Mayara S2 Felipe: 05/23/19

quinta-feira, 23 de maio de 2019

DE: Evolution Of A Competitive List

Double-face Archon is the best Archon.

Man, I am freaking excited to write this article. There has been a lot of questions floating around lately that I want to address and the more I think about it, the more I can root cause it to this very topic. I want to talk about the evolution of a competitive list, the aftermath of several games after you've finalized your competitive list. This is essentially the Part 2 of my rather popular Army Building Guide.

Before I begin in the earnest, let's talk about what kind of questions have been asked in the last couple of days. Yes, I do get Email and comments both on here and on the Dark City forums. Some of the topics that have been talked about are:

How many Dark Lances vs. Dissies?
Take me through your thought process after the Big FAQ?
General question asked to all: What does a competitive DE list look like?
Warriors or Wyches and why?

While all these questions might seem like they don't connect at first, I assure you they do. At least to the min-maxy type of player like me who likes to play in a competitive setting, all of these questions are completely valid. They are valid because I've put this list through a lot of thought, theory and practice questions against a variety of lists and opponents. Some opponents bring harder lists than others, some not so much. At the end of the day, a lot of these questions can be answered with "well, that depends" because every playing environment is different, and therefore, every meta is different. Regardless of whether or not you're playing in a local meta or in a GT, you must go into every environment with a gameplan. This means knowing the meta, predicting the meta, and taking your list through the gauntlet so you can answer what works best for you (in terms of playstyle) and what will be effective on the battlefield.

So, now that you've read through that guide and have a general idea of how I like to min-max my army lists, let's take a trip down memory lane to the very first army list I posted.

This was before the big FAQ:

1998 - 7 CP
Flayed Skull Battalion - 3 CP

HQ:
Archon, Agonizer, Blaster = 91
Archon, Agonizer, Blaster = 91

TROOP:
5x Warriors, Blaster = 47
Venom, 2x SC = 75
122

5x Warriors, Blaster = 47
Venom, 2x SC = 75
122

10x Warriors, 2x Blaster, Dark Lance = 114
Raider, Splinter Racks, Dark Lance = 95
209

10x Warriors, 2x Blaster, Dark Lance = 114
Raider, Splinter Racks, Dark Lance = 95
209

10x Warriors, 2x Blaster, Dark Lance = 114
Raider, Splinter Racks, Dark Lance = 95
209

FLYER:
Razorwing, 2x Dark Lances = 145
Razorwing, 2x Dark Lances = 145

+++

Black Heart Spearhead - 1 CP

HQ:
Archon, Agonizer, Blaster = 91
Warlord: Labyrinthine Cunning
Artifact: Writ of Living Muse

TROOP:
7x Warriors, Blaster = 59
Raider, Dark Lance = 85
144

HEAVY:
Ravager, 3x Dark Lances = 140
Ravager, 3x Dark Lances = 140
Ravager, 3x Dark Lances = 140

>>>
Firepower Analysis:
20 Dark Lances at BS3+
9 Blasters at BS3+
3 Blasters at BS2+
4 Splinter Cannons at BS3+
21 Splinter Rifles at BS3+ with Flayed Skull + Splinter Racks
19 Splinter Rifles at BS3+ elsewhere
2 Razorwing Missiles at BS3+

Possibly the best DE gif to ever exist.

This is not a bad list, but let me take you through all the thought exercises I put myself through while playing with this list over 12 times now. Remember, when you take your list through a gauntlet, the objective here is to build knowledge and experience. Knowledge in the sense that you know what every unit in the list is designed to do and what you purchased it to do (very different things), and experience in the sense that in X matchup on Y battlefield in Z scenario, you know what to do with said units.

Here are the thought exercises that I ran through in 12 games. There might be more, but these are the highlights. I will write a short blurb about each:

Balancing Dark Lances with Dissies
I started off with a lot of Darklight, and most importantly, a lot of Dark Lances that have 36" range. This was because my meta is saturated with competitive builds of Imperials (double SR/Dante, Azrael Hellblaster Deathstars, Guard CP bats/Custodes, AdMech Robots/Guard CP, or just Guard CP Tank Park). While I thought the results were decent, I was finding myself less effective against MEQ out in the open. Shooting a Dark Lance at a Marine is always satisfying, but it's not the best use of points because it's typically overkill. It's pretty much just wasted on Guard and less effective vs. Shield-Captains on Dawneagles. Therefore, I needed to strike a balance between lances for longer engagements and Dissies for volume and more efficient killing those targets I just named. I can literally go on with this forever, but what you need to do is do a firepower analysis (or whatever your primary killing method is) and range band everything with respect to what units you're engaging. The targets depend completely on your meta and your predictions for the meta. More on this later. Just remember that lances are better vs. T6/7 3+ targets (so basically Rhinos/Robots) while Dissies are better vs. everything else.

