Month: December 2024

Video Games

Xdefiant is weird

| admin

Xdefiant is weird

XDefiant is weird. The game is deeply confusing. On one hand, we have a Call of Duty arcade shooter mixed with a hero shooter, with core mechanics clashing. You can see hints of that conflict. The end result is a messy mismatch. Combine that with an art style that’s a mishmash of ideas, and the result is that XDefiant lacks any identity and feels ill-defined. Feels dated like an early 2010s game. I’m not sure who this game is for. Call of Duty veterans? That’s a tiny market. 

The gunplay is okay. Nothing to shout about, with a fast time-to-kill (TTK) that clashes with hero abilities designed for a much slower TTK. Map design feels like an arcade shooter—funnelling players down narrow paths with dozens of lines of sight you can’t cover. Common design for shooters nothing wrong with that. It’s colourful at times, but often dull, and boring, with generic characters—and that’s the problem. It’s a generic shooter. Nothing really stands out. It’s conservative in every respect and dull. Takes no risks.

As a shooter, it’s sort of fun but feels empty and lifeless. Does not use characters well at all. Nothing brings it all together and the result is bland. Only thing keeping you playing is progression, XP lock keeps players engaged. Attachments are behind that and weapons. Similar to other shooters. With shutdown everything is now unlocked. There’s no other gameplay hook that stands out. I’m left asking the question: who is this game for? Why was this made? Why?

Three hundred employees worked on this to deliver the bare minimum, and even then, it was delayed. Tons of basic features are missing or mismatched with the rest of the game. Some good news: the sound design seems to be okay. It’s an okay game, and that’s the problem. It’s just okay—a game with no clear direction. No single-player mode to fall back on, no co-op mode. Two most successful shooters of last decade have done something new. This game offers nothing new.

I’m no game reviewer, but I can see certain problems surely everybody else can. Unless this is a case of people investing time and not wanting to quit. Call of Duty is fast-paced. Its fast abilities rarely take you out of the action—that’s on purpose. Designers know you don’t want to die before using that super special attack. Yet that lesson is lost here. Worse still, some of the former designers worked on CoD. It seems to clone ideas without introducing anything new, being ultra-conservative without taking risks.

Unlike operators, which are skin deep, customisation in XDefiant is similar to hero shooters. But the problem is that everybody feels the same. Abilities don’t really have an impact. So why were they included? Dig further, and you’re left asking why certain choices were made. Why did the team go with such a fast TTK?

Feedback from Two Years Ago

My first impressions were pretty bad, and I didn’t enjoy the game. The core is deeply flawed in some respects.

Movement feels heavy and sluggish, while sliding feels smooth with aiming. It’s an odd contrast that feels disjointed. It just feels bad playing this game with a controller right now. Each complaint I had flowed into one thing: I was not having fun. The game felt like a worse Call of Duty clone. If you want to clone a game, you need to make a better version of it or introduce a new gameplay hook. Instead, the designers seemed to blindly follow the trend without considering other options.

A super short TTK with poor hit detection feels awful together. I have no idea if that’s due to the tick rate or by design. I found it hard to trace players, as the art style bends people into the background. Maps don’t suit having so many game modes.

A big problem was the game’s lack of direction. Beyond being a shooter, crafting useful feedback became difficult. I simply didn’t like the game in its current state, and that’s okay.

Some good news movement feels better. The bad news is shotguns feel like they wanted a slower game still. Core of the game is still flawed with hit detection still iffy, kill trading a thing which is rather funny. Some more good news it feels better on a controller. It a bit more fun. Lacking something magic and seems to follow trends without something new to offer. Worse still seems to misunderstand each choice that CoD has made and follows it blindly. From former CoD devs that raises questions. Art style is better but people blend in. Lack of direction remains. I sort of like the game now but it still not good enough. It sucks to see it die.

You can see they wanted a slower game. Shotguns still feel heavy and less arcade-like. But the rest of the game doesn’t have the same level of weight. It’s subtle, but noticeable. There are hints they wanted a hero shooter. However, the game was pushed in the opposite direction, creating this weird mash-up monster. Okay, maybe that’s harsh. I remember making the same movement point during the beta—and I was downvoted for it. Good news: they backtracked. Bad news: my broader point about not having a clue what direction they wanted rings true. It just all over the place.

