Friday, October 21, 2016

Secret of Mana, the World Map, and Flash vs. Function


Secret of Mana is an undeniably important videogame, mostly for illustrating that Japanese RPGs can be very pretty. 


Final Fantasy V, released December 1992:


Secret of Mana, released August 1993 on the same hardware:


For a long time, graphics in RPGs weren't really intended to inspire awe in and of themselves -- they were tools for igniting your imagination. An image of a dragon wasn't meant to terrify you in and of itself. What mattered was that it represented the idea of a dragon. One that could viciously tear your character apart and force them to restart at the last save point.


There's so much power to this kind of language. But when you explore a forest in Secret of Mana, it's not enchanting purely because it calls to mind the idea of a majestic forest. It's also because its representation of a forest is enchanting in its own right.


This was an important shift. Secret of Mana's aesthetic triumphs captured player's imaginations, and paved the way for Square's future successes like Final Fantasy VI and Chrono Trigger. That it also let you play it with your friends goes a long way to explain the game's enduring appeal.


It's also a very frustrating game. While I still connect effortlessly with older stories like Final Fantasy IV, I hate playing Secret of Mana



It's a game deeply concerned with surfaces. That comes through in the art design, which is still exceptional today. It's also evident in how Secret strives to eliminate many of the abstractions that for a long time defined the RPG. Instanced turn-based combat. Text-based menus. World maps. The problem is that all of its substitutions make the game feel wretched to actually play. 


The real-time fights feel mushy and detached. The interface is miserable to navigate. The AI partners are useless, and multiplayer is hampered by players having to pause the game every two seconds to cast magic. At every turn Secret substitutes functional, time-tested RPG design mechanisms for flashy, but ultimately weaker replacements. 


There's one key complaint I want to focus on though: how it approaches the world map, and how all the different places in Secret of Mana actually fit together.



Dragon Quest popularized the world map in Japanese videogames (which can otherwise be traced all the way back to Ultima and its predecessor Akalabeth). Using nothing but flat, 16x16 pixel four-color tiles, it represents a continent-spanning setting that links together every location in the game. The effect of this device is that instead of feeling like a bunch of disconnected videogame levels, Dragon Quest feels like one big world. 

This layer of verisimilitude is a large part of what makes RPGs special. "Exploring a world" feels different from "beating a level". This distinction is what Dragon Quest offered players used to more immediately fun games like Super Mario Bros., and it's part of why the series became a beloved national icon.

The world map is typically a more abstract space than dungeons or towns. Whereas in a town a single tile may contain a sign or a person, on the world map a tile can easily represent a bridge, a castle, or a mountain. Some games address this aesthetic dissonance by minimizing the spaces between significant areas, often by showing them on a map and letting players point and click to where they want to go (Terranigma, Romancing SaGa). Others present interstitial spaces with the same level of fidelity as in main play areas. Legend of Zelda's overworld is presented in the same scale as its dungeons. The same is true of Final Fantasy Adventure (the first Mana game and Secret's predecessor), Ys, and countless others.


All of these are valid solutions. Secret of Mana's approach is an awkward hybrid of Dragon Quest's and Final Fantasy Adventure's. It loses a lot of what these games have to offer to no real benefit.



At first Secret of Mana seems to follow Adventure's model -- it presents an interconnected world where all spaces function at the same scale. Not only that, but combat takes place on the same screen as exploration. While most RPGs of the era are modally split into "exploring dungeons and towns", "exploring the world map", and "combat", Secret of Mana's presentation is totally unified. This is something none of Square's other SNES offerings could manage, and it counts for a lot.


There are odd wrinkles, granted. One forest area can only be accessed via teleporter, for seemingly no reason. Spaces that you can easily walk between are connected with a deliberately comic and ridiculous fast-travel system in which your characters are launched out of a cannon. 


