It would be easy to dismiss Marvel's Spider-Man as the Marvel version of Batman: Arkham City, but that's a little reductive. After all: Spider-Man has more costumes.

I'm being a bit facetious, but really, much of what Spider-Man succeeds at feels directly aped from the open-world Arkham games: you fly through the city bounding between (or over) rooftops, side-missions explore the backgrounds of various allies and villains from the comics, and although Spidey can be upgraded to take more bullets than the Dark Knight could, the overall flow of combat is pretty similar.

And then there are the definitively not subtle imitations. Fighting Rhino felt a whole lot like fighting Bane. The third-act prison break is a thematic copy of Arkham City's first-act prison break. Screwball's insipid challenges and psychotic banter are almost verbatim from the Riddler. And Scorpion's hallucinatory sequences are a dead ringer for Batman's Scarecrow segments.

This isn't necessarily bad. Sometimes it feels ... uninspired, but if you're going to copy mechanics and themes from another game, you may as well copy from one of the best. Spider-Man's strongest gameplay is almost as fun as Batman's was.

Unfortunately, Spider-Man takes way too long getting to those parts. Until that third-act prison break, there's virtually no excitement or tension either in following the main story or in prowling the open world. The game's first two acts haplessly plod from one shallow reference to another, while waiting for the Mister Negative story to slowly progress. And until that story progress occurs, the activities available in the open world are relatively scant (and dull).

The first two thirds of the game serve little purpose other than making the player wonder how long it is until Doctor Octavius "turns," and forcing the player to watch Peter's cringey attempts at making up with Mary Jane.

To be fair, those moments aren't very numerous, and the early and middle game isn't "bad" per se -- it just tends to be pretty boring. Things don't get really interesting until the Sinister Six show up in Act 3, which thankfully is much more action-packed and engaging than everything before it.

Spider-Man is a well-polished and, ultimately, fun enough game; but it doesn't exceed its forebears, and takes its sweet time working up to them.

... as an aside, one thing that could really have helped Spider-Man stand out more is art style. This game doesn't really have one; it looks too realistic. The unlockable Comic Book Suit made me wish that the whole game had looked that cool.

Better than: Transformers: Devastation
Not as good as: Batman: Arkham Asylum
Also not as good as: Spider-Man: Homecoming or Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse.

Prismata is half visual-novel, and half turn-based strategy game -- except the strategy game is really a card game, and the card game feels a lot like a puzzle ... well, let's slow down a bit.

Prismata starts out pretty strong, with a cool sci-fi future setting and a sardonic smartass protagonist. The main character's apathy is a convenient vehicle for the game's tutorial missions; other characters rib him for not keeping his skills up, and then teach you, the player, how to control swarms of battling robots.

You see, he's a "swarmwielder," which is like an army commander except the army is made of robots. And when some worker robots start to turn hostile, it's your job to click a bunch of buttons and deploy security 'bots to quell a viral uprising.

(Each unit appears on-screen in the form of a card, and the battlefield is organized into front, middle, and rear lines of these cards. That's where the "card game" comes in.)

The combat itself is turn-based, and involves distinct phases of gathering various energy currencies; consuming those currencies to deploy new units; ordering those units to attack; absorbing enemy attacks; and repeating, so on, until you've obliterated the enemy's forces or vice-versa. The campaign's early missions introduce the rules of these phases pretty well, while simultaneously bringing in new unit types that help each mission feel fresh.

And I was really enjoying it until the end of the first episode, when a mission introduced the "seed" resource and limited the total available amount of each robot.

Up to that point, I'd employed the turtling strategy - as is my wont - of investing heavily in defense and infrastructure before ultimately rolling out an offensive force of shock and awe. But the "seed" limits meant that I couldn't keep deploying shield units forever; I would run out of them before getting to my offense, and inevitably succumb to enemy attacks.

This was when the game became more like a puzzle, in that I would have to figure out a precisely-correct balance of simultaneous defense and offense, to avoid dying while also beating back the enemy. A single wrong move would lead to an unwinnable scenario in later turns. (Granted, the game has a very retry-friendly "undo turn" system.)

I probably would have been fine with that puzzle game, except that I'd just finished learning how to play something totally different. So when this mission went back on all that I'd learned, I just bounced right off. Completely changing the play style that I'd just become comfortable with was not an attractive proposition.

There is some pretty cool stuff in Prismata, but the tutorial pulled a fast one on me, and I just didn't feel like re-examining all of my tactics in order to get to Episode 2.

Better than: Card City Nights
Not as good as: Thronebreaker: The Witcher Tales
The visual-novel part: isn't bad! The writing and ambience are good on their own, but not good enough that I want to re-learn the game.