Netcode and hit registration issues stand out. If you’re going to make a game this generic, it better be technically brilliant. Yet this game isn’t. It’s built on a bunch of flaws that were already pointed out during the beta. Even after all the delays, these issues weren’t fixed. Credit where it’s due: they delayed the game. But given the barebones content at launch, what were they working on? Did all the artists become beta testers? For a competitive shooter, you need outstanding netcode. Was Ubisoft trying to make an esport title? If so, why combine hero shooter mechanics with CoD-style gameplay?

It’s a dead game now. It’s dated and generic, with its funeral set. Perhaps Ubisoft will learn its lesson. Small-scale projects, taking some risk, and focusing on a gap. I respect them for trying to bring all their characters together, but two games in one did not work. Rumours are a buyout is coming soon.

Making games is hard. Making a successful game is even harder. It sucks that this game is shutting down. It could have been rebooted, but that would have required serious retooling of the core experience. Ubisoft, in the end, did not want to do that—business, after all.

Journal

Syrian tragedy

| admin

Syrian tragedy

Syria’s Civil War: A Fragile Coalition of Enemies

Syria’s civil war is one of the most complex and bloody conflicts in modern history. As a non-expert, I’ll try to break down the situation, explain the key players, and provide an overview of recent developments. This war, which started over a decade ago, is anything but simple.

A Brief History of the Civil War

Syria’s civil war began in 2011 during the Arab Spring protests. What started as demonstrations against President Bashar al-Assad’s government escalated into a full-scale war. Government crackdowns turned into violent insurgencies, with rebels receiving support from NATO and the Gulf Cooperation Council. Meanwhile, Assad’s regime was backed by Iran and Russia.

Russia’s airstrikes, which began in 2015, devastated rebel-controlled cities, while Iran deployed proxy forces to help Assad. Even Israel got involved, targeting Islamic State (IS) fighters and gathering intelligence on Iran’s proxies.

By late 2018, the rebels had lost almost all their territory, holding only a few strongholds. The war seemed frozen, but new developments have reignited the conflict.

The Rise and Fall of Islamic State

In 2014, the Islamic State emerged as a major threat, taking territory from both the rebels and the government. However, by 2017, an international coalition had largely defeated IS, though the group remains an insurgent threat in eastern Syria.

Adding to the chaos, Turkey launched a 2016 invasion against IS, the Kurds, and the Syrian government. This multi-front conflict highlighted just how many factions are involved in Syria’s war.

A Stalemate That Shattered

For years, Syria was locked in a frozen conflict. Assad controlled much of the country, while rebels, including the Kurds and the Free Syrian Army, held smaller regions. The United States supported some rebel groups, while Turkey backed others—often creating tensions between the two NATO allies.

In 2019, a U.S. withdrawal from Syria left the Kurds vulnerable to Turkish attacks. The Kurds struck a deal with Assad for protection, but this alliance of convenience did little to change the overall stalemate.

Two recent events have now shattered this fragile balance:

  • The war in Gaza.
  • Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine.

Iran and Israel’s Proxy War

Iran has long used Syria as a base for its proxies, including Hezbollah, to counter Israel and project power in the region. However, Israel’s retaliation to attacks by Iranian-backed Hamas in Gaza has decimated Iran’s proxy network. Hezbollah, which operates in both Syria and Lebanon, has suffered heavy losses in leadership, forcing it into a ceasefire.

These setbacks have significantly weakened Iran’s influence in Syria, making it harder for Tehran to maintain its regional dominance.

Israel’s Proxy War with Iran

Israel’s long-running proxy war with Iran is fundamentally about self-preservation. While Israel is strong enough to withstand most threats, its main objective is to reduce Iranian influence and ensure its own security.

A key area of interest is the Golan Heights, which shares a border with Syria. While some Israelis see the region as a strategic buffer zone, others view it through the lens of settlement expansion, adding to regional mistrust and unease.

Israel is particularly concerned about the possibility of terrorists, chemical weapons, or Iranian arms crossing into its territory. Beyond immediate threats, Israel seeks to degrade Iran’s ability to wage a shadow proxy war against it.

Looming in the background is the existential worry of Iran becoming a nuclear-armed state, which would make it the second in the region after Israel’s own unofficial nuclear capability.

Russia’s Waning Role

Russia, one of Assad’s main backers, has been weakened by its war in Ukraine. With resources stretched thin, Moscow can no longer provide meaningful support in Syria.

