way are scientific facts manipulated by social constructs? Doesn't this deluded idiot think it's weird that just about every single other species of animal has two different sexes. With the whole myriad of different social environments in the natural world, isn't it strange how transgender individuals are not found in nature. And secondly, if sex is a social construct then why does life revolve around sexual reproduction? That's the fusing of two different gametes from opposing sexes. How the fuck does that mean sex is socially constructed?

3) "Basing gender on perceived sex is oppressive." Assumptions are now oppressive apparently. You just couldn't help but play the victim card could you? When you haven't got a factual based argument to stand on you whip out the feelings, because of course they're far more important in a scientific debate.

4) "Biological sex has stuck around as unquestionable fact". Can't imagine why factual information would remain factual.

5) You don't need to test chromosomes at birth to identify the biological sex of a child, you can simply look at the phenotype, which is significantly different for males and females.

6) "You can't tell a person's chromosomes by looking at them". Yes you can, it's called karyotyping. And yes you can also get information from looking at them. You're actually describing the information you can see from them, it's called a phenotype, and is critical in understanding genetics. It's almost like chromosomes determine the sex characteristics of an organism isn't it? And since when are genitals not visible? What fucking bodies have you been looking at?

7) The biological definition of sex is not perfect, but it does describe a trend, and that's how scientific characteristics are assigned. It's true that some women are not going to have ovaries because of genetic defects or diseases such as cancer, but that's exactly the point, the difference are caused by disease and defects, and not by social changes. Would this person also think that humans are not biologically bipedal because Stephen Hawking uses a chair. 0.6% is the estimated American trans population, which is in no way significant.

8) Men with penises do vary in beard length, but surely the fact that women typically don't grow facial hair is proof that sex isn't a spectrum. The amount of testosterone an individual has in their body is a spectrum however, and the amount a person has depends on what sex they are. That's just basic genetic variation, and does at no point mean sex chromosomes are interchangeable. Your genes code for the amount of testosterone found in your body, not your feelings.

9) Yes you can have hormone treatment, BUT THAT DOESN'T ALTER YOUR SEX CHROMOSOMES. Just because you can lop off your cock doesn't mean biological sex is interchangeable. In fact lopping your cock off and having hormone treatment aren't natural in any way, so cannot be used to disprove that biological sex isn't a natural phenomenon.

10) "Genitals aren't a great indicator." I'll bet you a million pounds that genitals are a fucking great indicator, because aside from genetic defects, which obviously describe a trend, they are fucking great ways to distinguish between sexes. Either that or doctors look at the genitals of a baby just to be really awkward. And as previously explained removing a man's penis still makes him a man, because it doesn't alter his sex chromosomes. It doesn't matter if 3/5ths of a man is more commonly associated with females, because science does not work on a consensus, and the factor that causes sex differentiation has not been altered. How many fucking times am I going to have to repeat that?

11) "There's no reason to divide XX and XY people." I'm sure there's millions of reasons why this is such a fucking dumb idea. The main ones being medical care, scientific studies, and sexual reproduction. But yeah you're right, none of those things are important are they?

12) Yes sex is defined by things that are changeable. So is temperature, is that a social construct?  Good luck in biologically altering your chromosomes. And yes the unchangeable parts do have a real world effect because they're your whole genetic makeup. Do this thing even understand what a gene is?

13) SEX IS NOT FLUID. YOU CAN'T CHANGE SEX CHROMOSOMES. Stop ignoring the critical role chromosomes play.

Well apparently this was proof that sex is a social construct. Sure there's some stupid counter-evidence, but where's the biology? Anyway, the bottom line is that sexual dimorphism is universal in humans. If that isn't the case then I implore this bellend to try and give birth, or if this thing isn't a biological man then find a biological man to try this experiment on. Sexual dimorphism is not a social construct, so whatever this thing is can fuck off. I have nothing wrong with people cutting themselves up because of a misconceived gender issue, but please don't you fucking dare try and manipulate evidence based scientific facts with this sociological feelings based bullshit.

Morons of the Internet: Black Lives Matter Toronto

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

In this edition we have some more bullshit from our favorite band of domestic terrorists and general thugs 'Black Lives Matter'. I bet you'll be shocked to hear that one of their leaders is being a racist asshole. Normally I wouldn't care, but this one decided to try and use scientific evidence to excuse racism, so let's examine her point of view.
_________________________________________________________________________________
http://www.torontosun.com/2017/02/11/black-lives-matter-co-founder-appears-to-label-white-people-defects
_________________________________________________________________________________

Black lives may matter to this lunatic, but spelling apparently doesn't. I don't quite understand why 'humanness' is repetitively spelt wrong. If it's because the term contains the word 'man', then this woman has a sore misunderstanding of etymology, which really isn't a defiant action, and actually one that makes her points seem even more stupid than they already are. Anyway, the point of this lecture is to educate the public that white skin means you cannot possibly be human. We'll ignore the fact that black people can get albinism, and so therefore can't be humans, because really this point is a poor excuse to spew racist slander. It's well known in science that whales can also suffer from albinism, but even though the whale may look like a whale it can't possibly be because it has white skin. Simple science this guys. The solid scientific knowledge continues when we find out that all phenotypes exist within the black family, apart from white skin apparently, which this woman claims doesn't make you human despite very much being a common phenotype.

