An Elite Dangerous ship build that heals shielded “tank” ships when fighting Thargoid interceptors in wings or teams.
This arrangement is similar to how MMORPGs structure groups. The “tanks”, usually Imperial Cutters or Federal Corvettes with Prismatic Shields, try to draw the interceptor’s fire by staying close, hot and dishing out damage. Healers try to keep the tanks’ shields up, particularly when hit by an interceptor’s lightning attack. Dedicated anti-swarm and anti-scout ships handle the thargon swarms and scouts. The rest try to draw damage using more traditional anti-xeno builds and tactics.
This post assumes you are familiar with Thargoid interceptor combat.
Goals
Create a ship to:
Heal tanks’ shields. This requires the Regenerative Sequence experimental effect on Beam Lasers.
Remove the caustic debuff from tanks. This requires a Decontamination Limpet Controller and a Cargo Rack for limpets.
Reach tanks. Beam lasers and limpets are only effective within a kilometre or so. This build needs the speed and agility to reach them.
Survive around hostile thargoids, including thargon swarms and scouts. This requires strong shields, strong hull and removing your own caustic debuff.
Link: EDSY (have it open as you read about the build for easy reference)
Healing is a fun way to contribute while giving a different set of challenges. Elite Dangerous rarely creates opportunities for different roles within a team. A healer’s focus is on enabling others to be more effective.
Other ships, notably the Anaconda, can provide more raw healing power because they have more hard points and a larger power distributor. However, the Krait Mk II is faster and more agile, helping you get to more mobile tanks when needed or be more forgiving when you are out of position.
Healing:
Healing Beams: Efficient Beam Lasers with the Regeneration Sequence experimental effect are the best way to regenerate allies’ shields. The Regeneration Sequence experimental effect restores a team- or wingmate’s shields instead of damaging them. Efficient means you can fire the lasers for as long as possible, healing to heal through an interceptor’s lightning attack. The Concordant Sequence experimental effect increases the regeneration rate of the shield for ten seconds. However, the buff does not stack and tanks’ prismatic shields often have a slow regeneration rate.
Fixed Weapons: Tanks are usually large, slow-moving targets. Fixed weapons give enough extra damage/healing to make them worth it.
Power Distributor: An interceptor’s lightning attack will drain a tank’s shield quickly, particularly if it temporarily disables the tank’s Power Distributor. A Weapon Focused Power Distributor, four pips weapons and a full capacitor allow you to keep restoring the shields for 30+ seconds.
Decontamination: A Decontamination Limpet Controller and copious Cargo Racks for limpets means you can help remove the caustic debuff from tanks or, if attention permits, other allies. However, this can be challenging. Scouts, thargon swarms and interceptors often shoot off attached limpets. Limpets are also slow, and even a slow Federal Corvette can outrun a limpet. Cooperation with the tank is required. In a pinch, decon limpets can repair hull, including your own.
Tagging: Remember to shoot the interceptor a few times for a second. Otherwise, you will not get any combat bonds when it dies.
Defence
Shields: Many AX pilots prefer to go shieldless. However, given nearby tanks should be keeping the interceptor’s attention and scouts, thargon swarms or other interceptors may be nearby, strong shields soak up most of the damage that should be coming this ship’s way. If the shield drops, consider a reboot/repair to quickly restore it to 50%.
Caustic Sink Launcher: Given the difficulty of heating up with a shield and Efficient Beam Lasers along with the prominence of caustic clouds and missiles, a Caustic Sink Launcher helps keep the healer focused on the tank’s health and not its own.
Absolute Damage: Guardians do absolute damage so maximize raw shield and hull strength where possible.
No Guardian Modules: A Glaive’s anti-guardian module field will not worry this build.
No Shutdown Field Neutralizer: Most tanks have a Shutdown Field Neutralizer that will protect you. If not, swap one of the Shield Boosters for it.
Tactics
Team structure: Ensure you are in a wing or team with the tanks. Otherwise, your Regeneration Sequence Beam Lasers will damage their shields, not heal them. It also helps you easily locate your tanks by looking at the blue points on your radar.
Positioning: Keep the tanks within one kilometre and between the interceptor and you. Beam Lasers are most effective within 800 m. This position also reduces the chance the interceptor will target you.
Pip management: The default choice is two pips in systems and four in weapons. You will occasionally need to put pips into engines to boost away from caustic missiles or catch up to a distant tank.
Anti-Interceptor Shield: If your team is struggling against an interceptor, firing five beam weapons against its shield will bring it down quickly. However, this will bring you in range of its lightning attack and will put you on its target list for caustic missiles. Target the shield with care.
Anti-scout: Destroying scouts is challenging but surprisingly doable if you can get up close. It can keep you occupied while waiting for interceptors to jump in.
When I watched the trailers and read the synopses of The Creator, I thought this would be a movie about the dangers of artificial intelligence (AI). In an age where the technology sector has commoditized machine learning, calling it AI, this movie seemed to promise yet another warning about unchecked technological advancement and humanity’s negative tendencies. However, I was wrong.
The Creator is set in 2065. The global West wages war against AI after an AI nuked Los Angeles. It follows Joshua, an undercover US soldier sent to infiltrate AI society. Grieving for Maya, his dead wife, he pursues an AI superweapon while balancing his loyalties between his single-minded US military superiors and the AI community that adopted him.
If examining AI is The Creator‘s focus, it has a few premises the audience needs to accept. Humanity has also created artificial general intelligences (AGIs), AIs that are conscious and have emotions. AGIs can be housed in robots and control them to a human-like level of coordination and ability.
Humanity has also created life-like human robots called simulants. Their faces are clearly human, but a slight turn of their heads reveals their obvious ear canal-less artificiality. They have feet firmly planted on each side of the uncanny valley.
So far, this is standard science fiction fair. However, The Creator goes further. Human consciousness can be read, stored, and uploaded into a robot. Your soul can now be digitized. Add to this that humans are encouraged to lend their likeness to simulants, that damaging a robot destroys the housed AI and that simulants can eat and drink. The superweapon is a robotic child with a child’s presumed innocence, hitting parental instincts hard. Can the movie humanize AI more? Can you distance it from modern-day AI more?
That was when I realized The Creator is not a warning about AI’s dangers. It could have been a fantasy epic about souls and magic. The Creator merely adopts the current zeitgeist for broader audience appeal.
Instead, it is two things. The first is a critique of the West’s exceptionalism. Like the “War on Terror”, the war in The Creator is a battle for New Asia’s hearts and minds. The USA is not fighting the people of New Asia, only the AI they harbour. The alleged lie at the start of the war, that errant programming and not AI launched the nuke, hits hard. This lie parallels the lie that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, necessitating its invasion. As his motives shift away from the West’s established truths, Joshua slowly becomes a “terrorist”. Nuance and sympathy are trodden underfoot by the unwavering West.
