© Amazon/MGM

Project Hail Mary

As frequent readers probably know, I'm a fan of hard science fiction. I'll try to make a point of seeing new, high-concept sci-fi movies in theaters, especially if they are receiving positive word of mouth. Two of my favorite movies of the past decade or so have been The Martian and Arrival. Project Hail Mary is almost like a combination of those 2 movies, and its based on a book by the same author who rote the novel of The Martian, so it should be right up my alley.

I did still like it. But I also found myself disappointed that it was so "cutesy" and not quite as smart or thoughtful as I had hoped it would be.

Yeah, the rock alien is adorable. And the practical effects looked exceptional. The scenes of Grace and Rocky learning to communicate with each other, explaining concepts that are common to them, but alien to the other, and then solving problems together are the highlight of the movie to me.

And hey! Rocky is from 40 Eridani, which is the same star that Star Trek's Vulcan is supposed to orbit. So that was a fun little Easter Egg! Rocky is a Vulcan. He's a "Rock Spock"!

But Rocky is also a symbol of much of what annoyed me. For every moment in which the two are having slow, thoughtful conversations about the nature of existence, there is also a scene of Rocky running around like an excitable puppy for strictly comedic purposes. It just seems off for a character who is supposed to be a highly-intelligent engineer on an interstellar mission to save his species from extinction.

More generally speaking, this movie leans heavily on the trope of an in-experienced "regular guy" having to bumble his way through an incredibly technically-demanding mission. Yes, the guy is a PhD, so he is a very smart person. This doesn't quite fall into "Mary Sue" territory. But he's a biologist. He's not an engineer, or a pilot, or an astronaut. Yes, he does have months (or longer) to learn the spaceship's functions, but it's still not entirely believable that he would be able to single-handedly figure out how to operate a complicated spaceship. This is what separates Project Hail Mary from the much better movies of The Martian and Arrival. The characters in those movies are experts solving problems within their field of expertise and experience. They aren't middle school teachers thrown into a spaceship with no training at all.

©Amazon/MGM

Grace has to single-handedly figure out how to operate an advanced, experimental spaceship.

When I went back to re-download and play Surviving The Aftermath, I also noticed that Surviving Mars was in my library. I guess I must've bought it a while back on sale and forgotten about it. Due to the similarities of the name, I mistakenly thought that these 2 games were developed by the same studio, so I downloaded both. I had also seen some headlines and social media posts about controversy regarding a "Re-Launched" version of Surviving Mars. I wasn't quite sure what was going on there, but I decided to give the original game a test run and see if the Re-Launched version would be something I might like to try. If Re-Launched fixed some of the complaints that I had with the original game, than maybe I would upgrade to that. Or at least, that's what naive me thought.

After playing for a day or 2, I was liking Surviving Mars, so I went to the Steam page to see how cheap the upgrade to Re-Launched is. That is when I realized what all the controversy is about.

Paradox, in it's infinitely consumer-unfriendly wisdom, decided to make Surviving Mars: Re-Launched into a completely new game; it is not an upgrade or update to the original game! Paradox is selling Re-Launched at full price, even if you already have the original game. Worse yet, Re-Launched is basically a "complete edition" of the game, with all the DLC expansions packaged in, and with a slight graphics update. The original game looks fine as is, so I don't think a graphics update was necessary. But they also de-listed the original game, and all of its DLC expansions, so that if you own the original game, you cannot buy any of the expansions!

Re-Launched is not an update to Surviving Mars; it is a separate, full-priced release on Steam.

This is a kick in the gut to anybody who bought the original version of the game. Especially if you never got around to buying the DLC, and are now completely locked out of being able to do so.

I'm sorry, but this is basically strike 3 for Paradox. I gave them plenty of chances to right their ship, but they have now completely capsized and have lost all of my good will. They bungled the premature release of Star Trek: Infinite and killed that game basically out of the gate. They then went on to do the same thing to Cities Skylines II, and then fired Colossal Order from its own series. And now there's these shenanigans with Surviving Mars. This is all on top of all the older controversy involving Paradox's greedy piecemeal DLC pricing, releasing updates to games that make old saves incompatible, and releasing games that felt generally incomplete.