These wrinkles are off-putting, but for eight hours or so, Secret of Mana's world feels consistent and coherent and true. And because there's no map, you really have to learn your way around, feeling out the various paths and shortcuts, listening to lovely tunes and admiring the gorgeous art. This is my favorite chunk of the game.



Then we're introduced to areas you can exclusively travel to via cannon. This is a major fracture in the game's facade. The cannon travel is deliberately disorientating, and doesn't offer a sense of the two areas' geographical relationship. If you're playing Dragon Quest and walk on a world map from one town to another, you learn the distance between the two towns, the direction you have to walk, whether you cross any bridges or pass through any caves, etc. If you're playing Zelda and walk from one dungeon to another, you know roughly where they exist in relation to each other. The cannon travel offers none of this intimacy.


Before this shift in approach I could honestly deal with the boring dungeons and miserable bosses and fighting with the goddamn ring system. I could deal with the nothing plot and the empty characters. Because, for a little while, its world feels true. And exploring that world is an experience I could actively share with my friends. That's kind of incredible!


Then you blast off to the Upperland Forest and it starts to fall apart. No longer is every space linked together in a continuous world -- it's now a divied up series of videogame levels to progress through. It'd be one thing if it were one off-key note, but from this point on areas become increasingly small and fragmented. More and more levels contain a single town or dungeon and nowhere else to explore, before you blast off to the next section.



Getting the dragon should be such a powerful moment. You can now fly anywhere in this world you've been exploring for the whole game. But because of the disjointed approach, you don't have a real relationship with the setting. The connection between the world map you fly around and the spaces you've been exploring is unclear. It's not helped by the confusing mode-7 effect and the tank controls, but if the setting had stayed true to itself then that stuff wouldn't matter (see Final Fantasy VI).


Does it make sense why this is so disappointing? The grounded world in Secret of Mana's first third promises something unlike anything else Square was offering at the time -- outside of Final Fantasy Adventure of course. But while Adventure soars in its last third and reaches a triumphant, cathartic conclusion, Secret becomes an absolute slog. And while there's dozens of complaints to be made about how the game plays, how its world fails to fit together is maybe its most crucial fault.


This is a game deeply concerned with surfaces. It's full of texture and spirit and life. Later Square games would marry this loving presentation with moving stories and smart design. But, underneath it all, Secret doesn't seem to understand why RPGs were so much fun to begin with, or even the successes of the original Mana game. So it fumbles along, its half-baked design innovations skirting by on the strength of its aesthetic. 


The Secret of Mana I'd have enjoyed would've stuck its guns. It would've actually presented a unified world, a coherent setting. There'd have been no world map at all and fast-travel shortcuts like the cannon would've been minimized or non-existent. We could go further of course (a functional interface and combat that doesn't feel like pulling teeth would be nice), but that key shift in structure would've transformed my experience with the game. 


What's most frustrating of all is that this may have been the developer's original intent. Secret of Mana was originally planned as a much larger SNES-CD game. After plans for that peripheral fell through, the game had to be chopped apart to fit on a cartridge. Frankly the game feels miserably long already, so we may have gotten the better package ultimately. But I'd still be interested in seeing what that version of the game looked like.

We only have the game we have. As it is, I find it very difficult to conceptualize Secret of Mana's world as a singular place. Instead it feels like a disconnected hacked-up set of unfinished maps patched together with glue and string. 


Wednesday, September 28, 2016

Helen's Mysterious Castle


Helen's Mysterious Castle shines with charm and class.

Its story is minimal and affecting. It starts with no intro to speak of, dropping you straight into its world, then gradually unfurls. Little characters and moments are far more important than they initially appear. Short conversations endear you to its characters, so much so that you're sad when they're seemingly gone forever, and overjoyed when they return.

These narrative arcs elevate what's already a world-class dungeon-crawler. The level layouts are smart, economical, and dense. The one-on-one battles last under a minute a-piece, and pose extremely clever and engaging tactical challenges. It's a hard game at times, but also very kind -- death in battle poses no penalty except for sending you to the start of the dungeon, where you're given a meal that permanently raises your max HP.