The movie’s war is also a new Vietnam War, one that the USA is determined to win. The new AI society is based in New Asia, spanning most of South East Asia today. The film juxtaposes jungles, rice paddies and longtail boats with towering megastructures. Technology and tradition are ubiquitous. Women joke as they construct new simulants just like they would weave clothing. Most of the movie was shot on location rather than using a green screen, giving the movie a natural, tangible feel.
Unlike in the Vietnam War, the USA does not put thousands of troops on the ground, endangering its citizens to suppress a resistant populace in rugged terrain. Instead, the space station, the USS NOMAD (North American Orbital Mobile Aerospace Defence), looms in the skies. It is a miniature version of Star Wars‘ death star, poised to rain nuclear freedom. It becomes a symbol of technological and industrial superiority but also oppression.
When the USA fights on the ground, it uses its industry. The huge tanks rumbling through the jungle, large enough to make a Warhammer 40K player envious, epitomize the American approach to warfare: technologically lead and ruthlessly efficient. Their telltale thunderous sound and size intimidate and deter as much as their weapons do.
The Creator portrays US soldiers as bloodthirsty and uncaring. “It is only programming,” they say as they slaughter enemy robots indistinguishable from humans a few moments before. Contrast this with the AI, who lack weapons larger than small arms. They seem a minuscule threat against the disproportionate might of the West. They constantly lament the war, claiming they only want peace.
This confronting portrayal reinforces Joshua’s plight. Seeing the USA’s military-industrial complex from the receiving end is something few Western viewers have likely considered. Seeing near-religious fervour on the faces of what traditionally are the rational good guys is startling.
However, if you humanize the West’s enemies beyond that of humans and present them as homogeneously pacifist and constantly sympathetic, you risk a straw man fallacy. The Creator tries to shatter the USA’s self-image of a perfect, altruistic world policeman. However, this is a well-trodden path and more complex than the movie’s simplistic portrayal. Geopolitics is about shades of grey, not black and white.
Secondly, The Creator examines Joshua and his grief. His robotic arm and leg, lost when the nuke hit Los Angeles, make the war personal. The movie’s initial scenes and copious flashbacks see him in a loving relationship with Maya, his pregnant wife. Her apparent death at the movie’s start sends him into depression.
However, the prospect of Maya’s survival lures him back. He forges a Faustian bargain with his US military superiors to help find Nirmata, the AIs’ head architect. The child-like AI superweapon, Alphie, could be a facsimile of his unborn child. Pursuing love is a noble ideal, but has fate given Joshua a second chance or is he delaying hurtful acceptance with a technological substitute?
Meanwhile, The Creator is full of religious allegories. Technology offers the ability to be reborn and live forever, albeit in a robotic body. The AIs’ reverence for Nirmata and the saffron-cloaked monks’ inability to harm it borders on worship. The USA’s bomb robot bows before Alphie’s deific ability to control machines remotely. The final scenes depict a battle in heaven, and the grief-filled survivors return to earth weary from their pyrrhic victory. These and Hans Zimmer’s operatic soundtrack add gravitas and impetus, if not a slight unreality, to Joshua’s journey. The Creator is not merely a story. It wants to be a modern-day fable.
Ultimately, The Creator wants to say a lot, possibly too much. I applaud the vision and scope. It is dense and ambitious, and its special effects are fantastic. However, The Creator reduces complex issues like Western hypocrisy and AI’s potential to forces of nature, nearly overshadowing its examination of grief. The movie juggles many ideas and metaphors simultaneously but almost drops a few.
Get the commander to/from on-foot missions introduced with Odyssey. This requirement includes transporting an SRV (for mission support or raw material gathering) and a Detailed Surface Scanner (for finding points of interest).
Endure a sustained assault from on-foot enemies. This requirement ensures you can complete mission goals rather than rushing back to defend your ship.
Land at every surface settlement, outpost or station, effectively requiring a small ship.
Provide fire support to kill scavengers and other ground enemies. As these are too small to target with most ship-mounted weapons, this effectively means missiles or mines.
Have a fast boost speed. The build should reach supercruise distance quickly for material farming or escaping hostile ships.
Have a reasonable jump range and a Fuel Scoop for travelling to on-foot engineers or distant missions.
Link: EDSY (have it open as you read for easy reference)
When I first approached the problem of getting my commander to on-foot missions, the Cobra Mk III seemed to be the perfect choice. I still had the one I used early in my commander’s career. Its versatility and repurposing a ship I loved made it an attractive choice.
However, I recently unlocked all the on-foot engineers on a second or alternate (alt) account. I took it as an opportunity to try different things, including different ships. The Dolphin proved to be surprisingly effective at this role compared to my Cobra Mk III On-Foot Support build:
Feature
Cobra Mk III
Dolphin
Comment
Jump Range
30.58 LY
33.93 LY
Pitch/Roll/Yaw (seconds for a complete turn)
3.4/1.2/12
4.0/1.1/5.3
Dolphin has better yaw, making flying more natural and attacking ground targets easier.
Boost
605 m/s
591 m/s
Raw Shield Strength
625 MJ
681 MJ
Hull Strength
665
1001
Fuel Scoop Size
4
5
Faster fuel scooping.
Thrusting Heat
40%
31%
Easier fuel scooping.
Comparison of Cobra Mk III and Dolphin builds
Where the Cobra Mk III was superior, it was not relevant. For example, the Dolphin has only two small hard points compared to the Cobra’s two medium and two small. However, the Dolphin’s two small hard points have better convergence, making hitting small ground targets like on-foot scavengers easier. The Dolphin’s lower ammunition capacity is rarely a constraint.
The Dolphin has more flexibility and utility. The Dolphin’s extra utility slot frees up internal module slots that the Cobra Mk III needs for Guardian Shield Reinforcement Packages. The Dolphin could even use a size five Prismatic Shield Generator, although this makes power management challenging.
The only real difference is aesthetics. Some people dislike the Dolphin’s more organic shape and the wheezing sound of its boost. The Cobra Mk III looks and sounds more like an Elite Dangerous ship should.
Defence:
Prismatic Shields and Overchanged Power Plant: Most of the defensive measures are the same as with the Cobra Mk III. Strong prismatic shields protect it when attacked by scavengers or pirates. The Power Plant is Overcharged so it can service the power-hungry shields.
Strong Hull: Unlike the Cobra Mk III, this ship can afford strong hull protection. It has the internal slots for Hull and Module Reinforcement Packages. Its size five Thrusters can maintain a fast speed with the extra weight.
Offence:
Ground Attack: The Advanced Missile Racks provide explosive area damage against on-foot scavengers or guards. The Dolphin’s hard points are close, making targeting easier, and the fast yaw means moving sideways faster to change targets or to dodge incoming projectiles.
Utility:
Double SRV bay: This can transport both a Scarab and a Scorpion or two of your favourite kind of SRV. Dropping down to a 2G does not give any significant advantage. Coupled with the Cargo Rack, you could use this build for surface missions.