Venoms vs. Raiders
This one was an easier decision for me because I wanted more heavy weapons and transport space for Warriors. It was either more Dark Lance presence for AT or Dissies for general purpose. Either way, my meta called for less anti-infantry and more heavy weaponry which only the Raider can deliver. I also noticed that in my first couple of games, losing Venoms also dropped my SCs which was surprisingly frustrating. The next point will explain more.

Taking Dark Lances on Warriors
This is just playtesting at work. I originally thought: Great! More lances the better right? Not really, because I noticed that I tend to move around a lot while engaging, and the new Strategems like Fire and Fade kept my army active at all times. Investing 20 points into a Dark Lance is good, but having it hit on 4+ after you move is not. This is pretty much a 50/50 and after several games, I wanted to commit to something more efficient. This is when I started weighing the importance of having a 10 point SC upgrade on my Warriors vs. 10 point Splinter Racks vs. Flayed Skull and the re-rolls. I found that the Splinter Racks are good, but math says SCs are point for point much better. It also stays there after you lose the Raider and further increases in damage with respect to range compared to racks. Boom, made the switch and I've been liking the results so far. In some ways, I would say that Warriors carrying SCs is more durable than Venoms because they're less of a fire magnet.

Converting from Flayed Skull to Black Heart
You can find me writing a lot about this, but I wanted to bring more units under Black Heart simply because I can take advantage of the Archon's Living Muse on the Raiders themselves. The more I played with Black Heart, the more I saw an advantage in keeping my Raiders alive and thus, keeping the bulk of my firepower unharmed and alive as well. As long as my Warriors are inside and shooting, I felt less pressure on my presence on the board and greater pressure on my opponent once more of his things started dying. This is what I need because as Dark Eldar, you need to keep pressure and maintain momentum and tempo in a game. Keeping my units alive was more important to me in that sense, and the more heavy weapons I can put in-range of my Archon, the better results I was having. There's a follow-up to this below, and that's also because Black Heart transports work better for Obsidian Rose units.

Black Heart Air Wing to unlock AoV
I feel like a genius for discovering this and blogging about it, but not really because it was pretty much a braindead choice. AoV is great and just having it in the army mindfucks your opponent every time he wants to use a Strategem. Remember again guys, the more you make your opponents think, the higher your chances are of winning.

Min-maxing different detachments to spread obsession bonuses (Black Rose)
OK, this one I will take credit for because I think it's awesome. My Kabal of the Black Rose is simply the original pure Kabal list min-maxed as much as possible to suit my playstyle. Since I was already using Black Heart vehicles for their durability, AoV, re-rolls thanks to Living Muse and Cunning, I knew I needed to compliment that with an Obsession that would fit my particular playstyle. Flayed Skull was great, I've played it a few times, but it was too much of a glasshammer that encouraged overly aggressive plays. While I normally like that kind of play because I'm a highly aggressive player, my meta matchups needed something more flexible. I also noticed that the closer I got to Shield-Captains, the more I subjected myself to losing Raiders. This is more self-enlightenment more than anything else: I'm an aggressive player but I needed more threat without exposing myself to painful Space Marine assaults. I also needed something that I can poke and run because my meta have big scary melee units. Great, Obsidian Rose it is. Combine that with Black Heart and I have my Kabal of the Black Rose. Boom.