But that's not enough dreadful reasoning for this crazy lunatic, as she then claims that white skin is a deleterious mutation. This is an interesting point considering that white people are able to synthesise more vitamin D from the sun, and as a result don't get degenerative diseases like rickets in milder climates. The reason black people have retained melanin is to avoid getting skin cancer in arid climates, as melanin is very effective at absorbing light. In effect this 'deleterious mutation' happens to be selectively advantageous in sun baked Toronto, and therefore cannot possibly be a genetic defect. I also don't understand how just because a race has a higher concentration of enzymes inhibitors towards a particular molecule means that they are now subhuman. Somehow I don't imagine the biological species definition is going to be changed any time soon by this level of scientific incompetence. Humanness is determined by science, not your sociological nonsense.

Actually this isn't an exert from 'Mein Kampf', nor is it from 'War and Peace', as you might have been able to pick up from the quality of written communication. Amazingly it's the same woman as from before, which seems amazing considering her arguments were so well explained last time round. Scientific reasoning is referred to here, but unfortunately it's incredibly misunderstood. You see, linked to the reproductive system is actually melanin concentrating hormone, which as you can see is a hormone, and not a pigment like melanin. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that this molecule is more abundant in people with darker skin. Nor is there any evidence to suggest that melanin causes strong bones, only that a lack of vitamin D from sunlight causes rickets, a degenerative bone disease. Just take a guess at what pigment causes this. You see melanin is a hugely diverse group of pigments, with lighter skinned individuals only being deficient in Eumelanin, and not neuromelanin concentrated in the nervous system, which debunks yet another one of her points. which unfortunately for you has no correlation between race. Melanin is present in the eyes and ears, and actually individuals that suffer from albinism are known to suffer from poor vision and deafness in a process still not fully understood by science. Again however, melanin does not appear to directly cause this deficiency, which is funny seeing as this woman seem to think it has miracle based properties. Hard to know who to trust isn't it? You could believe the ignorant bigot, or the educated professionals.

But then we get to the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Apparently melanin captures light and stores it into memory. And to think this idiot has the audacity to source conventional science when she believes in this bullshit. Funnily enough I couldn't find any papers that found melanin to have the ability to memorise and store information as spiritual energy, nor for that matter any other pigment. Either this woman is talking complete shit or she deserve a Nobel Prize. I find this revelation most odd considering how a significant proportion of Africa isn't even literate, and their average IQ is significantly lower than light skin dominated countries. Unfortunately love your superior melanin levels still aren't high to produce a sensible argument that isn't full of shit. Amazingly it turns out this argument is just pseudo-scientific drivel masquerading as a serious debate.

Yes, the first homo sapiens were most probably individuals with a darker skin tone, however that doesn't equate to 'strength', especially when darker skin colours have been actively selected against in temperate climates. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that lighter skin colours are genetically weaker on a global scale, and simply stating 'first is better' is a ridiculous argument to make. By this logic teleost fish would be the strongest of all humans since they evolved well before the first homo sapiens walked the planet, and so their genetics would be the foundation of all humanity. The rest is just more generalised bullshit that clearly isn't true. If melanin was essential for an efficient performance from the body then it simply wouldn't make sense as to why it's still such an abundant phenotype in such a large population. This woman's racist spewing simply doesn't make any sense in the real world. Maybe her melanin levels aren't storing enough cosmic energy for her to understand this basic information.

I find it quite difficult to be lectured on allegedly factual scientific information from a person who not only uses the abbreviation of people in a formal argument, but also has the mental capacity of a fucking lemon. And anyway, in what world is this factual? Lighter skin is evolutionary advantageous in temperate climates, hence why white people evolved the adaptation of lighter skin in temperate climates; that's basic biology. That doesn't make any white individual any less of a person than any black person, they simply have different genes being favored in a different environment. If that's a defect then this woman clearly has no understanding of evolutionary biology. The last time I checked white supremacy doesn't have an influence on evolution. It's also plain bullshit to claim that white people can only produce themselves. Maybe try telling that to the numerous mixed race babies born every year. That evidence alone is proof that black people do not have the dominant genes to determine skin colour, otherwise lighter skin would not be a present phenotype in mixed race babies. That's just basic Mendelian genetics.

What I really don't understand about this rant is how it can be described as a plea for equality. Why the fuck would anyone support a movement that admits that they have the power to eliminate all other races? And being as this woman has tweeted that she would like to kill white people I'm fairly confident this tirade is actually support for systematic racism. Factual science doesn't matter to this moron. She's all but happy to include scientific evidence when it allegedly supports her argument, but she soon reverts back to the her bullshit sociological slander when it gives her an excuse to be a racist bitch; and even that doesn't make sense. If recovering from genocide makes you superhuman, then wouldn't Jews also be superhuman. Jews of course famous for being an exclusively black group of people. Although to be fair to Jews they've probably had to deal with racist ideologies almost identical to this one before.