Advanced Docking Computer: Odyssey added the ability to auto-land on planet surfaces. This module allows easy landing when distracted or on uneven terrain near surface points of interest.
Solo Tactics
Flee: This build runs, not fights. Its prismatic shields protect it long enough for it to escape. This build will outrun almost everything with its almost 600+ m/s boost speed. Most enemies will mass lock this build, so the high speed is welcome.
Power (pip) management: Place four pips in systems and two in engines when landing to maximize shield protection. Otherwise, do the reverse to maximize boost frequency, speed and agility.
Wing or Team Tactics
Pairing: This build can transport two commanders to and from an on-foot mission location, providing each with an SRV.
Rescue: This build can rescue an on-foot commander who has lost their ship or would otherwise wait for an Apex. Use missiles to kill any ground targets, land to pick up the commander, and then boost to supercruise before enemy ships take down the shields.
An Elite Dangerous ship build for more experienced players, effectively an end-game version of the Beginner PvE Combat Vulture Build.
Goals
The goals are:
Create a build that uses the Vulture effectively for late-game PvE combat, such as Hazadous Resource Extraction Sites, High Intensity Conflict Zones and Threat 7 Pirate Activity signal sources.
Use any module or engineering in the game to maximize effectiveness and the Vulture’s strengths.
Links: EDSY (have it open as you read the guide for easy reference)
As mentioned in my Beginner PvE Combat Vulture Build, the Vulture is a wonderful small ship to learn PvE combat. It is cheap, packs oversized weapons and teaches good skills like pip (power) management.
However, the Vulture is rarely seen during end-game combat. Large ships like the Federal Corvette and medium ones like the Fer-de-Lance and Chieftain tend to dominate. They have more firepower, better hull and shields, speed and/or agility.
No clever engineering or obscure modules will change this balance. However, the Vulture is far from useless. Some even see its disadvantages as a challenge. Killing NPC pirates in a fully engineered Federal Corvette is relatively easy. Doing so in a Vulture requires more skill.
Offence:
Intertial Impact: The Internal Impact experimental effect changes the damage from 100% thermal to 50% thermal and kinetic. This change means the Burst Lasers become effective against both shields and hull. However, it adds a 3% jitter, which is much larger than it sounds.
Efficient: Some people use the Short Range Blaser blueprint to maximize damage output but this drains the distributor quickly. Using Efficient means you can fire indefinitely with four pips to weapons.
Fixed: A small, nimble ship is the perfect platform for fixed weapons. The extra damage over gimballed weapons helps, as does the immunity to chaff or even needing to select your target.
FSD Interdictor: An FSD Interdictor is useful for interdicting assassination mission targets, wanted ships for bounty vouchers or even powerplay ships for merits. Swap for another Guardian Module or Hull Reinforcement Package otherwise.
Defence:
Resistance: This build focuses on high resistances for shields instead of raw strength. Unless you consistently fight plasma-armed enemies and cannot dodge the slow-moving projectiles, this focus gives a high effective strength with fast regeneration.
Fast Charge versus Lo-Draw: Like most ships using Fast Charge on a Bi-Weave Shield Generator, the Power Distributor cannot supply enough power with two pips in systems to rebuild the ship at the optimal rate. This build’s shields should drop rarely but, if they go down often, replace the Fast Charge experimental effect on the shield generator with Lo-Draw.
Reactive Surface Composite and Thermal Resistance: Reactive Surface Composite inverts the standard resistances for armour, making it strong against kinetic and explosive weapons but weak against thermal. To compensate, the build uses Thermal Resistant on one of the Hull Reinforcement Packages. This gives the build net positive resistances on the hull.
Guardian Shield and Module Reinforcements: Guardian Module Reinforcement Packages provide slightly more protection than Module Reinforcement Packages but cost some power. Swap for normal Module Reinforcement Packages if you do not have them unlocked. The Guardian Shield Reinforcement Package is the only non-utility module that buffs a shield.
Variations
Shieldless: A shieldless version (EDSY) reduces longevity but lets you put the system pips into engines for greater speed and agility. Consider it a challenge. Replace the Shield Generator and Shield Reinforcement Module with Guardian Module Reinforcement Packages and a Hull Reinforcement Package respectively. Replace the Shield Boosters with Shielded Point Defence and Chaff Launchers. Replace the Efficient blueprint on the Burst Lasers with Sturdy, giving them more protection and higher armour penetration. Sturdy costs more power but you have power to spare, even with an Armoured Thermal Spread Power Plant.
Anti-Thargoid Scout or Hunter: To create an AX version (EDSY), take the shieldless version and replace the burst lasers with Azimuth Enhanced AX Multi-Cannons. Fill the utility slots with Caustic Sink Luanchers and an Enhanced Xeno Scanner. Replace the FSD Interdictor with a 1A AMFU and the Guardian Module Reinforcement Packages with normal Module Reinforcement Packages to reduce power use and prevent a Glaive field from damaging them. Replace the Reactive Surface Composite with Military Grade Composite, because the additional resistances are unnecessary. Once again, other ships fulfil this role better but this build can hold its own.
Tactics
Finding targets: This build works best against wing-less large or less agile targets. Anacondas, Asps, Pythons and Type-10s are generally easy prey. Using fixed and jittery weapons against fast or agile targets, like Elite Vultures and Vipers, is doable but frustrating.
Point blank: Get as close as possible to enemy ships, preferably above or below where their surface area is maximized. Avoid jousting as it reduces time on target. Instead, circle strafe, pre-turn and landing gear-turn to track ships as they pass by. Hold down fire. Even with only two pips to weapons, exhausting the distributor or overheating will take minutes.
Power (pip) management: Two pips in systems and four in weapons are usually sufficient. Temporarily shift pips into engines to boost or run down fleeing ships. Ironically, power management is easier in this build than in the beginner version. An Overcharged Monstered Power Plant gives more than enough power. A Charge Enhanced Power Distributor gets it to where it needs to be.
Have you ever watched a movie or TV show and wanted to pause and marvel at a scene? It may be beautiful, showing off an artful mix of colour and design. It may be complex, requiring time to appreciate the detail. It may capture a moment that creates strong feelings or thoughts.
I love taking screenshots in video games. Not all video game graphics are lifelike or realistic, but even retro or pixel graphics have their beauty, such as the screenshot from Cloudpunk below. The definition of “realistic” also decays as each new generation of hardware increases fidelity.
Even Cloudpunk‘s voxel-based graphics are beautiful
Why take screenshots? I enjoy it. Arranging a good scene and admiring it as a screenshot is fun. This admiration is called “sense-pleasure”, a term coined in the original Mechanics-Dynamics-Aesthetics game design framework. Some game developers have screenshot competitions and communities. Winning is fun, as is sharing a common interest. Trying to take good screenshots also allows me to appreciate the effort developers put into games, looking at games and visual media through different eyes.
Taking good screenshots is simple: play games, take lots of screenshots, review them, decide which ones are the best, try to get more of those, and repeat.