The aesthetic builds on default resources with heaps of excellent custom sprites, animation, and re-orchestrated music. For someone already delighted by the RPGMaker 2000 aesthetic, the effect is intoxicating. 

Helen's Mysterious Castle takes exactly the amount of time it needs to fully explore the greater realities of its combat and its characters. Then it ends, without wasting your time. It is a thoughtful and lovely game, and I look forward to revisiting it in the future.

Thursday, July 14, 2016

MeGaLoMania: Undertale on Humans and Monsters


(This essay spoils most of Undertale. If you haven't played the game yet I highly recommend doing so.)

There's a piece on the Undertale soundtrack called Song that might play when you fight Sans. It's a cute little track. It borrows from Sans's goofy signature tune and from Papyrus's theme "Bonetrousle." It's placed near the end of the Bandcamp OST, a little before "ASGORE" and right after "Undertale." This is when you meet Sans in the actual game, when he reveals the truth behind EXP and LOVE.

"Song that might play when you fight Sans" never plays in the game. You don't fight Sans in the judgement hall -- not usually.

The only time the player fights Sans is in the climax of Undertale's “evil” route. This path is for players who go out of their way to exterminate every single monster in the underground. It makes up a pretty significant chunk of content. The game implores you not to play it.

Few players stumble upon Undertale’s evil route on a first playthrough. Most will only try it after playing the rest of the game, likely all the way through to the true ending. On these other paths, Undertale puts a lot of work into making you empathize with its characters. By the end of the story, most players will treasure them. In the evil route, slaughtering these characters is the only path forward.


There are reasons to do so. It shows us a side of the characters that we don’t see on other paths. We see Undyne at her most heroic, and Sans at his most desperate. We watch Flowey beg for his life. We know that Papyrus’s heart is full of love for even the most repulsive creatures, and that Asgore stays a coward even under dire circumstances.

We get to meet Chara, the fallen human. We realize they’ve accompanied us silently on all our past journeys. We see how terrifying they are face-to-face.

The characters are the heart of Undertale. Getting to know them a little better is a compelling reason to play through the evil route. The path also entails leveling up, finding powerful weapons that aren’t present elsewhere, and fighting devious and challenging super-bosses -- all typical post-game fare in other RPGs.

However, as valid as these reasons are, they exist outside the story of Undertale. Frisk doesn’t actually have a reason to murder every monster he comes across, at least not one that we’re privy too. These acts of violence are wholly senseless, even after we learn the truth during the ending.

In the conclusion, it’s revealed that Frisk’s actions at the start of the game awakened the spirit of Chara, who guides Frisk during their journey. Frisk’s increasingly malevolent actions are the result of Chara gaining more control over them. In the end, Chara resurrects completely. Then, whether you want them to or not, they destroy the world.


This sounds a lot like a “would you kindly” twist, but it’s not really. BioShock encourages the player to identify with Jack and the feeling of being manipulated by a malicious outside force. In Undertale, the player is the outside force, and the game takes great pains to establish the separation between its protagonist and the player.

After all, it doesn’t say “Frisk” on the battle screen, because you are not Frisk. You are just a tiny invisible spirit living in Frisk’s mind, guiding them towards making certain choices. You whisper in Frisk’s ear whether they should fight Toriel, or buy thirty hot-dogs from Sans, or tell Undyne that anime is real.

Your control is limited, because Frisk has their own personality and will that develop throughout the game. You can choose whether Frisk hugs Asriel, but you can’t force them to pull a knife and stab him. Even though that’s precisely what they do in the evil route! The Frisk that made friends with all the underground monsters and saved Asriel’s soul is incapable of that betrayal.

It’s not accurate to say that the player is Chara, or that Chara is the character the player is most encouraged to identify with. It’s more that Chara is a reflection of the player’s impact on Undertale’s world as channeled through their limited (but significant) control of Frisk’s actions.