This bitch is a hateful and disgusting racist, simple as that. One minute she claims to be part of the superior race then the next minute reverts back to being a victim of an allegedly inferior race. Imagine if this had been a white person talking about how inferior black people are? They would have been shunned across the media and labelled 'white supremacists'. Maybe we should be playing a game and replacing the term 'white people' with 'the Jews', and see how nicely it coincides with 'Mein Kampf'. Unfortunately it turns out eugenics is still rampant in the 21st century, the irony being it's now originating from those that have suffered from this ideology for centuries.

Top 10 Worst Video Games of 2016

When so many video games come out in one year there's always going to be many that just plain suck. 2016 was a year when we were inundated with unfinished, buggy, or just flat out awful ideas. Here are the worst culprits that missed their potential by an absolute mile:


#10 ReCore (PC/XONE) (3/10)

ReCore was just a really fucking average game in almost every aspect. It's actually boring just having to talk about it. That's such a shame considering how at one time ReCore was hyped up to be an exciting revelation that scratched an itch nobody had bothered to scratch before. Designed by Keiji Inafune, whose ideas have not been brilliant this year as we'll see later on, ReCore revolves around the concept that one core is used to control various mechanisms that can be used to explore the open world. Fine, that actually sounds alright, and if I'm honest should become a neat little game. But no, instead we somehow ended up with one of the blandest gaming experiences of the year. To understand why this game is so boring we have to look at the mission design, which is often just some glorified side quests that don't seem to serve any purpose. It's all very well having a good idea as a foundation, but you can't just waste that with boring missions that feel like an uninteresting grind throughout.

The world you explore is also as exciting and imaginative as wet cardboard. It's meant to be a dystopian world known as 'Far Eden', which in theory I should love, but unfortunately this dystopia just feels dead, and that's not because of the lack of life forms featured in the game, it's because not a lot of effort went into designing it. Far Eden is a drab and dreary world that will have you longing for the comparatively bright palate of Dark Souls. The visuals simply don't fit in the game, and they only serve to further ruin the already average gaming experience. The combat is equally devoid of any excitement. The system works on a 'three colours system', in that there are three colours of ammunition that are only effective against their complementary enemy colour. It's paint by numbers, and I haven't found that engaging since I was about five. There are also a plague of technical issues, but that's nowhere near as infuriating as the primary issues. That's the execution, which is just piss poor.


#9 Bombshell (PC) (2/10)

From one boring game to another. This might actually be worse, although both this and ReCore are good substitutes for sleeping pills. Amazing considering 'Bombshell' was from the guys that gave us the Duke Nukem series, which although are not technically brilliant games are at least damn entertaining. The central character in Bombshell however has nothing on Duke Nukem, and hopefully she'll never be given a full release ever again. I don't know why anyone would want to buy a Duke Nukem game that's lost all that signature entertainment and any respectable gameplay, but I doubt anyone ever will after this catastrophically bad title. I mean just look at that character. How is a game centered around her going to be in any way compelling? Not surprisingly she's an awful character with shit one liners and dialogue that will make you hate her instantaneously.

Maybe I wouldn't care about the protagonist so much if this wasn't a character driven experience, but honestly she's so fucking terrible. She's like one of those cringey people that tries to win you over by becoming one annoying cliche, trying desperately to fit into that stereotypical rock chick role, and failing miserably once her two dimensional personality is instantly exposed. You can't attempt to make a credible story with this crap, and as it turns out the plot is fucking atrocious as well. There's not even any solid gameplay to act as a compromise. It's just boring gunfights. It's so bad that's its enough to make you forget that this character driven game has such a hateful central figure, who if I haven't mentioned is fucking appalling. Nothing else in the game is in anyway memorable, apart from of course the terrible protagonist. The story is rubbish, the levels are rubbish, so unfortunately that leaves the terrible gameplay, and terrible protagonist, sticking out like a sore thumb.


#8 Alekhine's Gun (PC/PS4/XONE) (2/10)

A spy thriller named after a famous chess formation. You may be thinking a game with that style must be deep and sophisticated. Well no, quite the opposite actually. Alekhine's Gun is actually part of the 'Death to Spies' series, which sounds nowhere near as high brow as the latest incarnation's title may suggest. The reality is that Alekhine's Gun could have been a great game, but only if anyone had actually bothered with it during the development phase. A stealth game centered around The Cold War should be filled with atmosphere, but this is just one big empty universe that rarely brings up anything exciting. The stealth system is just broken, which is great in a game primarily based around stealth. Furthermore the combat is just horrendous. Your character would feel more natural if they were urinating at the enemies rather than firing bullets. Punch the shit out of enemies is the way to go thanks to the dreadful balancing of the combat mechanics, although even that fucking animation looks ridiculous.

Alekhine's Gun looks as awful as it plays, and has the technical capabilities of a hemorrhoid. You could have told me this was a Playstation 2 game and I would have believed you. But the worst thing by far in this game is the story. Jesus Christ, it's like watching a compilation of some of the very worst B-movie scenes. The characters have to be seen to be believed, and as for the narrative, well that's just hilariously bad. Mix all this crap up in poorly designed environments and you've just summed up this game in a nutshell. Trying not to crack a smile during the allegedly serious tones of the game is a mammoth task, and that's even before you've got round to fighting any enemies.