Trying min-squad vs. decent squad Wyches in Raiders
This feels like the odd-man out here, but I needed to try Wyches because I have like 50 of them sitting in a bin. They're great, I love them and I think they definitely will see play, but maybe not in a list like mine because the only thing I'm doing is taking away from my firepower. This is the list schism that I was talking about in my previous articles on how to build lists, and that's if you start to branch off and try to do different things (especially polarizing things), you water down your ability to be effective. When I mean polarizing, I mean specifically mixing shooting and melee whereas if you take the Meat Mountain + Wyches, you might get better results because there's more of a particular form of pressure that can overwhelm your opponent if they're not ready for it. Either way, I see merits in both min-squads vs. the larger 8-9 man squads of Wyches in a Raider. I still think Raiders are their best method of delivery, especially when you have shenanigans like Enhanced Aethersails and Fire and Fade (with a Dissie-mounted Raider) on T1. If I wanted to play more casual, I'll mix up my lists some more, but if I wanted to just play the ranged game and shoot with my Black Rose, I will go for more shooting, period.

Switching to Dark Lances on my Razorwings
After a bunch of games, I started noticing one thing: Once I converge with my Razorwings on that first initial high-five with my Living Muse Archon, they flew off to wherever I needed them to go. I never saw them within ass-slapping range of my Archon ever again so I knew something had to change. I knew I still needed Dissies, but just how many of them? This goes back to the question about balancing Dissies with Darklight, but after even more min-max testing, I decided that Ravagers were enough for now. Having 9 shots that are always in range of re-roll 1s to Hit and Wound was giving me the right results, whereas I've had more success moving Dark Lances to the Razorwings. The range threat was still the same, but the big difference for me there was that my lances need 3s to wound most things I wanted dead vs. the 5s that I would need with Dissies. Without the re-rolls, 3s are much better than 5s when dealing damage for sure. The other factor for me was that I found my previous firepower analysis was a bit biased towards Dissies: Having 15 Dissies and less 36" range lances. My first couple of turns in my meta is more probing and poking, and I definitely needed some added long-range weight before I pounce forward with my superior threat range. Notice how I'm using my experience in games to guide my decisions with what the list looks like in accordance to my meta and playstyle.

What my lists look like after the big FAQ
Well, the good news is that not much really changed for DE. I min-maxed some shit here and there but overall, the Black Rose emerged pretty victorious after all the dust settled. My lists are not overly ridiculous with more Ravagers than a bag can hold, and I typically build for more balanced lists than something completely over the top. OK, the 20 36" lances were kinda hilarious though. What I need to pay attention to going forward is not how my lists adapt, but how my competitive meta evolves. I have initial predictions that I will see more Guard players because I think they came out pretty good with the CP boosts for Bats and Brigades. Armies that relied heavily on alpha-striking with CC and dropping in the first turn also got hit, which further strengthens the power of gunline-oriented armies. With that said, I need to think about which armies out there will take advantage of the FAQ the most and prepare my list accordingly. For now, I think my mix is pretty decent since I just converted more units to carry lances, but only time and more playtesting will tell.

Well, there you have it folks. The first list I posted was on the last day of March. After all the experience and games, this is what I landed on today:

An artistic expression for my contempt for bad lists.

Kabal of the Black Rose
1999 // 10 CP

Obsidian Rose Bat +5 CP

HQ:
Archon, Agonizer, Blaster, PGL = 94
Archon, Agonizer, Blaster, PGL = 94

TROOP:
10x Warriors, 2x Blaster, SC = 104
10x Warriors, 2x Blaster, SC = 104
10x Warriors, 2x Blaster, SC = 104
10x Warriors, 2x Blaster, SC = 104

+++

Black Heart Spear +1 CP

HQ:
Archon, Agonizer, Blaster = 91
Warlord: Cunning, Living Muse

TROOP:
7x Warriors, Blaster, BP = 69

PARTY BUS:
Raider, Dark Lance = 85
Raider, Dark Lance = 85
Raider, Dark Lance = 85
Raider, Dark Lance = 85
Raider, Dark Lance = 85

HEAVY:
Ravager, 3x Dissies = 125
Ravager, 3x Dissies = 125
Ravager, 3x Dissies = 125

+++

Black Heart Wing +1 CP

FLYER:
Razorwing, 2x Dark Lance = 145
Razorwing, 2x Dark Lance = 145
Razorwing, 2x Dark Lance = 145

>>>
Firepower Analysis:
11 Dark Lances at BS3+
9 Dissies at BS3+
9 Blasters at BS3+
3 Blasters at BS2+
3 Razorwing Missiles at BS3+
4 Splinter Cannons at BS3+
41 Splinter Rifles at BS3+

Is this list perfect? Hell no. The big question up in the air right now is what the new competitive meta is going to look like. However, you bet your ass that I will be actively thinking about all the topics I went over today as we keep on murdering our opponents. Luckily, I've had enough games with the list above that I'm feeling pretty good, so I'm currently testing other lists to gauge which is more competitive. That's another story for another time.