Russia’s naval and airbases in Syria remain strategically important, but its broader ambitions in the region have been curtailed. Both are used to supply Russian proxy forces in Africa and Assad’s regime. Once heavily reliant on Russian support, Assad’s regime is now showing signs of vulnerability. Russia used Syria to help provoke a refugee crisis in Europe and instability. Now it faces it own interests suffering from instability caused by its actions.

A Fragile Alliance of Frenemies

The rebels have taken advantage of Russia’s and Iran’s declining influence. Groups like Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), once linked to al-Qaeda, have forged uneasy alliances with other opposition factions. While HTS remains controversial, its cooperation with other groups has strengthened the rebel coalition.

Turkey has played a crucial role, providing support to rebel factions while working to suppress Kurdish autonomy movements. Ankara’s involvement reflects both nationalist ambitions and a desire to reshape Syria’s future.

Interestingly, reports suggest that rebel-held areas have avoided widespread atrocities. Local elders have mediated disputes, creating a semblance of order amid the chaos.

Turkey: What Do They Want?

Turkey’s objectives in Syria extend beyond countering Kurdish nationalist movements. A key priority is reducing Iran’s influence and addressing the millions of Syrian refugees currently residing in Turkey, which have caused significant political unrest and domestic pressure.

However, there’s also an element of self-interest. Turkey sees a major opportunity to rebuild Syria and strengthen economic ties with the region. By doing so, it can not only diminish Iran’s and Russia’s influence but also gain significant leverage over both in economic and military terms.

Russia is already adapting to this new reality, as Turkey asserts itself as a key player in shaping Syria’s future.

Assad’s Mistakes and Collapse

Despite growing pressures, Assad refused to compromise. At a summit with Iran, Russia, Turkey, and Qatar, he was offered a way out but declined. This stubbornness, combined with economic collapse and defections from his army, has led to his regime’s rapid downfall.

Rebels are now advancing toward key cities like Damascus and Homs. Taking Homs would isolate the capital, dealing a significant blow to Assad’s remaining forces.

Iran and Russia Cut Their Losses

Assad’s defeat has forced Iran and Russia to reconsider their positions. Both countries have realized that salvaging his regime would require far more resources than they can afford. Iran, while weakened, may still maintain some influence through its remaining proxies.

Russia faces a greater loss: its warm-water port in Syria is critical for resupplying its African proxies and sustaining its global strategy. Losing it would be a major humiliation. Meanwhile, Iran’s loss of its land bridge to its proxies complicates resupply efforts, though it retains regional allies for now.

What’s Next for Syria?

The fall of Assad marks the end of one chapter but opens many questions about Syria’s future. Possible scenarios include:

  • A divided Syria, with different factions controlling separate regions.
  • A prolonged insurgency, as rival groups vie for power.
  • International mediation, though it’s unclear who would lead this effort—Turkey, Qatar, or another power?

Rebuilding Syria will require significant international support. Without it, the country risks descending into another brutal conflict.

A Fragile Victory

Assad has reportedly fled Syria, leaving the country in rebel hands. While this is a stunning turnaround, the coalition of rebels must now prove they can govern effectively. With Turkey holding significant influence, the international community will watch closely to see if peace can be maintained.

For Syria, the road ahead remains uncertain.

This conflict is filled with twists and turns, where friends and enemies often switch roles. I have focused primarily on the main players to provide an overview of the war, but there are countless other actors and layers of history that shape Syria’s ongoing tragedy.

Conclusion and Wrap-Up

Syria’s future hangs in the balance, divided among four powerful factions with conflicting goals. The U.S.-backed groups in the south, Kurdish forces in the northeast, Turkish-backed Islamist groups in the northwest, and Turkey itself all have stakes in the outcome.

Turkey’s dual objectives—repatriating Syrian refugees while undermining Kurdish autonomy—highlight the complexity of the conflict. This tug-of-war between regional powers risks sidelining the voices of the Syrian people, who remain most affected by the chaos.

Ultimately, Syria’s fate will depend on whether these external forces prioritize stability over self-interest. Without meaningful cooperation and international support, peace will remain elusive, and the suffering of ordinary Syrians will persist.

Gaming News

Xdefiant is shutting down

| admin

XDefiant is Shutting Down

I played the beta test for XDefiant back in 2023 – you can see my first impressions here. I wasn’t particularly kind in my review, as I found the game underwhelming.