#7 Umbrella Corps (PC/PS4) (2/10)

An MMO based zombie game should be a guaranteed money whore, but only if you actually bother to make a playable game. So no, that does not mean integrating a competitive multiplayer angle on top of the zombie hordes, because that simply doesn't work. As a result the multiplayer of Umbrella Corps is flat out confusing, and at no point do you ever have a good laugh. Who would have ever thought that eliminating the other team whilst for some reason also evading zombies would be a total mess? Then there's the single player, which is an even bigger joke. For some reason the developers didn't think you would notice that the missions are all on the same fucking map. You're literally playing the same mission over and over again, and don't think that's to do with any story element, because there simply isn't a story. This is a campaign that revolves around simple fetch quests. Turns out not a single person gave a single shit about this game during development. Either that or they forgot to hire anyone to write a story or design levels, and this was just the work of some programmers in their tea break.

What pisses me off with this game is that there's no creative flair, no artistic merit that would indicate anyone ever cared. It is undoubtedly the most generic and lazy game of the year by a mile. Oh, and just a side note, this is part of the Resident Evil series. Instead of promoting the game as a Resident Evil title the publishers treated this release like a child conceived by mistake, and a mistake that nobody ever thought of using a condom to prevent. It's no wonder they dropped such a huge name in gaming from the title, because Umbrella Corps has nothing to do with the beloved franchise that is Resident Evil. Most Resident Evil games have working controls. Most Resident Evil games don't have infuriating combat mechanics. Most Resident Evil games have competent AI. Most Resident Evil games aren't made by fucking lazy developers that can't even be bothered to do a half assed job. What an absolute joke of a game.


#6 Gemini: Heroes Reborn (PC/PS4/XONE) (2/10)

Here's this year's most pointless game that everyone seemed to love for reasons I still can't work out. Just because a game looks quite cool doesn't instantly mean it's going to be good quality, so whilst you can do some weird telekinetic shit in this game the rest is just rubbish. Gemini: Heroes Reborn is the story of a girl who unlocks great powers, and to be honest I just don't give a fuck. The story is just pure shit, and thankfully it only lasts a couple of hours, which is good for your sanity, but not so good if you were hoping for a respectable game rather than a cheap tech demo. I have no idea who wants to pay full retail price for that, but contemporary critics certainly thought so and gave this game rave reviews as a result.

To be fair the powers this game revolves around can be fun to use, about twice. Wandering through the grey and dreary environment, plowing through waves of enemies with little skill gets tedious after a short while, and when there's no substance behind the basic combat there's always going to be problems. It's one of those experiences that starts off feeling really fancy, but actually afterwards you really start to wonder what the whole point was. The game also crashes all the time, and performs like a dog that wants to be put out of its misery, in case you needed any more reasons to avoid this release at all costs. So yeah, the developers should probably go back to the drawing board with this one, as I suppose there's a decent concept hiding behind this mountain of shit. Yet another case of a good idea that was ruined by poor execution.


#5 Mighty No. 9 (Fucking Everything) (2/10)

Oh shit, another Megaman game. No, it's just some cheap imitation trying to make a few bucks from nostalgia. And I bet you can't guess whose idea this was? That's right, it's our old friend Keiji Inafune. Inafune thinks that nostalgia can sell games, and to be honest he's not wrong. Just a shame he couldn't include anything else in this soulless disaster. Whether due to mismanagement or just pure incompetence this release was plagued from the very start with endless delays and ended up being rushed out the door. I can't imagine that went down too well with the backers on Kickstarter that raised over four million dollars to develop this game, although I'm sure they were even more pissed off with the allegedly finished product. I guess it serves those backers right for trusting a heavily funded Kickstarter project which once again followed the history books and turned out very, very badly.

What the fuck was that money spent on? Might No. 9 looks like ass, is painfully short game, has zero replay value, boring levels, and a lack of any imagination. Inafune may as well have just fucked off to the Caribbean with his amassed fortune, as that would have probably pissed less people off. Mighty No. 9 actually reminds me of one of those cheap Chinese knock off products, as the Megaman series seems to have been described down the phone to some incompetent developers who have no idea what they're doing. The result is a cheap ripoff with zero excitement for anyone, only allowing the player to just run about a bit with some bellend in a suit named 'Beck'. Honestly, both the character and this game look worse than a genital wart, only genital warts don't cost four million dollars unless you acquire the services of a really fancy prostitute. In fact having genital warts is probably less of a disappointment than owning Might No. 9. Seriously, some classics should just stay dead.


#4 No Man's Sky (PC/PS4) (0/10)

Haha, what hasn't already been said about this PR disaster. As someone who was also sucked into the hype I can empathise with the hordes of people that brought this game on false hope. The ability to traverse a whole galaxy with each planet being characteristically different sounds absolutely amazing. 18 quintillion different planets were advertised by the developers, which is beyond my comprehension; that prospect might be more exciting than life itself. Unfortunately in the case of No Man's Sky there's fuck all to do once you get to those 18 quintillion planets that are all essentially the same with different stupid looking things you can laugh at. All you do is mine the planet for absolutely no fucking reason and then fuck off to the next one, for guess what, absolutely no fucking reason. Yeah you can attempt to get to the centre of the galaxy, but that has absolutely no consequences, so why would you? In terms of gameplay there simply isn't any. No Man's Sky, as we've heard a million times this year, is a good idea at best that unfortunately nobody bothered to turn into an actual video game.

