@rval25: This game shot up the Steam sales charts last week unexpectedly. That is what garnered the attention. The game was made by one person and had no marketing budget whatsoever as it had no distinct publisher. Strong word of mouth from puzzle game fans on Steam and through Twitter were the cause of this game's unexpected success.

And while it sounds like the late game stuff maybe is a bit too obtuse, the entire concept is unique, which in a world of Battle Royale clones and retro inspired platformers is something worth celebrating even if they don't quite stick the landing.

There are certain things that no amount of rose tinted glasses can help. Pre-VGA computer graphics were awful in the 80's and remain awful. Sorry, but this just looks ugly. The purple and baby blue that permeated the DOS games of the CGA era did not need to be revived. Ever.

@Zerabp: It is not about single stars being able to perform token roles in otherwise white movies, or about black actors making low budget niche films specifically for a black audience. The most successful movie of 2018 starred an almost entirely black cast, was directed by a black man, and represented race in an intelligent and empowering way that made for a great and affecting story. When a young boy or girl of African descent walked into a toy store last month they could buy a toy of a character that wasn't playing second fiddle to a white man from the most successful super hero movie of all time. That is something that studio executives for decades claimed wasn't possible.

You know it has been quite a few years since this game came out on Wii U so I might be mistaken, but I'm fairly certain you could play as Nabbit in that version as well.

@mullets: That honestly makes the most sense, except then we still don't know why Credence is so important. At least if he is Dumbledore's brother that would explain why Grindelwald is so hell bent on turning him. But as stated in this article, the timeline makes no sense as both of Credence's supposed parents were dead at the time of his birth. So is there yet another reason why Grindelwald wants Credence? Hard to know.

And also, we know that Credence had a flaming bird. That doesn't make it a Phoenix. Grindelwald is a supremely powerful dark wizard in possession of the elderwand and he is a master of illusion and transformation. So it is not out of the realm of possibility that the bird being on fire was merely an illusion or some sort of spell that allowed a normal bird to live while being burst into flame.

Honestly, the thing that I don't get is how Grindelwald knows who Credence is if it is true. No one knows but Leta that she switched the baby, right? There is no indication that Leta and Grindelwald had met prior to the events of this film, nor any indication that Leta had told anyone the truth about what she did. So how could Grindelwald know this information? In fact, even if he knew she switched babies, he wasn't on the boat so how could he know who she switched with? Even she didn't know that piece of information as she states to Credence and Newt in the Crypt. It just doesn't seem possible that he could know this unless he has been planning all of this since that day which also doesn't make sense because then why did he have to spend the whole first movie finding Credence?

@starkiller_7149: If this were EA's first major error I would give them a second chance. Hell I might be willing to give them a third or fourth or fifth chance. But this is EA we are talking about. They have literally decades of shitty business practices behind them. From buying and then closing the competition rather than make a superior game (See the original company named Origin), to buying the exclusive rights to the NFL and FIFA, again rather than just making a better game, to purchasing renowned developers only to run them into the ground(Bioware, Bullfrog, Pandemic, Criterion, and at least a dozen more), to various "always online" titles like the most recent SimCity that ruin perfectly good games in order to make them "connected experiences", to destroying well respected franchises through greed and mismanagement(see Mass Effect, Dead Space, Ultima, Medal of Honor, Dungeon Keeper, and dozens more), to these more recent disgusting microtransactions, EA has done so many awful things for such a long time that anyone who still trusts them likely also thinks Vladamir Putin is an upstanding individual who would never throw an election in any nation including his own.

I feel like every commenter on this website has forgotten what it was like to be a kid. Did none of you ever make a robot outfit out of cardboard and imagine you were fighting aliens or monsters? The reason for the cardboard isn't that it is cheap. It's that kids love to create things like this. It's fun for them. Hell it's fun for a lot of adults too. Nintendo has just made it so that those DIY toys now come with a game you can play.

Nintendo isn't putting crazy loot boxes with elite gear in Zelda or letting you buy moons in Mario with premium currency. Their games aren't filled with pointless grinding that exists only so you can pay them more money. If the price of that is having to share shelf space with some crappy kids games then I say go for it. Sounds like something an 6-12 year old me would have loved, and it's a good way to make some extra money to spend on the hardcore AAA games I want to play as an adult so it's a win-win.

I wonder if at this point Monolith assumed everyone would have played one of the first two games and so glossed over some of the combat tutorials that were brought over from those games to focus on some of the newer mechanics. The whole "arts" concept is easy enough to understand if you think of it like an MMO skill bar, and both the previous games had the staggering/knocking over mechanics.

Also obtuse mechanics are kind of in vogue right now. Even Zelda at the beginning of the year lacked the lengthy tutorials the series has become known for in recent years. That said, this series is one of the most dense and complex I have ever played and if any series needs to rexplain its basic mechanics every game this would probably be the one.

Wait what? A Rockstar game got delayed from a holiday release to a release in the following spring? Shocking I tell ya. At least it would be if they hadn't done the exact same thing for every single game they have released for over a decade now. I just add a year and a quarter onto whatever release date Rockstar gives for a game and generally I get the actual release date.

@monkey54: Having not played this game I will say this. A good difficult game still finds ways to teach the player about new abilities and obstacles. I think the most famous example goes all the way back to Super Mario Bros 1-1. Play that level trying to forget all you know about gaming. Without text or icons or instructions, Mario teaches you everything you need to know to beat the game in that very first level. Every obstacle in that level requires you to master a new skill. Those skills might be incredibly basic by today's standards, but remember that it was uncommon for games at that time to be more than one screen big.

A good challenge comes not from poorly explained mechanics but from well constructed level design and intelligently balanced AI. And it should also provide a smart difficulty curve so that the player feels prepared for each new challenge and not overwhelmed. To use a more recent example, Super Meat Boy is an insanely hard game that few people ever fully beat. But the difficulty ramps up smoothly over the course of play, so that you feel like you have mastered each obstacle right before a new one in introduced. A poor difficulty curve, and unfair or poorly explained mechanics might make a game hard but it isn't a good hard.