Progress: Didn't quite finish Episode 1 of the campaign.

Qora is a side-scroller entry in the "Walking Simulator" genre. Which I guess makes it a "Go Left or Right Simulator."

It's not without some charm: the story hooks are intriguing, the NPC dialog has a sense of humor, and the simple art style is adequately evocative. Running through its screens and uncovering its strange, fantastical plot makes for a good 20 minutes of fun.

The problem is that Qora is actually an hour long. It moves so slow -- and I mean that very literally. The movement speed is absurdly slow, and occasional button-mashing obstacles don't help.

Qora would be a "Meh" if its milquetoast story elements moved along at a reasonable pace. But the pervasive slowness of the game make it feel like a chore. Despite how ultimately short it is; Qora should be much shorter.

Better than: Zoo Rampage
Not as good as: Cube Escape: Paradox
There are multiple endings?: but I can't imagine plodding through Qora a second time.

Depixtion looks like it's just doing three nonograms to blend red, green, and blue tiles together -- but it's actually more than that. It changes the fundamental rules of picross-style puzzles, in a way that I'm not sure I really like.

In each of the red or green or blue puzzles, there are two "marked" states: a light version of the color, and a dark version of the color. (You click twice to color in darker, which isn't a great UX but whatever.) And when light- and dark- colored sections are next to each other, there isn't necessarily a blank space inbetween them.

So the first new lesson to learn is that row and column hints must be counted differently. A dark 2 followed by a light 2 doesn't mean a minimum of five cells; it means a minimum of four. Then there are new logical scenarios to look out for, e.g. the row hints may say a cell is either light or empty, while the column hints say the cell is either dark or empty.

Normally I would be excited about new puzzle rules, but in Depixtion's case they seem awkwardly shoe-horned into an existing game. I felt like I had to switch contexts and recalculate my approach in circumstances that weren't really that complicated.

It seemed like the game had to recalculate a lot, too; the way that row and column hint numbers got deactivated based on my puzzle progress didn't always track with what I'd filled in.

Maybe I'm just not "getting it," maybe I'm too set in my puzzling ways. But in any event, I think I got all the Depixtion that I'd care to out of the demo.

Progress: Finished the demo puzzles.

Battle Chef Brigade is a peculiar mix: part side-scrolling action/combat game, part puzzle game, and part fantasy adventure where fates are decided by Iron Chef style cooking competitions. Fight monsters, cook their parts into a meal, and win chef battles to earn your way into the noble Brigade!

Taken separately, each part of Battle Chef Brigade isn't very good. The action game is shallow and button-mashy, since advanced techniques like magic aren't as efficient as regular attacks; the puzzle game is mechanically straightforward, yet still impenetrable in some key ways (like balancing a dual-element objective); and the adventure game has significant pacing issues, as key story threads sometimes disappear and reappear by surprise.

But the game is absolutely greater than the sum of its parts. The time limit for a chef battle makes fighting monsters and finding good parts feel more tense, and various twists to the puzzle mechanics (like pans and kettles with different effects) keep the color-matching interesting even after dozens of battles.

And, especially, the poorly-paced story is nonetheless highly entertaining thanks to an evocative art style, surprisingly-excellent voice acting, and some great writing. Both light-hearted and heart-wrenching moments make the game's characters feel charming and real.

While elements of Battle Chef Brigade may appear familiar, the package as a whole is definitely unique, and also a treat to play -- if a bit over-long by the end.

Some extra tutorialization around how a dish's score is calculated, and some more depth in the monster-fighting action, could make a really impressive sequel.

Better than: most beat-em-up, match-three, or cooking games.
Not as good as: Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney Trilogy
It's hard: to find other games with meaningful comparisons.

As a promotional tool, Borderlands 2: Commander Lilith and the Fight for Sanctuary isn't bad; it's perfectly playable and has some fun moments. As a game, though, it's fairly bland and feels unnecessary to the franchise.

The Fight for Sanctuary picks up after the events of both Borderlands 2 and Tales from the Borderlands, explicitly to set the stage for the upcoming Borderlands 3. But it doesn't do a hell of a lot of foreshadowing for the next game -- and it doesn't have much story of its own to tell, either. Mostly, this DLC is a recap to reacquaint years-lapsed Borderlands players with Pandora's wacky cast of characters.

And while it's fun to watch Tiny Tina fangirl out about a big missile, the cast overall is glossed over pretty quickly. Between Lilith, Mordecai, Brick, Vaughn, Moxxi, Ellie (sorry Scooter), Mordecai's new pet Talon, Tina, Dr. Zed, Marcus, Crazy Earl... most characters only have about a minute of screen-time, and barely get past re-introducing themselves.