I'll happily admit there's a lot of potential for this franchise, but there's no excuse for releasing a game that simply isn't finished. Gamers had a right to feel angry at the developers after the launch fiasco. There's no narrative involving a galactic conflict, no multiplayer, no economic system, no unique animals, no visually stunning worlds, no actual variation aside from random algorithms that sure as hell don't create diverse planets that are effected by their individual location. All these things were promised during development. I'm pretty sure that's fraudulent full stop. Not content with being lying scumbags the developers then turned their back on the obviously frustrated community. I get that the immense hype wasn't of their doing, but there's no excuse to flat out lie to consumers and then not communicate with the community after the backlash. Not surprisingly many now refer to this mess as 'One Man's Lie'. What we can say is that No Man's Sky is a legendary disappointment that I'm sure will be talked about in the gaming industry for years to come.


#3 Roller Coaster Tycoon World (PC) (0/10)

What the actual fuck happened to Roller Coaster Tycoon? How can you go from the highs of the original trilogy to this absolute mess. Oh that's right, get some no name developers to try and recreate a classic with almost zero funding. As a result what little content there is looks absolutely shit. The coaster creation is rubbish, the amount of content is rubbish, the art design is rubbish, and the game performs like absolute rubbish. All these elements used to be absolutely spot, and made the originals so much fun. Hell, I even spent the majority of my childhood on them, as did many others.

I apologise if this is coming across as simply a personal attack from me, but I and many others waited a whole twelve years for more roller coaster action, and all we got in return is an incomplete game that barely functions on even the most basic of levels. If the stupid customisation tools don't infuriate long time fans first, then the tanking performance as soon a single person enters your fucking park will. It's so fucking infuriating when a developer rushes a game to make a quick buck, ruining a respected name in the process. With dollar signs in their eyes Atari forgot what made the originals such an integral part of my childhood, and that for me that's absolutely unforgivable. I don't even want to waste my valuable words on this abomination. This isn't Roller Coaster Tycoon, and I sympathise with everyone who bought the infinitely better Planet Coaster in disgust.


#2 Ghostbusters: The Video Game (PC/PS4/XONE) (0/10)

The Ghostbusters game might actually be worse than this year's Ghostbusters film, which is an achievement within itself really. Just like the film this game has dull and irritating characters, only the ones in the game aren't even featured in the Ghostbusters universe. They don't even have names. The developers couldn't even be fucking assed to make up characters, which is so fucking tragic. How little effort can you put into a video game? This must be a game marketed for kids because honestly the challenge this game presents is simply non-existent. Not only are the missions mindnumbingly uneventful, but they're also all the same idea. And they go on for fucking years. You'll be begging by about the halfway stage for it to finally put you out of your misery and finally end, only for the next mission to be exactly the same. But the worst sin is just how bland the whole game is. It's Ghostbusters. How can you not create something cool or exciting with that iconic license to play with. Instead gamers got a lazy game that never even bothers to charm the player or create an environment that's fun to play in. This is a cash scam at every step of the way. No one cared about the consumer during the production, this was just a lazy excuse to milk some money off the rebooted franchise.

Even the majority of crappy games based off of newly released films are better than this effort. I honestly think there's a conspiracy here that the developers absolutely hated the franchise and so wanted to ruin it for everyone. Maybe the boss's wife was sexually assaulted by Dan Aykroyd, but why else would the player be punished for wanting to enjoy a Ghostbusters game. Only someone who truly hated Ghostbusters would force consumers to listen to the theme song over and over again like some torture method, or be forced to fight enemies so painfully boring it feels like sensory deprivation. The thing is this torture method will set you back full retail price. No, fuck the publishers. This game isn't even worth a dollar, but they still think it's acceptable to charge a ludicrous amount because they know a Ghostbusters game will sell. Luckily the developers filed for bankruptcy three days after launch, so I'll doubt we'll be seeing shit like this for a while. Serves them right too. How fucking dare they massacre a well love franchise for a few bucks? Makes me fucking sick.


#1 Strike Force: Desert Thunder (PC) (-10/10)

Steam in 2016 went absolutely mental. There must have been at least fifty billion indie titles released this year alone, and as you would expect from indie titles most of them were shit. Any number of  shit games Steam supported this year could have occupied this spot, and actually they could have occupied the whole list, but here is the one that embodies everything wrong with steam. Strike Force: Desert Thunder is just not a functioning game, simple as that. There doesn't seem to be any attempt to make a finished game, and actually it resembles more of a high school project from some bored teenagers. For starters the mechanics are just pathetic. Every important aspect of a fun, or even playable shooter is missing. The AI is just broken. They don't even react when you shoot at them, and that's assuming that every object in the game hasn't already glitched out.