The player/Chara accompanies Frisk on every path the game has to offer. It’s why their name shows up on the battle screen. On the neutral and pacifist routes, the player/Chara’s influence feels silent. Frisk’s actions, even the violent ones, make sense for a little lost kid that got stuck underground. On the evil route, Frisk’s homicidal actions feel purposeless, because they’re rooted in the player/Chara’s desire to tear the world apart just because they can. Hence, Chara’s presence in the story is brought to the forefront.


The horror of the “would you kindly?” twist in BioShock is that the player thinks they are capable of fully exerting their will upon the story, then the game reveals otherwise. This is true of all games, really -- your influence on any story is always limited. It’s constrained either by absolutes (Samus refuses to kill the baby metroid, Crono always goes through the gate after Marle) or by the choices presented (Frisk may or may not hug Asriel, but they still would never stab him). BioShock’s twist builds on the player’s fear that things might not be all about them.

The horror of Undertale’s twist is that the player gets exactly what they want. They get to level up, fight the super-bosses, see all the content, and 100% the game.

That doesn’t seem so bad, right? Ultimately, it’s just a videogame, a collection of 1’s and 0’s. Toriel isn’t real. Killing her is not an immoral act. Neither is killing any other monster in Undertale, or in any videogame. We figured all this out a long time ago, when we realized DOOM wasn’t causing school shootings.

So what evil is the game trying to highlight? Why does it judge the player so harshly? Why is the dialogue so damn cruel? It’d be pretty awful if none of that hand-wringing and drama about killing monsters actually meant anything.

Because that’s what Undertale is about: the relationship between humans and monsters.


So here’s an important question: what are monsters?

Let’s concoct a somewhat arbitrary definition to make a rhetorical point. A monster is a being that exists in total ideological opposition to a protagonist, so much so that their extermination is a wholly justified act. They lead one-dimensional existences, defined by their hostility towards the player’s avatar. This kind of monster is ubiquitous in videogames: the goomba, the slime, the cacodemon, etc.

“Ideological” is the important word there, because the choice to include a monster in a work of fiction always has political underpinnings. The story of defending against an endless horde of Space Invaders is different from the story of infiltrating the Bydo’s mother base and destroying the core. And while Missile Command involves defensive play much like Space Invaders, the choice to exchange alien monsters for human warheads changes the work’s meaning entirely.

Monsters are a narrative device. They don’t actually exist. An angry mother bear isn’t a monster, it’s just worried about its children. A rabid dog isn’t a monster, it’s just sick. Evil human beings aren’t monsters either; there are always reasons behind human evil, even if they're petty or horrible.

But monsters allow for simple conflicts, which means they’re well-suited to videogames as a medium. When you’re using code to draw information on a screen, it’s easy to make an on-screen sprite vanish. Hence, the most basic interaction you can code between any two objects in a game is for one to erase the other. Mario landing on a Goomba. The lone bullet colliding with a Space Invader. The ease of programming these interactions has shaped the medium’s vocabulary.

This part of the vocabulary is most effective when it’s used to express subversive themes. Breath of Fire: Dragon Quarter is a story about struggling under systemic capitalist oppression, and dramatizes that struggle through taxing conflicts with monsters. The Space Pirates in Metroid Prime are missile fodder at first glance, but on reflection they exemplify the thoughtless environmental destruction humans are often guilty of.


Monsters are most harmful as a stand-in for those that stray from the status quo. This is the worst fantasy of monsters: the fantasy of Us versus Them, We versus The Other.

It doesn’t feel too insidious in something like Dragon Quest, with its colorful Toriyama illustrations and lighthearted tone. But it’s there. These are games about idyllic worlds in distress because of foreign interlopers. Once you destroy the evil wizard or the wicked witch, things go back to being perfect. Dragon Quest is beautiful in many ways. But this is an ugly and conservative fantasy.