That leaves two questions. The first is “Which games should I take screenshots from?” The second is “What makes a screenshot good?”
The answer to the first question is also simple: play whatever games you enjoy. That said, some platforms, such as PCs, and game types, like 3D open-world games, are more conducive to taking beautiful screenshots. High-end PCs have higher resolutions and are capable of better graphics. The developers of 3D open-world or similarly expansive games often create visually appealing worlds.
Some graphics capabilities require special attention. Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR) are more of an experience, something a static screenshot cannot capture. Screenshots from High Dynamic Range (HDR) displays are often too bright, at least in non-HDR file formats.
Screenshots of glitches, memes or schadenfreude are often spontaneous. These can be fun. They have their place. However, these tend to be unpredictable and their popularity fleeting.
Answering the second question, “What makes a screenshot good,” is more difficult. Someone with art training could write volumes on what makes a good painting or scene. However, some general advice I found helpful follows.
The human eye is usually drawn to specific places when playing a game. Players have fractions of a second to decode a busy scene and determine what to do next. The game designer wants to emphasize where to go next or the boss’s weak points.
An underground cave from Greedfall
The above screenshot from Greedfall shows how the developer can unsubtly force the eye to focus somewhere. The light filtering from above among the dangling roots directs the player while hinting at this place’s history and significance.
However, the human eye can take its time to appreciate a screenshot. Treat each screenshot as a diorama. People view a screenshot holistically, like a painting. Arrange interesting things around the image or, if there is a single focus, ensure it is unique or intriguing enough to hold attention.
An Asp Explorer (spaceship) from Elite Dangerous
This screenshot shows a beautiful fusion of elements. The blue exhaust from the Asp Explorer (spaceship) heading towards the ringed planet matches the light of the eclipsed blue-white star. The edge of the Milky Way galaxy shows behind. This fills the image, meaning there is something interesting to look at everywhere.
Night City from Cyperpunk 2077
This screenshot shows the busy Night City skyline from Cyperpunk 2077. There is so much detail that it takes time to parse. What initially could pass for any modern metropolis is quickly dashed by the ascending holograms and unfamiliar advertising.
A Krait Phantom (spaceship) flying between a planet and its moon in Elite Dangerous
Another example from Elite Dangerous is above. Elite Dangerous‘ planet generation is fantastically detailed, and the colour contrast reflecting off the Krait Phantom’s mirrored hull looks wonderful. The distortion from the engine exhaust gives it that extra touch of realism and adds momentum.
Looking at the planet’s star through its rings in Elite Dangerous
While stark and beautiful, the lack of something interesting in the foreground in the above image gives the feeling something is missing or incomplete.
The best screenshots are not always from the most action-filled or detailed scenes. Screenshots omit many elements of game interaction, reminding us of what the screenshot lacks. There is no movement or action. There is no music, sound effects or story. The hardware sometimes limits the graphical fidelity. A screenshot can expose low polygon models and blurred textures.
An alien machine from Elite Dangerous
If you have a central focus, viewing it from a slight angle gives it a more natural appearance. It shows more detail from the side or top. The above screenshot shows the misty, creepy, organic, Gieger-esque internals of a thargoid base from Elite Dangerous. The details of the back pillar would otherwise be obscured if the shot was front-on.
The best screenshots tell a story or evoke emotion without context.
A Scorpion (buggy) exploring a thargoid spire site in Elite Dangerous
For example, zooming back from the Scorpion (buggy) and placing it below the camera’s centre in the screenshot above draws the eye towards the towering thargoid spire above it. The contrasting light between the green cloud to the right and the blue star to the left pleases the eye. This screenshot evokes a sense of alienness, wonder and being alone.
A rain scene from Cyberpunk 2077
Plenty of games have rain. However, the mist, almost monochromatic palette and subtle reflection in the puddles above capture a dreary oppression better than any other I had seen. The dirty footpath and cluttered scene emphasize the worst parts of urban life.
Avoid busy or unclear scenes. The dozens of spell effects hurled at a boss in an MMORPG raid can be impressive. However, parsing the scene can be difficult. 3D scenes rendered in wide aspect ratios, such as 16:9 or 16:10, distort around the edges. Avoid putting essential details there.
Lighting and colours pose unique challenges and opportunities. Overly dark or light scenes can be hard to discern. Contrasting light can be beautiful, as shown in the dull red of the star against the alien structure’s yellow below. Monochromatic scenes can be stark.
A thargoid titan from Elite DangerousA dark HDR screenshot from Elite Dangerous
While the scene above has a lot of detail, it is too dark. This is a good example of an HDR scene losing too much contrast when rendered in standard displays.
Disable or remove any “heads-up display”, voice chat overlays or similar UI elements. They often distract from the scene unless they are the focus (“I survived at 1% health!”).
Modern games may have photo modes that temporarily use more screenshot-friendly graphics settings and give more camera control. Use these when you can. Controlling the camera angle or adding effects, such as vignettes or filters, can add a lot.
An alien world from No Man’s Sky
Tilting the camera turns the already alien world from No Man’s Sky, above, into something disorienting. The slight vignette helps focus the attention on the centre and adds depth.
An Imperial Cutter (spaceship) amongst a gas giant’s ring in Elite DangerousLooking through asteroids toward a faint, distant star in Elite DangerousA thargoid interceptor at a barnacle site in Elite Dangerous
Effects like bloom, light rays, reflection or lens flare turn a scene into something magical, as shown above. If I ever want new backgrounds for my computer’s desktop, Elite Dangerous is a wonderful way of generating them. Unfortunately, players may have to turn effects off to improve frame rates or to run games on low-end graphics hardware.
A traveler admiring the nighttime bioluminescent display from No Man’s SkyA traveler admiring an eclipse on No Man’s Sky
Sometimes, careful timing and placement are key. This can be as simple as waiting until night in the first screenshot above or finding a lens-flared eclipse’s exact moment and angle in the second.
Be careful of symbolism and logos in games. While these can be meaningful and emotive in games, they often lose context outside that game. Worse, games sometimes use real-world symbols that can offend.
Avoid modifying screenshots after taking them. Highlight the game developers’ artistry, not Adobe Photoshop skills. Modifications are often prohibited if you want to enter screenshots in competitions. However, each game and community will have its own rules.
Many games have “vista moments”, where the player leaves a cramped, narrow area and enters a broader, almost agoraphobia-inducing wider world. If you are looking to start taking screenshots, finding these is a great place to start. The developers often make these look stunning.
Your first view of the Erdtree in Elden Ring
Your first view of the Erdtree in Elden Ring is a wonderful example of a panoramic “vista moment”, as shown above.
Looking over the water at dusk in Deliver Us Mars
The above scene showing the sun reflecting off the water is a wonderful change from the cramped corridors preceding it. In a setting where the Earth’s environment is collapsing, this reminds you what you are trying to save.