Strike Force: Desert Thunder has the fucking audacity to claim it's set in a large open map, which is true if you like your large maps with nothing in them. This is just a game full of sand and poorly rendered objects that have about as much life in them as Henry VIII. The developers also claim the loadouts are customisable. That's true, only there's twelve guns to choose from. Honestly, The Dalai Lama has a better choice of guns than that. I'm not even going to comment on the technical qualities of this game, because as you can clearly see there aren't any. In fact there isn't a single positive I can think of. This game is the embodiment of pure excrement; a game without merit. Seriously Steam, have some fucking quality control. I don't know, build a virtual wall or something, that seems to be the in thing at the moment. Just stop shit like this from ever being released.

Top 10 Video Games of 2016

2016 was actually a fairly decent year for video games. Unlike the real world I found there was a lot of good stuff on the market, but not enough great stuff to make this a great year for gamers. Sure, there was a ton of stuff in terms of quantity, and that made a lot of competition to make this year's list. Here are those video games that made it:

#10 Pokemon Go (Mobile) (6/10)

Is this allowed? I'd normally shudder at putting a mobile game on any list that concerns the best games of the year, but when a game becomes such a huge cultural phenomenon like this one did then you sort of have to. 'Pokemon Go' was a game that managed to appeal to every gamer out there, and even creating new ones in the process. This game managed to not only unite an often divided world of video games, but also made headlines for positive reasons. 'Pokemon Go' even had some unusual side effects, such as curing obesity, and aiding the suppression of depression and learning difficulties. For once a game wasn't being blamed for every evil in the world by the mass media, and actually society as a whole seemed to enjoy this global fad. Nintendo certainly enjoyed the fad. Their share price rose by 50% after the release of this game, and the sheer number of players caused widespread server issues that still have yet to be fully fixed. Sure, this is probably one of the simplest games ever made, and if I'm honest it's a huge bundle of wasted potential, but it gave gamers that brief joy of being a Pokemon trainer. And let's face it, what kid has never wanted to catch them all?

I guess it's too bad that 'Pokemon Go' will go down as a huge fad, as nobody gives a shit anymore. That may have a lot to do with integral features being removed by the developers for whatever reason, seriously affecting whatever good gameplay there was originally. Aside from the charm of catching Pokemon there were the odd negatives that arose from this game. Actually they're very big negatives. I can never recall any other game getting into trouble for encouraging the catching of Pokemon in minefields or Auschwitz, and Indonesia even claimed the game was a national security threat. Still, however you see this game there's no denying that it's had an unprecedented effect on gamers worldwide that probably won't be seen again on the same scale for decades. Turns out real life is sometimes more exciting than virtual worlds. Not that gamers will care about that conclusion in about a year.


#9 Watch Dogs 2 (PS4, XONE, PC) (7/10)

I was one of many people left majorly disappointed by the original Watch Dogs game after feeling let down by its immense hype. The original should have been a good game in concept, but just didn't deliver on its promises and failed to capitalise on any of its unique selling points. The sequel however actually listened to these concerns, which is a strange occurrence in the gaming business, and thankfully resulted in a game worthy of the strong original concept. The central components of hacking and player navigation have been completely overhauled, which was much needed, and although there are still some irritating technical issues the game actually feels polished, and the gameplay is well integrated.

I thought I would hate the new 'hipster-esque' feel of the plot, but honestly it's so much more exciting than the dreariness of the original. Half the characters now seem to want to irritate you at every opportunity, but main character Marcus Holloway is a solid, if forgettable protagonist that certainly improves on the bland characters the original gave us. Watch Dogs 2 is a game that retains the 'hacking is fun' attitude, but switches setting from the metropolis of Chicago to vibrant San Francisco. This change of setting presents the player with a change of style and narrative, with the environment also becoming a much more enjoyable place to be. Thankfully hacking is still the central concept, which was something the first got right, although there is still the tendency that every encounter can be solved by shooting everyone up. There is still work to do in this series, but this new installment was a huge step in the right direction.


#8 Superhot (PC/XONE) (8/10)

Here's my annual indie game pick. A hard choice actually despite the amount of shit that flooded the indie market this year. This however was the game that came out of nowhere and impressed me no end. The idea is that time only moves when you do; genius I know. It's a mechanic so simple yet completely changes the whole dimensions of the FPS genre. Instead of just mindlessly blowing things up the player requires tactics to succeed, which provides gamers with genuinely intriguing challenges that are fun to calculate. You can tailor your killing spree to the accuracy of a split second, which makes you feel like you deserve to be cast in 'The Matrix' as a result of your heroics. Despite not even playing as some tanked up superhero, rather a character that can be killed by one bullet, you still get a huge adrenaline rush after performing a perfectly timed action sequence.

There is a story going on apparently, not that I really gave a shit as it lasted for about two seconds, but that unlocks the customisation of each individual scenario, which is where this game really starts to get good. In essence you can become the star and director of your very own action flick. Admittedly you do have to become a star in a film with a minimalist art style, which I can't say I'm a huge fan of, but I suppose it's unique despite being totally bizarre. I get it's meant to highlight key areas that the player should be aware of, but honestly I think it just looks ugly. Thankfully Superhot is a game that's minimalistic at its very core, but certainly not in terms of the depth in gameplay. This game is living proof that shooters apparently can be turned into brilliant puzzle games, and not just dumb explosion-fests.