Global Game Jam 2018 @ KSU 48 HOURS Jam!

IMPORTANT UPDATE: GGJ @ KSU will be OPEN for the ENTIRE 48 hours.

The Global Game Jam 2018 @ KSU will be held from Friday, January 26th through Sunday, January 28th.

This is a great opportunity to come and make a game over a weekend. Anyone can join in regardless of skill or experience. Come and have fun, learn, and meet some new people.

Come to the J/Atrium building (Marietta campus). Driving directions and a campus map is available at http://www.kennesaw.edu/maps/docs/marietta_printable_campus_map.pdf and http://www.kennesaw.edu/directionsparking.php

Register now and save, registration fee increases to $45 on January 19th
https://epay.kennesaw.edu/C20923_ustores/web/classic/product_detail.jsp?PRODUCTID=2015

You will also need to register https://globalgamejam.org/2018/jam-sites/kennesaw-state-university

The registration desk will be on Level 2 of J-Block at 1:00 pm.

The opening ceremonies will take place in Q-202 and will start at 4:30 pm. The jam will take place in J-Block and will start at 6:00 pm on Friday January 26, 2019.

This is an 18 Plus event. If you are not 18 or older, you will not be able to participate.

REAL TO SIMS 4 #5 + DOWNLOAD + TOUR + CC CREATORS | The Sims 4

Tech Book Face Off: CoffeeScript Vs. Simplifying JavaScript

I really like this setup for a Tech Book Face Off because it's implicitly asking the question of what can be done to improve the quagmire that is the JavaScript language. Should we try to simplify things and pare down what we use in the language to make it more manageable, or should we ditch it and switch to a language with better syntax that transpiles into JavaScript? For the latter option, I picked one of the few books on the CoffeeScript language, aptly named CoffeeScript: Accelerated JavaScript Development by Trevor Burnham. Then, for sticking with JavaScript, I went with a recently published book by Joe Morgan titled Simplifying JavaScript: Writing Modern JavaScript with ES5, ES6, and Beyond. It should be interesting to see what can be done to make JavaScript more palatable.

VS.

CoffeeScript

This book was written a few years ago now, in early 2015, but CoffeeScript is still alive and kicking, especially for Ruby on Rails developers as the default front-end language of choice. CoffeeScript is integrated into Rails' asset pipeline, so it gets automatically transpiled to JavaScript and minified as part of the production release process. If you're already comfortable with JavaScript, and even more so if you know Ruby, then CoffeeScript is a breeze to learn.

The ease with which this language can be picked up is exemplified by the book, since it's one of the shortest books I've ever read on a programming language. Over half of the book has more to do with examples, applications, and other stuff tangential to CoffeeScript, rather than the language proper. The book itself is just short of 100 pages while the content on syntax and usage of the language is condensed into the first half of the book.

As all books like this do, the first chapter starts out with how to install the language and configure the environment. It's pretty straightforward stuff. Then, we get into all of the syntax changes that CoffeeScript brings to JavaScript, which essentially defines the language since all of the features are the same as JavaScript's. Chapter 2 shows how function and variable declarations are different, and much shorter. Chapter 3 demonstrates some nice syntactical sugar for arrays in the form of ranges, and iteration can be done more flexibly with for comprehensions. Chapter 4 gets into the syntax features for defining classes and doing inheritance concisely.

Most of the syntax will look quite familiar to Rubyists, including class instance variables denoted with an '@' prefix, the string interpolation notation, unless conditionals, and array ranges. Here's an example from the book showing a number of the syntax features:

class Tribble
  constructor: ->      # class constructor definition
    @isAlive = true    # instance variable definition
    Tribble.count += 1 # class variable access
  
  breed: -> new Tribble if @isAlive
  die: ->
    return unless @isAlive
    Tribble.count -= 1
    @isAlive = false

  @count: 0            # class variable (property)
  @makeTrouble: -> console.log ('Trouble!' for i in [1..@count]).join(' ')

This code would be about twice as many lines in JavaScript, so the compression is pretty great and the code is much cleaner and easier to understand. Burnham proclaims these virtues of CoffeeScript early on in the book:

Shorter code is easier to read, easier to write, and, perhaps most critically, easier to change. Gigantic heaps of code tend to lumber along, as any significant modifications require a Herculean effort. But bite-sized pieces of code can be revamped in a few swift keystrokes, encouraging a more agile, iterative development style.