Despite initial hype – with around 3 million players trying the beta – Ubisoft went silent for two months. When the game finally launched in 2024, it reported 10 million players over its first two weeks. But now, barely a year later, XDefiant is shutting down. The game has already been delisted, with servers scheduled to go offline in June 2025. Ubisoft has offered refunds for certain purchases and for items bought within the last 30 days, suggesting all in-game sales will be suspended.

When someone mentioned the shutdown to me recently, my first reaction was: That game actually came out? I couldn’t even remember playing it until I looked it up. That alone says everything: the game lacked any lasting identity. Its name and branding felt generic, like a shooter from a decade ago. I’m still surprised Ubisoft didn’t use the Rainbow Six branding to leverage an existing fan base. Oddly, while it avoided Rainbow Six in its name, XDefiant borrowed character factions from Ubisoft’s other franchises, including Far Cry, Watch Dogs, and Tom Clancy titles.

The Fallout

Ubisoft announced the shutdown alongside news of studio closures and layoffs. Two of the primary studios behind XDefiant – Ubisoft San Francisco and Ubisoft Osaka – are closing, resulting in 143 and 134 layoffs, respectively. Ubisoft’s Sydney office is also downsizing.

This game was supposed to be Ubisoft’s big entry into the live service genre, positioned as a direct competitor to Call of Duty. But it’s clear Ubisoft miscalculated. The company has faced a string of lacklustre releases and financial struggles, and XDefiant became another failure in its growing list of missteps.

Revisiting XDefiant

I revisited XDefiant, and to its credit, it’s more polished than it was during the beta. However, key issues remain, the biggest being its lack of progression. There’s nothing to keep players coming back.

Shotguns still feel heavy and clunky compared to the smooth handling of assault rifles. The maps are vibrant, but the overly dark character designs hurt visibility. While Ubisoft has made slight improvements in this area, it’s still not where it needs to be.

The map design follows the arcade-style formula of Call of Duty. A standout feature is that weapons and attachments are not locked behind progression; everything is available from the start. This is a refreshing change from grind-heavy systems, but it’s also a double-edged sword. Without progression hooks, there’s little incentive to keep playing. The game’s basic daily challenges and camo unlocks tied to levelling feel like afterthoughts.

If XDefiant had launched in 2023 with its current polish, it might have stood a better chance. But the delays and absence of essential features at release doomed it. To me, it feels like a carbon copy of Call of Duty – well-executed but saddled with the same flaws. It’s a fast time-to-kill game with restricted movement and map design, seemingly tailored to make casual players feel good.

Lessons Not Learned

Ubisoft’s belief that XDefiant could rival Call of Duty was naive. Call of Duty’s free-to-play offering is a global juggernaut, consistently among the top five games. Once again, it’s the lower-level developers – not the executives who made these decisions – paying the price for failure.

Live service games can be incredibly profitable, but success demands a long-term vision, a steady content pipeline, and robust management. Ubisoft seemed to skip these steps, relying on a few beta weekends and a delayed launch. The lack of basic content at release was shocking.

This shutdown echoes Concord, Sony’s live service shooter, which was cancelled just two weeks after its October 2024 launch. At least Ubisoft can claim XDefiant lasted longer. But it’s frustrating to see publishers repeatedly chase trends without learning from past mistakes.

A Broken Industry Model

The deeper issue lies in the rising costs of game development, which have fostered a risk-averse, short-term mindset. This stifles creativity, leading to fewer new games, longer development cycles, and an overreliance on updates for existing titles.

Perhaps the solution is to balance smaller, experimental projects with a few major releases every couple of years, alongside a single well-supported live service game.

The gaming industry’s COVID-era boom is over, and many studios are scrambling to adapt. Until the industry rethinks how games are planned, developed, and released, we’ll continue to see more XDefiants: trend-chasing projects burdened by mismanagement and poor execution.

A Missed Opportunity for Preservation

One final frustration is that XDefiant will not be preserved. Game preservation is crucial, and it’s a shame Ubisoft didn’t consider making the game open source or revamping its assets to avoid IP conflicts. Instead, it’s being written off as a tax loss – another casualty of corporate thinking.

Preserving games, even flawed ones, matters for gaming history. Sadly, XDefiant will soon be forgotten, a fate it could have avoided.