#7 Civilization VI (PC) (8/10)
 

I'm going to be honest and say Civilization VI is nowhere near the best game in the franchise, although that's hardly a criticism. What this game is however is a return to form for a franchise that's been going through a rough patch as of late and needed a release like this one to get its mojo back.
This release will be very familiar to longtime players of the franchise, but this time the developers took risks instead of relying on the same formula for the umpteenth time. That basic formula is still at the forefront of this new installment, but now we have new features such as hand drawn maps and different districts around cities that update the gameplay. These features work too, especially the districts system that's such a simple yet strategic addition that totally revamps the traditional concept of settlements in Civilization. I honestly believe these features have brought new life to a dwindling franchise, which is an extremely tough thing to do. In essence this game gets the right balance by not  abandoning its huge fanbase, but also making changes to appeal to a new market.

I can't say I'm over the moon with these changes as I consider myself something of a Civilization purist, but I can't complain too much when top quality games are still being produced that still feel unique and original despite being the same concept presented in a different style. Recent Civilization titles have felt unbalanced and incomplete at launch, especially the fifth installment of the franchise, but here that's not true. It already feels a complex game worthy of its namesake that doesn't require DLC to give you the standard Civilization experience. I honestly didn't think I was going to like it, but it still has that original charm, as well as being a friendly but complex strategy game. I even ended up loving the new art style, so all in all I have to give credit to the developers for taking the franchise in the right direction. Civilization VI ended up being hugely successful, with 1 million units shipped in two weeks. This the best selling Civilization game ever, and although not the best, is still a worthy addition to the franchise.


#6 XCOM 2 (PC/PS4/XONE) (8/10)

XCOM 2 is a very intelligently made game. The central idea that dominates the whole atmosphere of this game is that humans have lost a fictional war with aliens, and now like any good underdog story they must fight back. Honestly it's a great setting, and one that allows every tactical move you make to feel even more significant. You have a whole race to save with your little minions, and that feels like an absolutely huge task that will easily engross you in this well told story. XCOM 2 is a game that requires you to think. It's a simple turn based strategy game that emphasises the role of teamwork. That sounds incredibly simple in concept, but after making a few tactical sacrifices you'll start to understand just how complex and stressful making just a single movement is. When it all comes together you feel like the Napoleon of tactical video games. That, or feel a huge sense of relief that some of your squad are still alive to tell the tale.

The real highlight of the game for me is that you can customise your whole team. I wouldn't advise putting your own likeness in your dream team, as sure enough you'll end up sacrificing them to the alien horde in an action sequence so dramatic and emotional it makes Hollywood films look pathetic in comparison. You will get attached to each individual soldier on the battlefield, which is a trick team based strategy games rarely pull off, but when it's pulled off as well as this game manages then you have such a fucking great experience. Even more dramatic is that the game seems to have a perverse obsession in trying to make every engagement a difficult one. Even if you do manage to beat the game you'll find if you try again the world is randomly generated to make no two playthroughs ever the same. I'm sure you could try and figure out some tactics to deal with this ever changing world, but I don't think I can handle that level of emotional trauma ever again.


#5 Forza Horizon 3 (PC/XONE) (8/10)

I fucking loved the original Forza Horizon. You could just sense that every inch of potential was being squeezed out of an open world driving game. In my opinion this latest edition of the franchise was just as groundbreaking and awe-inspiring as the original. You get that sense that once again you're playing an epic adventure game as well as a solid racing sim in its own right. In essence it's perfect for any gamer who loves a good racer. Australia was the perfect setting for this new installment. It's a place with such a diverse natural landscape that driving through a virtual version is breathtaking at times. And of course it's Forza, so you just know it's going to look beautiful, and this game is no exception. Seriously, some of the visuals are stunning in this one.

For me Forza Horizon games have always been at their best when you just want to cock around, and this third installment is no exception. Hell, the game will even reward you for coking around in as much style as possible. This game will happily aid you in creating monstrous cars to do the stupidest and craziest things possible, and there's a lot of space and varied terrain for this to happen. Whether it's buy whatever car you want to kit out from a vast selection, or keep repeating a huge number of activities, this game has you covered for hours. The actual storyline is relatively short and underwhelming, but that's not really the main point for a game that's all about you having fun. I still think the original was better at the time of release, but Forza Horizon 3 is damn close to being the perfect open world racer.


#4 Overwatch (PC/PS4/XONE) (8/10)

A lot of the time video game developers forget that games should be primarily about having fun. Overwatch is that type of first person shooter that rewards fun and tries to limit needless frustration. There's bucketloads of charm and exhilarating action to be had in this character driven shooter, and honestly that was such a breath of fresh air in such a miserable year. It was lovely to indulge in this cheerful vision of the near future. Everything is almost too nice about this game, even the community is filled with a large amount of nice people, which is quite ironic when the goal is to eliminate members of the other team. I don't think I've ever played an online shooter where people actually want to work together, but here, unlike many other shooters, teamwork reaps big rewards. But the central idea of Overwatch is becoming an integral part of that team. You have to actually study your chosen character to play well, and there's a huge focus on learning the ins and outs of each vastly different hero that are each hard to master in their own right. That's not to say this isn't an easy game to pick up, but it's one that richly rewards competitive gaming.