Maybe that's stated a bit more strongly than is warranted, but it's still hard to argue with the improved simplicity and cleanliness of CoffeeScript making developers' lives more pleasant.

The last three chapters of the book delve into different frameworks and packages in the JavaScript universe that can be used with CoffeeScript, and the vehicle for exploring these things is a (heavily) stripped down version of the Trello app. Chapter 5 goes through how to create the front-end portion of the app with jQuery and Backbone.js. Chapter 6 adds a backend server for the app with Node and Express. Chapter 7 explores how to test the app with Intern. All of the code for the front-end, backend, and tests is written in CoffeeScript, and the transpiling is setup to be managed with Grunt. It's nice to see multiple different examples of how to use CoffeeScript anywhere that JavaScript would normally be used, just to get an idea of how to transition to CoffeeScript in multiple ways.

Throughout the book, Burnham presents everything in a straightforward, no-frills manner. Everything is clear and logical, and his concise descriptions are part of the reason the book is so short. He assumes you already know JavaScript—which is much appreciated—and he doesn't go into extended explanations of JavaScripts features. It's just the facts on how CoffeeScript is different and what the syntax is for the features it compresses. It's awfully hard for me not to recommend this book simply because it's so short and to the point. It only took a few hours to read through, and now I know a better way to code JavaScript. There's not much more I can ask of a programming language book.

Simplifying JavaScript

Every language has those more advanced books that assume you already know the language and instead of covering the basics and syntax, it provides advice on how to write idiomatically in the language. I've read these books for C++, Ruby, and JavaScript and found them to be surprisingly enjoyable to read. That was not the case with this book, but before I get too far into criticisms, I should summarize what this book does well.

Simplifying JavaScript is organized into ten chapters with each chapter broken into a set of tips that total 51 tips in all. These tips each explain one new feature of the JavaScript language from the new ES5, ES6, and ES2017 specifications. Some features, like the spread operator take multiple tips to fully cover. Then, the last chapter covers some features of the JavaScript development environment, like npm, that are not part of the language and have been around a bit longer than these newer specifications.

Most of the new features significantly improve and simplify the language, and they include things like:

new variable declaration keywords const and let
string template literals, which look much like Ruby's string interpolation
the spread operator ... for converting arrays to lists and converting lists of parameters to arrays
the Map object
the Set object
new loop iterators such as map(), filter(), and reduce()
default parameters
object destructuring
unnamed arrow functions
partially applied functions and currying
classes
promises and async/await

The arrow functions, spread operator, loop iterators, and destructuring go a long way in making modern JavaScript much more pleasant to program in. All of these features—and likely more in the newest language specs—make CoffeeScript nearly irrelevant, and likely not worth the effort of going through the step of compiling to JavaScript. The language has really matured in the last few years!

Morgan does a nice job introducing and justifying the new features at times:

We spend so much time thinking and teaching complex concepts, but something as simple as variable declaration will affect your life and the lives of other developers in a much more significant way.

This is so true. The code we're reading and writing every day has hundreds of variable declarations and usages, and being able to indicate intent in those declarations makes code much cleaner and more understandable. Getting better at the fundamentals of the language and having these new declarations available so that the most common code is clear and purposeful will more significantly improve code than all of the complicated, esoteric features that only get used once in a blue moon.

These exciting new features and simple explanations were the good parts, so why did I end up not liking this book much? Mostly, it was because of how long-winded the explanations were. Each tip dragged on for what felt like twice as long as it needed to, and the book could have easily been half as long. CoffeeScript showed how to present language features in a clear, concise way. This book took the opposite approach. Then, to make matters worse, it was written in the second person with the author always referring directly to the reader with you this and you that. Normally I don't mind a few references to you, the reader, every now and then, but this was constant so it became constantly aggravating.

Beyond the writing style, some of the justifications for various features didn't hold much water. For example, when trying to rationalize the new variable declarations, Morgan presented an example of code where the variables are declared at the top, and then there are a hundred lines of code before those variables are used again. Then he says, "Ignore the fact that a block of code shouldn't be 100 lines long; you have a large amount of code where lots of changes are occurring." I don't know about you, but I wouldn't declare a variable and then not use it for a hundred lines. I would declare it right before use. He shouldn't have to contrive a bad example like that to justify the new const and let declarations. The improved ability to relate intent in the code should be reason enough.