Vaughn comes the closest to providing real entertainment, with some bandit-ey mission text and radio banter, but he falls short of Shade from Captain Scarlett and Her Pirate's Booty. Even this DLC's antagonist is a flat villain with minimal (and uninteresting) backstory, and ultimately defeating him isn't very satisfying.

Something that this DLC does execute well is a new item rarity, the "effervescent" tier. Like Legendary items, these are more scripted than random, and their effects are bonkers -- like an assault rifle that shoots 10 bullets at once, or an SMG that you can throw away as it spins and shoots in all directions. Effervescent items are also crazy-sparkley, which is a very cool visual effect.

So, I look forward to more effervescent items in the late game of Borderlands 3.

That said, while this DLC pack isn't "bad," it doesn't really feel worthwhile either. The whole thing could have been replaced with a 15-second cutscene in the beginning of the next game.

Better than: Borderlands 2: How Marcus Saved Mercenary Day
Not as good as: Borderlands 2: The Horrible Hunger of the Ravenous Wattle Gobbler
Oh yeah: where's Torgue!? He'd better be coming back!

Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night starts out rough. Primarily, I would say, because you start the game with no combat or mobility techniques and it's quite a while before interesting abilities show up.

Let me set the stage a bit. Bloodstained is a spiritual sucessor to Koji Igarashi's Castlevania games, from Symphony of the Night through Order of Ecclesia. Mechanically, Bloodstained is most like the Aria/Dawn of Sorrow installments -- except, instead of collecting enemy "souls" to learn their powers, you collect enemy "shards" to learn their powers. (Yeah they are the same thing.)

There's no Dracula in this game, but there is an ostentatious villain who dresses a lot like a vampire. And he's summoned a sprawling, magical, maze-like castle from hell that serves as a headquarters for his army of demon invaders. ... It's not subtle.

(That isn't the villain. That's some other vampire.)

Even the composer is a Castlevania alum. And that's very aurally evident in the theme and quality of Bloodstained's soundtrack; all that's missing is a track called "VAMPIRE KILLER."

Bloodstained is so much like those Castlevania games that it hardly merits further explanation. It replicates the same empowerment arc through experience points, weapon drops and crafting, soul- er, shard powers, Metroid-style upgrades that unlock new areas ... and the sense of achievement that comes from defeating bigger and badder enemies with your newfound strength.

It's a shame, then, that Bloodstained doesn't give you enough power to start with. In the early game, you can't jump very high; walking is slow; and none of the available shard powers elevate combat beyond a simple "slash enemy then move away" routine. It was about two hours until I'd made enough progress to change any of that. Until new abilities arrived, unlocking new areas and spicing up the combat, there just weren't enough options to keep the gameplay interesting, and journeys from one safe-room to another felt like a chore.

Also, the game's opening moments insist on verbosely explaining and re-explaining the plot to you through dull character interactions. The premise - alchemists opened a portal to hell - isn't bad on its own, but the written dialog is ... well, it's reminiscent of Symphony of the Night's infamously bad localization. And with the happy exception of protagonist Miriam, Bloodstained's voice cast sounds almost as awkward and unenthused as PS1-era voice acting did.

So like I was saying: it starts out rough.

But Bloodstained does, after a few hours, get over these humps of lackluster gameplay options and clumsy storytelling; and then the "magic" comes back in full force. Like the best Igavanias, when all its cylinders are firing, Bloodstained delivers rich and varied opportunities to make progress -- exploring the map, collecting items, leveling up, and occasionally discovering fun secrets.

It almost always feels like you're accomplishing something, even if only in small increments, toward the ultimate goal of overpowering evil. Bloodstained is at its best when it's giving you plenty of opportunities for continuous improvement. (And when it sets the story aside for some Castlevania references or other light-hearted fun.)

... and then there are a few points where Bloodstained stumbles along its critical path. Like, I totally admire when bonus content is unlocked by using a random-seeming ability in a special area. But it feels obnoxious when such a secret is smack in the middle of the main storyline. Needing a random-drop shard ability to dive underwater, or needing a hidden piece of equipment to get past an environmental hazard, before the next story beat shows itself; these moments feel pretty archaic.

And that's why, despite how enthralling the game can be, it's hard to think of Bloodstained as more than a reboot of 15-year-old Castlevanias. Clearly the formula is still relevant; but the familiar setting and obscure obstacles also make it feel stuck in the past.

I had a blast in Bloodstained's castle, in fact I'm continuing to enjoy being an obsessive completionist about it. And, hell, I'd definitely play another game just like it with little hesitation.

But Igarashi could learn a thing or two by looking at games other than his own for inspiration. More recent Metroidvanias like Dust: An Elysian Tail, Guacamelee, Ori and the Blind Forest, Timespinner, even Toki Tori 2+ have iterated on IGA's legacy; the master could learn some new tricks from these students.