Graphics are arguably the most essential part of video games. While it is possible not to have any significant graphics, e.g. The Vale, video game developers spend much time and resources getting things right that players may only see for a few moments. Taking screenshots both helps share these moments and appreciate the effort and artistry that goes into video game development.
Frontier’s stream on 31 January changed the landscape for Elite Dangerous players. Accustomed to Frontier drip-feeding content, no credible roadmap, and poor financial results, Elite‘s players had resigned themselves to being comfortable with table scraps. Did this stream signal a change?
Frontier has traditionally been famously vague, uncommitted and underwhelming. For example, a “new feature overhaul” was first discussed in 2022 for 2023 and is still undelivered. The content Frontier did release, such as the thargoid titans and spire sites, was visually spectacular. However, it lacked the long-term game loops required from a live service game.
By contrast, the pleasantly succinct 31 January stream announced four things: a culmination of the thargoid war, a revamp to PowerPlay, an undisclosed major new feature and new ships. The new partnership with Dead Good Media for PR is producing good results.
This announcement exceeded reasonable expectations. It surpassed mine. However, that was not the biggest surprise.
While players have enjoyed the Thargoid War, Elite has always interweaved multiple game loops. Culminating the war allows people to get back to other things.
Galnet, Elite‘s in-game newsfeed, has strongly hinted at a PowerPlay revamp. PowerPlay, Elite’s macro-political simulation, has devolved into passive-aggressive cargo healing. A rework is welcome.
Delivering four new ships was terrific news. New ships allow players to customize and experiment, re-experiencing existing content through a different lens. Frontier last released new ships in 2018. Five years without new ships is a long time when Elite is essentially a spaceflight simulator.
The mockup of the Python Mk II, shown above, looks cool. It engages players’ imagination. The new canards, short tail fins and wing tips make it look sleek and modern. Frontier has taken a page from Star Citizen‘s playbook.
However, the biggest surprise is Frontier’s implied renewed focus on Elite. As my previous post said, most expected Frontier to put Elite into maintenance mode.
It is essential not to get too excited, though. For example, the PowerPlay revamp and the new feature are not new; Frontier just reannounced them. They have been years in the making. They may get pushed back again or, when delivered, be underwhelming.
From a business model perspective, the promise of new ships is the most lucrative. ARX sales for cosmetics will help the bottom line. Many ex-Elite players are interested in returning to play new ships. Whether it or any of the other announced features brings in new players is yet to be seen.
As my previous post said, games sell on potential and goodwill. Elite has lacked both for some time. Frontier has created an opportunity to hint at a vision or dream. However, it now has to deliver engaging content in a reasonable time frame. If so, Elite may return to the glory days of old. If not, this opportunity was Frontier’s to lose.
Note: I originally wrote this before Frontier’s 31 January stream, which revealed surprisingly pleasant news. I considered rewriting this post for a few days. However, I decided to post it as is and then write an update later.
Frontier Developments PLC (or Frontier), the developer of Elite Dangerous (or Elite), recently published its interim 2024 financial reports. I have played Elite for thousands of hours. Considering the lacklustre Odyssey expansion launched two years ago, Elite‘s vague roadmap, and Frontier’s economic woes, I was interested in what this said about Elite‘s future.
Two slides from the financial report summarize Elite‘s situation well. The first is the “Cumulative Revenue” graph, shown below. This graph shows Elite favourably, earning the second-highest cumulative revenue of all Frontier’s Intellectual Properties (IPs).
However, the “Cumulative Cash Flow” graph tells a less rosy story. Elite has earned the least of Frontier’s big IPs. Elite‘s current (right-most) line is almost flat, meaning its income roughly matches its costs.
Given Frontier’s financial troubles, what does this mean for the future of Elite? The critical question is, “What are Frontier’s goals?” If Frontier wants to keep Elite as a “pet project”, they need not do anything different. Frontier can continue maintaining the game, likely entertaining the hardcore players for years. Frontier and Elite are synonymous, and Elite should continue as long as it does not lose money.
Unfortunately, Frontier needs its IPs to generate income. David Braben, Frontier’s founder and previous CEO, may love Elite. However, Frontier is a business, not a charity. Their investors, including the Chinese game giant Tencent, rue the declining share price. The relative success of Star Citizen, No Man’s Sky and similar IPs of the same age and genre must weigh heavily.
While, technically, it may have been the correct decision, Frontier’s decision not to support consoles likely had a significant financial impact. Frontier had invested heavily in Elite‘s console support before ceasing it without realizing any revenue. As shown in the Cumulative Revenue graph above, releases on other platforms boosted all IPs significantly.
Frontier may also be using Elite to hide costs. Frontier shares many development resources, such as the game engine, audio, marketing and community relations. Frontier may disproportionately attribute costs to Elite to bolster other IPs. However, given the lack of evidence and specifics, I am ignoring this.
Elite makes most of its money from the initial purchase or selling ARX, its cosmetics currency. Therefore, Frontier must attract new players or convince existing players to purchase cosmetics like ship paint jobs.
Unfortunately, the “Cumulative Cash Flow” graph indicates Frontier failed. Not in creating a good game – that is another discussion – but in creating a game that generates significant revenue.
One way to generate revenue is to improve gameplay. Frontier needs to identify new foci that engage players. For example, Eve Online wants to focus on “conflict, identity, and community” per Eve Online‘s 2024 roadmap. Elite needs beginner-friendly gameplay with less “grind” (repetition). However, gameplay changes are another discussion, as mentioned above.
Another way to generate revenue is through hype and promise. Star Citizen is a prime example. Players “pledge” thousands of dollars for new ships to be released years from now, if ever. Players happily shrug off poor performance and reliability. Elite has lost this over the years. Better marketing and community relations could help, but Frontier needs that inspiring vision or dream.
An alternate could be changing the business model. The game designers may have created the ideal Elite but for a different monetization model.
For example, Elite could go “free to play”. A free version may allow players access to specific star systems or ships, requiring a purchase to unlock the full game. However, this is unlikely. Elite has a famously steep learning curve and lacks a clear story or path, meaning a low conversion rate to paying customers.
Elite could shift to a monthly or yearly fee, like Eve Online. This shift would increase revenue but would likely drive most players away. Many players drift into and out of Elite, while others enjoy it precisely because it is free after the initial purchase.
Elite could alleviate the grind. For example, it could offer blocks of engineering materials for ARX or increase the materials gathered. Another possibility is buying Federation or Imperial rank to unlock ships and gain access to systems like Sol. Warframe and other “free to play” games have similar offerings. Many enjoy Elite but are time-poor or only enjoy some game loops. Unfortunately, this is getting close to “pay to win”. It can frustrate or alienate those who put in the effort.
Frontier could generate more revenue from a regular, smaller expansion model instead of the current “big bang” model. Eve Online and No Man’s Sky do this. The high development time and cost mean a misdirected or incomplete expansion, such as Odyssey, can endanger an IP’s financial viability. “Big bang” expansions are typically sold at a significant discount in regular sales.