The ugliness is more obvious in something like Modern Warfare or The Division, where real-life marginalized people are monster-ized thoughtlessly. These stories express evil prejudices. Yet in many ways they represent the norm for storytelling in large-scale projects.

There’s obviously a spectrum to all this, but it’s uncanny how often we fall back on monsters as a narrative tool in videogames. You can see storytellers struggling with this throughout the history of the medium. You win Ultima IV by being a moral and just Avatar, and also killing monsters. You finish Mother by singing a lullaby to a frightened child, and also killing monsters. You beat Breath of Fire: Dragon Quarter by triumphing over cruel capitalist overlords, and also killing monsters. No matter how clever and subversive their themes might be, it’s a bit frightening how many games rely on casts of one-dimensional uncharacterized foes for the player to tear through.

What does Undertale have to say about all this? It’s pretty overt about it actually. Its thesis on the subject is its final boss fight (of sorts) with Sans.


After a whole route of effortlessly killing almost every monster, Sans is designed to be as difficult and discouraging as possible. Most of the route up to that point entails tedious grinding to raise your LOVE. Sans represents a different kind of tedium: the tedium of bashing your head against the same boss fight and unskippable cutscenes for hours until you finally win.

The fight’s dialogue is more didactic than anywhere else in the game. It cuts like a knife, if you’re invested in the story’s characters. Sans knows he’s fighting you at a disadvantage: you can save and reload, while he cannot. All he can hope is that you get bored and quit.

The song that plays when you fight Sans is called Megalovania. "Megalovania" doesn't reuse any motifs from the rest of the soundtrack -- because Fox didn't originally compose it to appear in Undertale. He wrote it in 2009, for his Halloween-themed Earthbound ROM hack.

In Fox’s Halloween Hack, the player’s avatar "Varik" chases Dr. Andonuts, a side character from the original Earthbound, into a dream world. In its climax, the player reaches Andonuts, transformed into a horrible monster. The player unloads their most powerful attacks on the monster. He doesn’t fight back. Then, on the brink of death, he changes into a recognizably human (and pissed off) Dr. Andonuts. He swears a lot. Megalovania plays. Varik kills him. The resolution is distinctly unsatisfying -- there’s a sense that the game resents the player for finishing it.

MeGaLoVania also plays in an animation in the multimedia webcomic Homestuck. Starting at 1:51, fan-favorite villain-protagonist Vriska realizes her powers as the Thief of Light, and uses them to murder her disabled friend Tavros. She later tries to explain this act, but all her rationalizing really amounts to is “I killed him because I could.” It’s a bullshit excuse, but that didn’t stop legions of readers from leaping to her defense and tearing down Tavros.

So we have three stories: the stories of Chara (the player), Varik (the player), and Vriska (the fan-favorite). All three are about people wielding great power thoughtlessly, people who kill not because of what they may gain, but because it’s gratifying.


Toby Fox cares a lot about the ugliness of wielding great power thoughtlessly. Because we all have power over someone. Power over our friends, our siblings, our partners, our children, ourselves. Think of how much a sincere cutting remark from someone you love and respect would hurt you. Or how much it’d pain you if they left your life unexpectedly.

Sometimes we have to hurt people -- breaking up the toxic relationship, or telling someone that their behavior is pushing people away. But the point is that we have that power, and we have to handle it delicately. We can’t be like Chara, Varik, or Vriska. We can’t wield our power without care or restraint. That’s how we destroy our lives and the lives of people we care about.


Finishing the evil route of Undertale has irreparable consequences. It’s nothing all that dramatic really. All it does is add a ten second cutscene after the True Ending, in every subsequent playthrough. The rest of the game is unchanged, and can be played through over and over. It still drives people nuts though, to the point that there are a ton of guides online for turning off the variable in RegEdit. People hate it when their actions aren’t above consequences.