Better than: Timespinner in terms of breadth and depth of content.
Not as good as: Timespinner in terms of modern trappings (not leaving me totally lost mid-story).
Some more bugfixing would also have been nice: fortunately I wasn't caught by this progression blocker, but I did have to reload on this pause menu soft-lock multiple times.

One of my biggest complaints about Hacknet - just yesterday - was how crowded the network node-map became. So you may imagine my delight when, a few missions into the Labyrinths DLC, I was given a new utility to auto-organize the map. Praise Dijkstra!

This critical UI enhancement is only one of a few ways that Labyrinths improves upon the original game. There are some new tools that make network exploration more interesting (recovering data from memory snapshots!), there are new security mechanics to puzzle around (connection whitelists!), and even the storytelling feels more immersive and thrilling than before.

The missions in Labyrinths come from a group of NPCs who hang out in an IRC server, like in Hackmud. Much more so than simply reading an NPC's email, watching these characters type out the story line-by-line lends a sense of urgency to in-game events; and begins to show some relatable personalities. If there's more Hacknet in the future, I'd be very excited to see more character-chatting.

Hacket: Labyrinths still doesn't check all of my "ideal hacking-game" boxes, but gets yet-closer than Hacknet did. Really, my biggest disappointment with it is that it's relatively short. More, please!

Better than: Hacknet
Not as good as: if you could somehow combine this game's usability and motif with NITE Team 4's realistic technobabble.
Apparently I missed: a "getting hacked" moment, because I stopped it from getting too far. I read about it later and this puzzle sounds super-cool.

The Breath of the Wild sequel looks exciting, and the No More Heroes III reveal was a pleasant shock (please, please don't suck).

But for me, the most surprising E3 announcement was Spiritfarer, a game where you explore the world in a boat, build a miniature town, and have a pet cat. What I realized watching this trailer is that those three things - exploring, building, cat - are like ... my top three most-wanted game features. And I don't think they've all come together before.

(Keanu was great, but, no, the fact that Cyberpunk 2077 is hyped-as-shit is not a surprise. I know that it's going to be awesome.)

As a programmer, sysadmin, typist, and puzzle enthusiast, I have some vivid expectations for the ideal "hacking" game. Hacknet isn't it; but it's the closest I've seen yet.

Hacknet isn't as realistic as NITE Team 4, hand-waving gameplay concepts like local executables running on remote machines; remote code execution requiring cracks on multiple outward-facing services; or notes that use "megabytes" of memory for each line of text (the memory usage is really a thin metaphor for screen space).

But after the tutorial, the game does a good job of glossing over its shaky technobabble, and quickly dives into reading emails, browsing web boards, and exploring filesystems. And those things felt pretty real. By the game's end I'd mostly forgotten its bizarre architectural idiosyncrasies (well, except for text-note memory).

Unlike many other hacking games, Hacknet doesn't have an upgrade path for your machine, so you can't scale up to running cracks faster or using more of them simultaneously. I was dubious about this at first, but the simplicity really works to Hacknet's benefit: I was never insufficiently equipped for a challenge, and I never got distracted from hacking by watching a currency wallet.

Hacknet's UI isn't perfect, but gets the job done. It stands out that a few controls require clicking, and a few others require typing -- because most controls are both clickable and keyboard-able. Nice! (Having both graphical and text interfaces to all commands is in my "ideal" hacking game vision.)

Hands-down, the worst part of the UI is its node-map of discovered servers, which is impossible to organize and also way too small and crowded. Nodes can partially overlap other nodes, so, that's kinda bad. This would be worse if Hacknet's quests had more backtracking and made you search for long-forgotten connections, but since they usually just throw you at newly-discovered nodes, this UI element is merely an occasional annoyance.

An aspect that Hacknet actually nails, I think, is its balance between nerd culture and drama. Granted, the core story isn't very elaborate; but it's well-paced, following a technological plot without getting lost in the technical details. And it leaves plenty of freely-discoverable files that flesh out the world and its sense of humor, like audio diaries in text form, to be consumed or ignored as one sees fit.

Overall, Hacknet is good enough. The immersiveness is imperfect, the UI is just fine, and the puzzles aren't very ambitious - I was disappointed that the Decypher tool didn't require reverse-engineering its C# algorithm - but everything works moderately well, and it succeeds at stringing together objectives to be compelling, and fun.

Better than: Hacker Evolution, Hackmud, NITE Team 4 (the demo at least), Uplink
Not as good as: my perfect hacking game. ... maybe someday.
The internet-culture humor was amusing: but surely there are more sources than just bash.org? There have to be, right? (Maybe not.)