Thinking more pessimistically, Frontier could sell Elite to another company. Daybreak Games, the owner of old MMORPGs like Everquest and Lord of the Rings Online, is one possible home. Pearl Abyss, the new owner of CCP games who make Eve Online, is another.
Selling Elite would give Frontier a much-needed cash injection. This injection could fund another creative management game or two, something Frontier has monetized more effectively.
However, a sale is unlikely. As stated above, Elite holds a special place at Frontier. It uses Frontier’s proprietary Cobra engine, unused outside of Frontier. Elite is still profitable, albeit marginally, so the price would be high. Thus, making a decent return on investment could be difficult.
Predictions are always tricky. We need more information on the development team’s size and capabilities, the quality of the code base, and Frontier’s plans. Frontier’s next stream on 31 January will also lay out plans for Elite, although this will likely be just a teaser for the upcoming update 18.
However, if I had to predict, little will happen beyond update 18 for 2024. If anything, Frontier will continue drip-feeding the irregular updates planned as part of Odyssey. Anything else that happens will be completing existing work.
This prediction may sound pessimistic. However, Frontier’s communications mention no new Elite content but plenty of content for other games. The recent restructuring has seen many senior members of the Elite team leave. Rebuilding and realigning afterwards will take time.
Reading between the lines, Frontier is moving Elite into the “too hard basket” for now. They want to focus on creative management simulations. They need revenue to correct their balance sheet and appease investors.
What would I like to see? I would love an inspiring and engaging “vision” for Elite. The hype around Odyssey drove huge player numbers and an undeniable anticipation. A focus on gameplay and marketing like that would be ideal. However, that requires creating a compelling vision, investing in marketing and community relations and commitment to see it through. These are improbable for a game in the “too hard basket”.
I would also love a “season” (like in Path of Exile or Diablo) or an “expedition” model (like in No Man’s Sky). These are separate versions of the game with interesting or exciting changes. Imagine Elite with a different economy, ships/modules, weapon balance or location/setting! Imagine replaying stories from Elite‘s lore!
Realistically, moving to smaller, cheaper, regular expansions will occur in 2025 or later. It deviates the least from current patterns, creates a constant revenue stream and reduces risk.
That said, it is remarkable that a game as old as Elite still makes money. Plenty of space games have come and gone over the years. Elite is still profitable and will be around for a while. However, in an industry dominated by hits, Elite may not be enough of a success to get the resources and attention it deserves.
Moonring is a top-down, turn-based, retro, fantasy role playing game (RPG) developed by Fluttermind Games. It is the work of a small indy team led by one of the designers of the first Fable game. It is also free.
In Moonring, you play an unnamed protagonist in the eternally shadowy world of Caldera with little early guidance or direction.
Mechanically, you move your character around the world using up, down, left, or right. Moving onto items picks them up. Bumping into enemies attacks them. Bumping into doors opens them. Bumping into allies starts a conversation. Moonring highlights keywords or phrases when you speak to NPCs. You type them in to converse further.
Using these, you piece together what to do. Your deceased father left instructions to continue unravelling a mystery. These involve a tutorialised exploration of your small farming community and then leaving to explore further.
As implied above, playing Moonring needs effort. No quest log or marker is pointing you in the right direction. No dialog tree reminds you what to say. The game helps a little. It captures notes with pertinent information and sometimes puts locations on the map. However, the player deduces what to do.
As you explore and converse, you learn that Caldera plunged into darkness centuries ago. Five moons appeared, each associated with a god. Unlike most, you have not had a god-enthralling dream. As one of the dreamless, is your destiny to become the new Archon and rule Caldera?
You also discover Moonring‘s mechanics are more complex than they appear. The game has a complex stealth system. You can make ranged attacks. Status effects overlap in interesting ways, such as water dousing fire. Ability’s energy costs change as different moons wax and wane.
Moonring has rogue-like elements. Saves are automatic, and there is a single save slot. You cannot save scum. The game generates dungeons when first entered. Dying punts you back to the dungeon’s start, losing your progress. The game randomises potion ingredients in each playthrough.
Moonring can be frustrating. I often felt stuck and had to review old notes or wander until I stumbled into something useful. I died to the end boss of a seven-level dungeon multiple times, having to repeat the whole thing each time.
However, the eureka moments when things clicked, or I finally beat a boss, were exhilarating. Sometimes, it is as simple as finding the one villager with a vital clue or bumping the right wall to open that secret door. Sometimes, it was new tactics and gear inspired by earlier failures.
These highs and lows are like those in the late 1980s RPGs that inspired Moonring. Moonring’s pixel graphics even use the old 16-colour EGA palette; the audio is reminiscent of the old IBM PC speaker, and the music is MIDI-like. There is even an optional blur mode to make the graphics look like an old, interlaced, cathode ray tube monitor.
However, there are conveniences and improvements found in modern games. As mentioned, Moonring takes notes for you. While Moonring intentionally does not explain its mechanics, the game has basic help. When crafting potions, Moonring tells you the potion that ingredients will create. The game explains new status effects each time.
Moonring treats advancement differently from most RPGs. Moonring does not reward killing creatures, discovering new areas, or completing quests. Instead, you earn devotion to one of the five gods. You spend it to gain god-themed abilities and raise that god’s attribute, which makes new items usable.
You earn devotion by using a rare item or fulfilling deity-specific tasks. These tasks can be as simple as a pilgrimage to their holy city or as complex as recovering a sacred relic. The tasks tie into each god’s themes. A god of strength may reward killing many enemies. A god of knowledge may reward discovering ancient artifacts.
This advancement system encourages exploration and discovery, which is the heart of Moonring. This is not just of the map but of mechanics, conversations, crafting, equipment types and even status effects. The game encourages stealth or working around problems. Grinding or clearing out every creature on the level is rarely rewarding.
How else will you discover whether becoming the new Archon is the only way to complete the game? How do I afford a ship deed at that price? Is there more to the fog-like amber? There is no magic system, right?
Moonring will appeal to those who played early RPGs or want a quirky, sometimes frustrating game. You can finish the game in about 10 hours, but most playthroughs will take much longer. It will not appeal to many. However, Moonring shows love and nostalgia for an RPG style long surpassed. Being free is just icing on the cake.
Starfield is the latest action role playing game (RPG) from Bethesda, the developers of Skyrim and Fallout.
Starfield, the first new RPG setting from Bethesda in a long time, is set in 2330. The Earth’s magnetosphere dissipated over a century earlier, rendering it lifeless. Thankfully, humanity mastered faster-than-light travel via the gravity drive. They rapidly evacuated to the star systems near Earth, deserting old nations and building new institutions.
You start Starfield as a lowly asteroid miner, listening to your coworker’s banter. You unearth a seemingly alien artifact that gives you strange visions. After an attack by space pirates, you are inducted into a quaint, exploration-focused organization called Constellation and whisked off onto an adventure.