In the end, we are like Chara, Varik, and Vriska. Because we like killing monsters. We like killing monsters, getting stronger, then killing monsters more efficiently. A violent display of power over virtual, conquerable enemies feels good. Mastering a system feels good. We enjoy holding a tiny electronic world in our hands and imposing our will upon it. This megalomaniacal facet of the id is real, it’s valid, and it isn’t going away. We’re never going to erase the ugliness because it’s a part of being human.

Undertale doesn’t want to erase anything. It just wants us to be aware of how we indulge our baser selves -- because that’s what we’re doing when we play games about killing monsters. And if we’re aware of it, we can steer some of those indulgent urges towards something more constructive.

We can make fewer games about LOVE, and more about love. We can make games about trauma, pain, and guilt. We can make games about friendship, empathy, and kindness. We can make games for every facet of the human experience.

Undertale is a game about humans and monsters. Monsters with hopes, dreams, fears, ambitions, friends, families, self-esteem issues, favorite cartoons, surprising talents, special attacks, and secret crushes. Monsters who aren’t actually different from humans at all, except that humans have more power. Its human protagonist can wield their power with grace and form lasting friendships. Or they can wield it like a sledgehammer and destroy lives.

We face these choices every day, because we all have power over people.

Let’s do our best to choose grace.


Monday, May 30, 2016

The Limitations of Prescriptive Design Models


Let me know if you’ve heard this one before. *ahem*

A videogame contains rules governing how objects in the game and the player interact. A game should introduce new rules to the player gradually, using context to teach the player how they work. It should mix those rules together in interesting ways, and as the game progresses it should escalate the complexity of those mixtures. Eventually the game should reach a satisfying climax that uses all the player’s newfound skills in harmonious concert.

This is a useful model for understanding and making videogames. It’s also obviously wrong, if you think about it for like two seconds. Let’s start with what’s valuable about it though.

What this model represents is a clear-cut way to communicate effectively in a videogame. To use the obvious example, there’s very little information in Super Mario Bros. that isn’t expertly conveyed. It introduces its rules early on using a clear visual language and careful level design. Even the game’s more eccentric touches (the water levels, the boss fights, the castle mazes), are established as key characters during the first half of the game. When all the story’s players return in the game’s devious final worlds, it’s easy to understand the challenges presented.


It's Game Design 101. And if you understand it, if you make a game as laser-focused and restrained and elegant as Super Mario Bros., then you’ve probably created something neat and interesting! Even if you don't fit exactly into that curve, it's still a strong backbone to build a game on.

So. As useful as it is, I’ve never made a game that wholly follows this model. Why?

Let’s look at one of my games as an example let’s say Frog Adventure (which you can play in five minutes for free over here) ‘cause it’s also a linear 2D platformer. If you put most of Frog Adventure's levels in a line, yeah, they teach you how to use the tongue, how to beat the level, and how the bubbles and the sand work differently from static blocks. The first world ends with a boss fight that feels tonally distinct from the preceding levels, but still uses the same set of verbs and incorporates the three kinds of blocks. Beyond that, everything in Worlds 2, 3, and 4 builds off of characters established in World 1. It’s classic formal stuff.

Here’s a twist though: the boss fights at the end of each world actually get easier as the game progresses. World 1’s boss is a puzzle that requires some thinking and decent timing. World 2’s puzzle is a little simpler, but still requires timing. World 3’s boss is trivial. The world 4 boss is just an empty room! The final level (world 5) adds in scrolling but doesn't have any bubbles or sand. Out of the three kinds of blocks in the preceding levels, the climax only concerns one.


Why didn't I follow the ideal shape? Because I wanted the game to be funny! The boss fights were already a joke thanks to the absurd contrast between the main levels’ background music and the boss theme. Having them go from easy to trivial to nonexistent felt like a natural place to push the gag. Beyond that, I made the last level completely unlike the rest of the game up to that point 'cause I wanted it to feel super-melodramatic. I thought the absurdity of it would give the ending more comic punch.

So again, why would anyone deviate from the prescribed formal model? For a quadrillion reasons. Frog Adventure differs for comedy. Fugitive does it to make a point. And Dance Party doesn't fit the model at all!