In another example for why one must be careful when testing for truthy values in a conditional, he shows some code that would fail because a value of 0 is falsey:

const sections = ['shipping'];

function displayShipping(sections) {
  if (sections.indexOf('shipping')) {
    return true;
  } else {
    return false;
  }
}

Ignoring the fact that I just cringe at code like this that returns a boolean value that should be computed directly instead of selected through an if statement, (don't worry, he corrects that later) there is much more wrong with this code than just the fact that an index of 0 will incorrectly hit the else branch. In fact, that is the only case that hits the else branch. Whenever 'shipping' is missing from sections, indexOf() will return -1, which is truthy! This code is just totally broken, even for an example that's supposed to show a certain kind of bug, which it does almost by accident.

Other explanations were somewhat lacking in clarity. Late in the book, when things start to get complicated with promises, the explanations seem to get much more brief and gloss over how promises actually work mechanically and how the code executes. After having things explained in excruciating detail and in overly simplistic terms, I was surprised at how little explanation was given for promises. A step-by-step walk through of how the code runs when a promise executes would have been quite helpful in understanding that feature better. I figured it out, but through no fault of the book.

Overall, it was a disappointing read, and didn't at all live up to my expectations built up from similar books. The tone of the book was meant more for a beginner while the content was geared toward an intermediate to expert programmer. While learning about the new features of JavaScript was great, and there are plenty of new features to get excited about, there must be a better way to learn about them. At least it was a quick read, and refreshing my memory will be easy by skimming the titles of the tips. I wouldn't recommend Simplifying JavaScript to anyone looking to come up to speed on modern JavaScript. There are better options out there.

STAR TREK: GENERATIONS

Three years after Captain Kirk passed the torch over to Jean Luc Picard in the seventh Star Trek motion picture, MicroProse finally gave us the movie tie in. Released in 1997, Star Trek: Generations adds a heavy dose of adventuring to the first-person-shooter but is it any better for it?

Read more »

Life Is Strange 2 | Episode One "Roads" Review |

After a late spring of prodding, Dontnod's continuation of its award-winning episodic adventure arrangement Life is Strange is here, and it has a loud and clear message to convey to every one of us.

Quick Facts :

Initial release date: 27 September 2018
Developer: Dontnod Entertainment
Genre: Adventure game
Platforms: PlayStation 4, Xbox One, Microsoft Windows

'Roads' What Is It About :

'Roads', the first episode in Life Is Strange 2, is around two primary things; naivety and wistfulness. It's a testing, self-contradicting true to life experience about children growing up and confronting the duties that join that, encircled through the account of two siblings who are unreasonably youthful to be outfitted to manage their nerve racking circumstance. That juxtaposition is, at its center, what makes this opening section to Life is Strange 2 so exceptionally extraordinary.

Life is Strange 2 includes none of the characters or settings of its forerunner. Its new saint, a 16-year-old hero Mexican-American kid named Sean Diaz, does not have a choice turning around time-travel capacity like Max Caulfield. Be that as it may, the minute an acoustic guitar starts carefully strumming over the sun-kissed title screen, it is obvious what you are playing. This might be a new story among new faces and obscure districts, however from every other angle this is Life is Strange.

The game rapidly sets the scene. Sean is a relatable track star youngster who is attempting to discover his way in the world , trying different things with workmanship, medications, and young ladies and stressing over whether kinships will last as his training finds some conclusion. The two siblings live with their dad Esteban, a workman and the passionate shake of the family which the siblings rotate around.

Life is Strange 2 is inside and out a more intricate issue: its activity sprawls out from Seattle to the forested areas of Oregon and still more distant abroad, giving it the vibe of a street motion picture in amusement frame.

The carefree dynamic of the Diaz family is quickly fathomed as you examine Sean's home, gathering supplies for a late-night party. The course of action has had a honest to goodness graphical refresh as a result of Unreal Engine 4, which infers swathes of superbly completed the process of describing objects, ordered journal doodles, and fluid, human activitys that pass on another level of nuance to the record.