Structurally, Starfield has a similar “in media res” style introduction to Skyrim. It quickly teaches you the basic mechanics, gives you a short fight to get the blood pumping, establishes you as the “chosen one”, sets you on the main quest, and then gets out of the way. Much of the exposition happens later.
Starfield‘s strength is the breadth, if not depth, of game loops. Its gameplay is fun, but only exploration is remarkable. The combat is standard first person shooter fare, although melee could be more varied. The stealth mechanics are good but not up to Deus Ex or Cyberpunk 2077. Bethesda nailed the sci-fi feel of lock picking, but once you understand it, less player skill is required than in Skyrim. Your scanner is helpful for exploration, identifying enemies, or satiating hoarding instincts by finding things to pick up.
The gameplay is repetitive but not grindy. You do not need to repeat boring activities to enable more enjoyable gameplay. Sufficient variety in the quests and randomly generated or placed content prevents boredom. Once you exhaust the scripted quests, Starfield offers randomly generated versions to pass the time or continue adventuring. Alternatively, land on a planet and start exploring.
Starfield‘s main quest line is suitably epic and galaxy-spanning, providing mystery and motivation. It draws you above the drama occurring elsewhere in the settled systems. However, this distance means the main quest line loses some emotional grounding and gravitas. Starfield‘s setting and side quests provide the most content, variety and potential like most RPGs.
Starfield contains many visually and thematically diverse places. After leaving the dusty, decrepit asteroid mine and a short detour, you first visit the city of New Atlantis. It is the capital of the United Colonies. Visually, it resembles the citadel from the Mass Effect series: clean, bright, organic curves, open spaces with water and greenery integrated seamlessly with technology.
New Atlantis contrasts with other places like Akila City, the capital of the Freestar Collective. Its mud roads and stone buildings make it feel like the Wild West in space, complete with a bank robbery. As its name suggests, Neon is a cyberpunk (the genre) style metropolis on a rain-drenched water world. It is where to indulge in less savoury activities, like gang warfare, corporate espionage, or elicit substances.
Neon’s exterior in all its multicoloured glory.
Exploration is integral to Starfield, being the primary mission of Constellation. Mechanically, it is similar to No Mans Sky or Elite Dangerous. However, Starfield does it better. Starfield supports multiple biomes per planet, adding variety. Starfield is about exploring a known, finite universe, not the near-infinite set of random ones no one else will ever visit. Planet surfaces intersperse improbably frequent natural phenomena and enemy-filled bases to break up the gameplay. You can improve your exploration skills, like increasing scanner range, sprinting further, or learning more about scanned species.
A misty sunset with trees in the foreground and mountains in the background.
Starfield is visually better than games like No Mans Sky and Elite Dangerous, and “sense pleasure” is integral to exploration. Not just because Starfield is newer. While all generate terrain procedurally, most of everything else in Starfield is hand-crafted. Starfield‘s alien flora and fauna are more plausible, not just a random assortment of limbs. Think Star Wars, where humanity is not at the top of the food chain. Starfield‘s designers often placed moons and planets to create picturesque views, like ringed planets filling the sky. Starfield also has weather, like dreamy mist-filled sunrises, savage dust storms, or dreary rain.
A beautiful ringed planet viewed from a moon.
You need a starship to explore. Your starting ship, the Frontier, is a masterful example of worldbuilding. From the venting gas from its landing thrusters, whose exhaust is ignited by sparks like modern rockets, to its white, vaguely aerodynamic shape reminiscent of the space shuttle, it anchors the setting to a believable near future.
Unfortunately, you pilot your ship rarely. It is either in space, docked or landed. Docking and landing are automated. Flying between planets or systems is “fast travel”, using a short cutscene.
Approaching the starstation “The Eye”.
Starfield has ship combat, but it is arcade-like and closer to No Mans Sky than Elite Dangerous. It devolves into building ships with better shields and weapons. Manoeuvring is all but useless. The camera views block too much with either the cockpit or your ship’s back. Power management is awkward, particularly in the heat of battle. Macros would be helpful. The targeting mode loses any situational awareness.
However, once you master the clunky interface, the shipbuilder is a beautiful avenue for self-expression. Like the Galactic Civilization franchise, you customize and assemble ships using modular components. In a clever touch of worldbuilding, different vendors’ modules have different styles, such as the blocky, angular Deimos or Taiyo’s almost organic curves.
You can also walk around your ship, board enemy ships and add crafting stations and containers. However, to prevent punishing those with large ships, you can board into or leave directly from the cockpit. Elite Dangerous‘s designers should take note.
The back of a Stroud-Ekland cockpit.
Starfield allows building outposts on different planets to store excess equipment, gather resources, craft materials, and refuel ships flying past. You can also create trade links to automate the transfer of materials between them. Starfield almost rivals factory games like Satisfactory with its web of materials and resources.
However, the capacity of even the largest storage buildings needs to increase. A lot. No Mans Sky offers more variety, including positioning individual walls, roof and floor tiles.
In terms of companions, there are dozens that you can hire or find around the galaxy. Of these, four companions have unique quest lines. Each quest line companion follows roughly the same moral compass: generally good and favouring exploration. Although not my thing, this limits the potential for less noble playstyles.
Some want Vasco, your robot companion, to have a quest line and opportunity for growth or change. However, with the world currently enraptured by the potential and danger of AI, seeing a robot follow its programming is a welcome piece of sanity.
Thankfully, Starfield does not take itself too seriously. Catching up with your parents in an alien petting zoo or watching them pretend they did not try illicit substances is touching and amusing. Various “inspirational” posters line the walls of shady secret research labs. Chunks, the ubiquitous cubic fast food of the 24th century, “meet all minimal nutritional requirements”. Vasco has some innocent but cuttingly insightful wit. Your adoring fan’s flattery never gets old.
Hmmm. Appetizing.
Starfield‘s music is orchestral, reminiscent of Star Wars or Star Trek. Most tracks are slow and use periodic gradual crescendos to emphasize the wonder and grandeur of Starfield‘s universe. The soundtrack is composed to support a game with lots of voice dialog and critical sound queues, such as in combat. It does not call attention to itself. For example, the restrained, almost mournful menu theme is the opposite of Skyrim‘s rousing call to action. Rather than assaulting the player with aggressive emotion, Starfield‘s version hints that the player has to come to the game (or music), not vice versa.
My main criticism of Starfield is not that it is too easy, at least on “normal” difficulty. I may have played many Bethesda RPGs, but even “hard” provided little challenge. Assuming you do not intentionally engage in challenging content, there is little pressure to specialize your character’s skills, ship, outposts or use consumables for temporary buffs. These become more role playing opportunities.
My main criticism is also not that Starfield is the usual Bethesda RPG oxymoron. Starfield empowers you, creating a feel-good power fantasy where you are important and can make galaxy-affecting changes. However, as the conveniences in your favour accumulate, like free ship fuel or unkillable companions, immersion and suspension of disbelief get harder. Starfields‘ roots in points-based mechanics mean large level differences between you and your target can create unrealistic bullet sponges.