And those are just my games. Think about how the Mother games subvert expectations for their haunting climaxes. How Contra: Hard Corps enthralls even though it's mostly made up of wildly different bosses that barely inform each other. How Chrono Trigger gives you one chance to save Lucca's mom with an obtuse and time-limited minigame. How Problem Attic changes its rules for every scene to keep you feeling off-kilter for the whole story. How Undertale turns formal design paradigms inside out in dozens of ways and is infinitely richer for it. How We Know the Devil condenses the player’s entire input into just seven choices, and makes you feel their weight deep inside your heart.


You can teach each rule to the player in a controlled setting before using them in more sophisticated scenarios. That’s a valid approach just like you can choose to compose a poem that fits the rigid structure of a sonnet. These models are useful because prescribed structures often inspire ‘more’ creativity than making something wholly freeform.

But you wouldn’t yell at e.e. cummings for writing poems that don’t rhyme, or Faulkner for writing run-on sentences. As a designer, your toolset is similarly limitless. You can throw three new challenges at the player at once. You can make a climactic sequence pitifully easy. You can upend everything and totally change how the player’s commands work, then change them back in the next area. You can make games with complex rules and demand that players figure them out with little guidance. You can make games with simple rules introduced early on that never change or develop.

Why would you want to do any of this though? Why not just make perfect beautiful games like Super Mario Bros. from now until the end of time?


The same reason you make a game at all: expression. Sure, you can craft immortal stories within strict formal boundaries. But if you want to say something that requires stepping outside of those borders, you can. You don’t have to limit yourself.

Thursday, November 26, 2015

Complete Timeline of My Work


(EDIT (11/16/2021): I think I'm finally ready to retire this list and keep things updated elsewhere. You should be able to find all my new work using the Overview page.)

One of my favorite little pleasures is discovering an artist and pouring over their body of work. It's fun to see the little arcs their output takes over time. Often this requires a kind of make-shift archaeological approach, since many artists don't take pains to preserve their old work.

I've been posting stuff on the internet for many years now, and I've built up a significant backlog. I like to think some people may take interest in those little arcs in my work. So here it, as complete a timeline of my oeuvre as I can put together, including a few collaborative efforts.

Obviously I don't stand by all of it now -- the glowing Other M review is a particularly aggravating stain -- but it all speaks to the person I've been, am, and will be.

Ongoing


The Sockcast Podcast Began 4-28-2021
World Revolution Podcast Began 10-12-2017

2021


Wayward Writing 7-23-2021
Facets v1.1 Update Games 7-23-2021

2020


SMPS Game of the Decade List Writing, Podcast 7-29-2020

2019


Stuck Games 12-3-2019
Expanse Games 8-5-2019
Saber's Mark Writing 7-26-2019
A Technical Rundown of Facets’ Bosses Writing 7-12-2019
Caster's Gift Writing 5-17-2019
Let's Play Castlevania: The Adventure Videos 5-5-2019
Let's Play Castlevania (NES) Videos 3-3-2019
Afterward Games 2-14-2019

2018


My Wish For You Games 12-5-2018
Facets Games 7-24-2018
Notes on Trails in the Sky FC's Pacing Writing 4-2-2018
Things That Aren't Real Writing 3-18-2018

2017


Atop the Witch's Tower Games 6-12-2017
Kikai Games 5-13-2017
Her Lullaby Games 2-14-2017
Solutions without Problems Writing 1-19-2017

2016

Let's Play Don't Look Back Videos 4-2-2016
Let's Play Sonic Adventure Videos 3-20-2016
Let's Play Super Hexagon Videos 3-11-2016