The biggest credit however has to got to the art design team. They've crafted some of the most diverse characters in gaming, who despite not having any form of narrative to promote themselves, still gives this game its own charm that you don't get with other conventional shooters. This is such a refreshing attitude when you consider just how over-saturated the multiplayer based shooter market is. Every other shooter is about making everything as macho and self-centered as possible, so I can understand why gamers loved the gamble of making everything bright and colourful. It's just one of those shooters that never gets boring, with every game turning out to be a completely different scenario than the one before. This fun does come at a price however. It's an exclusively online game. I'm sure that doesn't matter to the 25 million people to have bought the game since its release however.


#3 Battlefield 1 (PC/PS4/XONE) (8/10)

Do you remember the days when Battlefield was in a hot rivalry with Call of Duty? well that doesn't really exist anymore considering how badly Battlefield humiliated its biggest rival this year. Ever since the trailer dropped for Battlefield 1 you could instantly tell which was going to be the best selling shooter of the year. Personally I was skeptical to say the least, but my doubts turned out to be sorely unjustified. By rolling back the years to a period even further than most shooters dared to go DICE managed to create an original shooter experience that never diverted from the standard formula. I didn't think it was possible to make an exciting World War One based game, considering a large portion of the war was set in trenches and a complete stalemate, but Battlefield 1 certainly didn't give a shit about that stalemate and sets a game as frantic and action packed as any other shooter on the market. Here you have cavalry, zeppelins, and tanks, all on the same battlefield, replicating the diverse weaponry of the time. This is a shooter experience that actually feels like a genuine global war, and an authentic retelling of such a huge conflict.

Even the story, which Battlefield games have always struggled with, is surprisingly ingenious this time. I would argue it portrays the horrors of historical warfare in excellent detail, with characters that feel genuine and are just a minor part of a huge global conflict. By setting the campaign in multiple settings we get the impression of the sheer scale of this war, and although the campaign is very short in length we find some truly memorable characters that deliver some interesting tales. Of course it's the multiplayer that really stands out. That's expected to be honest, but this time the destruction you cause feels even more vivid in this real world historical setting. If there's a message to conventional shooters here it's that players like it when the action is simple, and when developers are willing to breathe new life into a franchise without going overboard.


#2 Titanfall 2 (PC/PS4/XONE) (9/10)

Titanfall 2 was hands down the best shooter of the year for me by a mile. I had the same amount of fun in this game as I did in the original, with the concept still feeling as fresh and revolutionary, and also that genuine intrigue I felt watching the first ever trailer. If you want to blow things up with giant robots and participate in firefights at a million mile an hour, then this is your perfect game. Honestly, some of the moves I pulled off playing like a complete idiot blew my own mind and made me think I was some MLG YouTuber. The developers also decided to follow an optimal model for making an exiting shooter. Not only did they actually listen to fans but they also optimised the game for free DLC. Gone is the multiplayer only campaign of the original, and instead there's a single player experience that isn't just there to appease whiny gamers. The story isn't anything amazing, but it's fun and the missions are well designed, so there's no complaints from me.

The multiplayer of course is the real focus, and Titanfall 2 nails that aspect. It was such a shame this was a commercial flop, because so many gamers missed out on one of the best multiplayer experiences of all time. EA, in their infinite wisdom, decided a release during a packed schedule and minimal marketing would make them money off this game, and so not surprisingly the game sold at just a quarter of what the original did, despite being four times better. I have an infinite amount of respect for a game that tries to find the art in an explosionfest. I especially have respect for a developer that listened to consumers to iron out the many flaws of the original. The result is an exceptional game that should have been the hallmark of what fast paced shooters should all be about.


#1 Uncharted 4: A Thief's End (PS4) (9/10)

Uncharted 4 seems to be a confused game. On one hand it wants to be the greatest action adventure story of all time, and the next it wants to be the best looking game of all time that tries to distract you with its stupendous mission design. You might think these two traits would counteract each other, but I genuinely think developers 'Naughty Dog' have managed to cover both these features without ruining the overall experience. Sometimes this game will leave you absolutely breathless because of just how well developed and integrated every mechanic and detail is. That's obviously once you've recovered from some of the jaw-dropping set pieces on display, but then that's what we've come to expect from the Uncharted series over the years. The fourth installment in particular is a tribute to this idea of quality game making. Even the multiplayer mode, which I assumed would just be a trivial add on to keep players vaguely interesting, is actually well made.

The rest of the game is the standard Uncharted experience. It's full of guns and over the top sequences, and wants you to go as mental as possible even if you don't particularly want to. Everything about this game is in excess, but for the majority of the time that's a huge plus, and honestly creates one of the most exhilarating experiences I've had in recent years. Uncharted 4 also has the distinction of focusing on a story driven experience that highlights just how great a character Nathan Drake has become. It's a slow builder that resembles the world of the silver screen rather than attitudes often found in video game narratives. I think it's a fitting tribute to Nathan Drake, who's become an iconic part of the Sony franchise, and so thankfully we finally get the adventure this traveler deserves. Yes there is still that sense that the world is far more beautiful than any one person in it, but in this game the narrative sometimes becomes even bigger. I personally think this was a new high from such a polished franchise, albeit unfortunately the last adventure we'll ever get from Nathan Drake.