I do not mind that, despite Starfield having the best facial and hair animation of any Bethesda RPG, it still falls into that uncanny valley. NPCs wander aimlessly and still get stuck in walls occasionally.
My main criticism of Starfield is an absent central or recurring theme. For example, in a world where AIs are more intelligent and capable than humans, and the powerful are unshackled from laws and ethics, Cyberpunk 2077 examines humanity. The Fallout series deals with the difficulties of survival and that the best choices are often hard or impossible. The Witcher series shows that, when monsters walk among humans, humans are sometimes the most monstrous of all. The Nier series deals with loss.
In fairness, a game does not need to be profound to be good. Making action movies or games requires skill. Bethesda more than demonstrated it with careful level design, regular mixing of gameplay modes, managing tension, and catering to familiar sci-fi tropes and fantasies. The usual meme-worthy glitches are thankfully absent. The greater attention to quality after Cyberpunk 2077‘s problematic launch is apparent.
Instead, Starfield is pure, fun sci-fi escapism. It is a series of concurrent action movies. RPGs are defined by how well they let you play out fantasies. Starfield delivers on that.
For example, the Vanguard quest line plays like a rerun of Starship Troopers. The Ryujin quest line is a sci-fi James Bond or Mission Impossible coupled with corporate espionage and intrigue. Completing the Mantis quest allows you to play as a space Batman. The Sysdef/Crimson Fleet quest line has palpable tension as you play a double agent, playing criminals and the law against each other. Join the Rangers and play as a space cowboy.
A “Neil Armstrong moment” standing on the surface of Luna, the moon, looking toward the Sun.
Starfield is unoriginal. Almost everything in the game is “heavily inspired” by something else. That is OK. Successful RPGs help players fulfil fantasies by immersing players in familiar tropes. Where Skyrim opened the fantasy genre to a broader audience, Starfield attempts to do the same with science fiction.
That said, I was disappointed there were not more overt references to other movies, shows or games. Many will pick the few references to Skyrim‘s sweet rolls and Meridia quests. Yes, there was some well-known voice talent from Star Trek: Deep Space 9 and a subtle reference to the 1986 Transformers movie. Cyberpunk 2077 did this comparatively better.
Without strong themes and notwithstanding a few minor nods to modern sensibilities like same-sex relationships, there is little to offend or demand too much of its players. Perhaps Bethesda wanted to play it safe and avoid controversy.
However, Bethesda missed the opportunity to do something more. So many quests touch on real-world themes. For example, the war between the United Colonies and the Freestar Collective that ended 20 years before the game’s start still has lasting social and economic impacts. The United Colonies has to deal with the compromises and the demands strict order creates. The Freestar Collective juggles freedom with the criminal behaviour it facilitates. The Rangers’ quest line deals with the place of veterans in a postwar society. Meanwhile, the wealthy flatter themselves on luxury space cruises.
DLC or the modding community may fill the gap. Like Skyrim and Fallout, Starfield is as much a gaming platform as a game. Much of the work establishes content for future expansion or use. Outposts and shipbuilding, for example, go far beyond what Starfield currently needs. The Va’ruun, relegated to mysterious bogeymen, have much potential.
If you enjoyed Fallout or Skyrim or like science fiction games, you have probably already played or plan to play Starfield. You can race through key quests in 30 hours, but the complete experience takes at least 100 more. Starfield is fun, emphasizes exploration and knows its target audience well. However, the lack of anything original, introspective or thought-provoking may limit its long-term impact on the gaming landscape. Playing Starfield is like eating Chunks. It tastes good and you want more but the nutrition is questionable.
Stray Gods: The Role Playing Musical, or just Stray Gods, is an interactive musical game, as its name suggests. Summerfall Studios developed it, the first game for this Australian studio.
You play as Grace, a leather jacket- and boot-wearing directionless 20-something. After sitting through uninspiring auditions for a new band member, Calliope happens by. The muse from Greek mythology inspires Grace, weaving the words from her mournful song into hope.
Later that evening, a wounded Calliope bursts into Grace’s apartment. She dies in Grace’s arms, gifting Grace her powers and catapulting Grace on an adventure to clear her name.
Mechanically, Stray Gods is similar to point-and-click dialog games. However, this mechanic extends to songs, where the player’s choice determines the subsequent words and music sung. This design alone puts Stray Gods in almost unique territory.
Some dialog and most song choices are associated with one of three traits: caring (green), kick-ass (red) or clever (blue). You select one at the start and another when you max it out. Choices accumulate. Some options may only be available with a sufficiently high score in its trait.
A musical lives and dies by the quality of its music. Thankfully, Stray Gods’ music is excellent. One would have expected no less from Austin Wintory with help from Tripod and Montaigne.
“Adrift”, the first song, is probably the best. It sets the game’s moody, elemental tone. Its waltz-like triple time gives the feel of constant motion or bobbing, reinforcing Grace’s relatable malaise.
“Old Wounds”, another memorable song, is an argument between Persephone and Apollo. Its chorus is a welcome respite between the angry words, and the verses tear open millennia-old wounds. It is almost uncomfortable to hear. It reinforces how the Idols are divided, self-righteous and entrenched.
However, Stray Gods also surprised me with its writing and voice acting. Its story is deceptively deep and intelligent, reminding me of the musical Wicked. Instead of subverting The Wizard of Oz, Stray Gods reinterprets the Greek gods and how they would function in modern society.
It is not just Grace who is adrift. For example, burdened by history and the guilt of his prophecies, Apollo has receded into himself. He has become a meek, softly spoken shadow, whispering most of his lines. He is the opposite of what a sun god should be.
Persephone embodies rage and resentment, often depicted with her back to Grace or the world. Every word seethes and resents her injustices, like losing her underworld.
Pan is more faithful to himself, revelling in chaos and mischief. He copes by living in the moment and seeking advantage where he can.
The game’s writers also showed love and attention to detail. I spent twenty minutes chatting with Apollo as he mournfully whispered the Idols’ history and current challenges. There is also a bit of humour, such as with Apollo’s or Hecate’s unease with modern technology.
The art style is dreamlike and stylised. The main characters are cell-shaded, with minimal animations between poses. The backgrounds vary. Some are detailed. Some, like Calliope’s apartment, are merely pencil lines over patches of colour.
My criticisms of Stray Gods’ are few. Despite a patch intended to fix this, the sometimes inconsistent dialog volume can be jarring or make some lines hard to hear.
Stay Gods also has superficial libertarian or “woke” undertones. Some romance options are same-sex. It hints strongly that one idol is transgender. Some characters have piercings and tattoos. None of this should matter. However, some will read too much into it.
If you like musicals, Greek gods, murder mysteries and a bit of romance, Stray Gods has you covered. It is short and sweet at about six hours. However, multiple playthroughs are required to see all possible outcomes and get all achievements.
The Single Player 