2015


The SnS Clubhouse Podcast 8-18-2015
Hummingbird Lovers Psychic Supernova Games 7-13-2015
The Top Generation 5 Games Ever Writing, SMPS 6-25-2015
How SaGa 2 Tells a Beautiful Story Writing, ZEAL 4-3-2015
Let's Play Darkfate Videos 3-9-2015
Let's Play Romancing SaGa Videos 3-2-2015
Midnight Ramblings on Chrono Trigger and Fate Videos 2-16-2015
Let's Play For the Frog the Bell Tolls Videos 2-9-2015
Let's Play Super Mario Land Videos 2-2-2015
Let's Play Kirby's Dream Land 3 Videos 1-26-2015
Let's Play Monuments of Mars Videos 1-19-2015
The Maturity of Zelda II Writing, Clickbliss 1-16-2015

2014


2014 Game of the Year List Writing, SMPS 12-22-2014
Frog Adventure Games 12-14-2014
Operation K.A.T.B. Games 9-20-2014
Ants: A Love Story Games 8-25-2014
#welovegamedevs Writing 8-22-2014
Effective Drama in Videogames Panel Summary Writing, IGDA 8-1-2014
Let's Play Problem Attic Videos 7-13-2014
Let's Play Super Xalaxer Videos 7-6-2014
Let's Play A Night in the Woods Videos 6-24-2014
Let's Play La La Land Videos 6-14-2014
Effective Drama in Videogames Panel Videos, IndiE3 6-11-2014
IndiE3 Week and anna anthropy's emotica Writing 6-9-2014
Dance Party Games 6-8-2014
Mega Man 2 (NES) Review Writing, Nintendo Project Resumed 5-23-2014
I wanna be the very best Writing 5-20-2014
Designing Drama - Fugitive Postmortem Writing, ZEAL 5-15-2014
Top 10 Games of 2013 Writing, SMPS 01-01-2014

2013


The Top 129 Game Boy Games Ever Writing, SMPS 12-22-2013
Into the Vortex Games 12-21-2013
Mother 3 and Abstraction Writing 12-7-2013
Fugitive Games 11-1-2013
Super Xalaxer (Browser) Review Writing 8-22-2013
Let's Play Summer School 2013 Videos, SMPS 07-23-2013
Quarantine Games 5-16-2013
Mixtape #1: Flash Games Writing 4-24-2013
Antichamber (PC) Review Writing 4-21-2013
Ni no Kuni (PS3) Review Writing 4-9-2013
Anna Plays Mega Man X for the First Time Videos 3-25-2013

2012


Top 10 Games of 2012 Writing, SMPS 12-31-2012
The Top 153 Genesis Games Ever Writing, SMPS 12-22-2012
Mega Man X Minimalist Playthrough (Unfinished) Videos 8-8-12
Let's Play Summer Blockbuster 2012 Videos, SMPS 07-21-2012
Iji (PC) Review Writing, SMPS 06-10-2012
Let's Play Springfest 2012 Videos, SMPS 03-18-2012
Battle with Magus (8-bit Famitracker Cover) Music 2-22-2012
Lava Reef Zone (8-bit Famitracker Cover) Music 1-19-2012
Descent into Hell (8-bit Famitracker Cover) Music 1-16-2012
F-Zero: Big Blue (8-bit Famitracker Cover) Music 1-14-2012
Silent Hill 2 (PS2) Review Writing, SMPS 01-05-2012

2011


Top 10 Games of 2011 Writing, SMPS 12-31-2011
Let's Play Fall Funtacular 2011 Videos, SMPS 11-01-2011
Silent Hill (PSX) Review Writing, SMPS 09-15-2011
Let's Play Summer Olympics 2011 Videos, SMPS 08-05-2011
Top 10 Cartoons of All-Time Writing, SMPS 07-31-2011
Princess Tutu Review Writing, SMPS 07-01-2011
Mega Man X3 (SNES) Review Writing, SMPS 01-25-2011

2010


Metroid: Other M (Wii) Review Writing, SMPS 10-25-2010
Battletoads (NES) Review Writing, SMPS 08-03-2010 

2009


Ahriman Games 12-11-2009