Life is Strange 2, most importantly, is an account of fellowship and society, and even in its beginning times Sean and Daniel's relationship is tremendously contacting. Out and about, Sean is urged to not just pay special mind to or secure Daniel, but rather help raise him. That duty shows in manners both self-evident – don't spook the child with phantom stories previously you stay outdoors amidst the forested areas around evening time — and more hazy. You're bankrupt and eager and urgent. Is it worth a critical dollar to offer him a hint of something to look forward to as a chocolate bar or a toy?

An untidy whiteboard demonstrates a disorderly errand plan… Invoices and apparatuses uncover that Esteban is a compulsive worker. Sean chimes in contemplatively to The Streets in his room, and Daniel opens his entryway somewhat subsequent to pummeling it close to ensure his sibling won't see his Halloween ensemble. It's a living domain, more so than any found in the principal diversion.

The devil genuinely in the subtle elements, and this is extended to the discourse. Sean would now be able to respond to surrounding discussions amid ongoing interaction, or, in other words, much like the framework found in Night School's Oxenfree. This implies the game doesn't simply bolt you out when you associate with something, and there's very little dead air when you're investigating, which I for one believe is a colossal move up to life is strange part 1.

Discussions proceed all through physical activities, which helps me to remember discussion among Sam and Nathan in uncharted 4, makes the experience undeniably streaming and artistic. This is helped by an influx of new camera strategies, from taking off feathered creatures eye-see shots of the siblings to astute close-ups and wide edges that give space to the player to think about and consider what unfurls before them.

A progression of grievous occasions happens not long after the introduction which results in the incidental demise of their racially provocative neighbor, which subsequently prompts their dad turning into a casualty of police severity, shot dead without hesitating.

The menu and stock framework have been fleshed out definitively, and your knapsack is loaded up with nostalgic things from your home and will keep on clamoring with articles as you advance through the story. You can likewise hang trinkets and connect fixes to it, these going about as the discretionary collectables you can discover amid the occasions of the diversion.

In particular, the things in your rucksack really mean something, As it holds everything that the siblings have left from their previous life. Sean's journal is another key bit of gear. Amid calm minutes Sean can utilize his craft aptitudes to sit and draw the earth around him, a fun little amusement that effectively makes a memory,(This too helps me to remember Uncharted 4 where Nathan draws his own guide in somewhat entertaining path as he continues investigating ) demonstrating DONTNOD's proclivity to attach play to the story.

While investigating you will locate an additional blue feature on specific things in the condition that takes into account a dialog between the siblings, rather than perceptions neighborhood to the hero. You can train Daniel about trail blast blemishes on trees and push him to continue attempting when he has a craving for abandoning skipping stones.

Its influenced fascinating in light of the fact that you to understand that Sean is similarly as green to the world as his sibling, however is presently his sole gatekeeper. You're compelled to consider how you utilize that duty. Daniel is starving and you don't have any cash for nourishment, yet by taking you affect him by obscuring the lines among good and bad, which have outcomes even inside this one episode.

Obviously, there are additionally interchange, more twofold flashpoints that don't have simple answers, however I found that creation intense choices and lamenting my activities attempted to make a feeling of perpetual quality and promise to my own story that had me considerably more drew in with this account than I at any point was in past titles in the arrangement.

At last, this outcomes in a wonderfully paced prologue to a fresh out of the plastic new world, one that I never needed to take off. Cunning composition and important moves up to the moment to minute ongoing interaction guarantee that Life is Strange 2 is an equation breaking development for the experience diversion kind.

The Verdict :

The first episode of Dontnod's Life is Strange 2 guarantees a greater, more intricate story than told by the predecessor, Though its social reactions feel expansive and rather awkward up until now, its center story of fellowship and clique between two conceivable characters is as of now gigantically contacting. With Life is Strange 2, DONTNOD has overhauled and refined each component that made its ancestor fruitful, while sprinkling some supernatural new increases in with the general mish-mash to make a basic kind pushing background that isn't only for fans.

Oceanhorn 2: First Gameplay Video And Screenshots!

Since many of you can't make it to the Nordic Game conference in Malmö, Sweden – we decided to capture a video of our demo! The video is unedited footage that is captured on an actual iPhone 7 Plus.

If you happen to be in Nordic Game, come visit us at Epic's booth and try out the demo yourself! I will keep it short and let the video and screenshots speak for themselves.