I have had it with Paradox! I don't think I can buy another game from Paradox, and I am actually starting to feel guilty for playing the Paradox games that I already own. It's a shame too, because Paradox, as a publisher, sells games that are right up my alley. They specialize in strategy, management, and simulation games -- often with historic or sci-fi themes. Now I feel like I can't play any of these games, or else I'm giving money and support to a company that might very well be the sleaziest, greediest, and overall worst game publisher on the market right now. Possibly as bad or worse than the likes of Ubisoft, Activision, EA, and 2K.

I don't know, maybe Ubisoft, Activision, EA, and 2K are still far worse. I haven't been keeping up as much with news on those companies since I haven't been on social media as much, and since I actively avoid their games (other than buying used copies of EA's football games). On top of all that, Stephanie Sterling hasn't been making new Jimquisition episodes (now rebranded as "High-Steph") to tell me all about the evils of these companies and their executives. Well, except for a recent episode that reminded everyone of former Activision CEO Bobby Kotick's close association with convicted pedophile Jeffery Epstein...

There's been a lot of depressing news lately. The rise of fascism and right-wing authoritarianism around the globe, an unstable stock market and economy being manipulated by White House for private gain at the cost of tax-payers and consumers, wars and genocides, irreversible climate change tipping points being tipped, and so much more. But through all that, there was one shining bright moment this past 2 weeks: The launch and successful landing of NASA's Artemis II mission. For the first time in more than a generation, human beings have travelled beyond near Earth orbit and around the moon. Sadly, this was a manned test run of the capsule, and so this mission did not land on the moon. For that, we will have to wait till 2028, at least.

Photo credit: NASA.

Artemis II crew: Jeremy Hansen, Victor Glover, Reid Wiseman, and Christina Hammock Koch.

Space exploration has felt rather stagnant for decades. The focus on the space shuttle and space station programs kept manned space flight in near Earth orbit, while deep space missions have all been done by robots. There's been quite a few robotic missions. Multiple rovers have landed on Mars, some of which are still active long past their expected expiration dates. Probes have visited the planets of the outer solar system (as well as the not-a-planet-anymore Pluto). And probes have even done test landings on asteroids and comets! I do not want to diminish these accomplishments one bit. They are all extraordinary technological and scientific breakthroughs on their own. Landing on asteroids and comets is especially significant, because they are a stepping stone towards mining and resource extraction from such celestial bodies, which could hopefully pave the way for abandoning our capitalist economic systems in favor of a post-scarcity model. But as cool as these missions were, they haven't been manned missions. People weren't actually going to these places.

At least not until now. With Artemis II, a group of 4 human beings (Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, Christina Koch, and Jeremy Hansen) travelled around the moon, and saw the far side of the moon with their own, human, eyes. That is something that hasn't happened since the Apollo missions of the early 1970's.

Photo credit: NASA.

Artemis II witnessed the Earth "set" behind the far side of the moon.

Every now and then, a very odd or unique game catches my eye. I knew nothing about Cosmogenesis when I bought it. It looked like a borderline "edu-tainment" product, with its theme about the creation of solar systems and origins of life. And I had success with previous edu-tainment games. Photosynthesis was a surprise smash hit, and turned out to be one of the most popular games in my collection. So maybe Cosmogenesis would capture that same lightning-in-a-bottle?

But solo designer Yves Touringny and publisher Ludonova are not Blue Orange Games. Cosmogenesis plays solidly enough, but it just lacks the sheer "table presence" of something like Photosynthesis.

Star child

Cosmogenesis plays like a tableau-building card game, but without any cards. Instead, each player has a cardboard player board with circular slots along one side, in which circular cardboard planet discs can be slotted. Other cardboard asteroids, comets, and planets can be placed on the board, on the same row as a slotted planet, to act as moons. And small, gray plastic discs (that looks like an Advil tablet) are used to track the development of life on a track on eligible planets (or moons).

The only player interaction is resource-denial, which is rare.

Each player is kind of playing your own little game with almost no interaction with the other players. This can be good for players who can be more sensitive to being "attacked" by other players, or for players who prefer to focus on what they are doing instead of having to try to consider how other players might interfere with their strategy. The only player-interaction that ever really happens would be resource-denial, in cases in which one player specifically claims a token or objective that another player wanted.

But even that seems rare. The way that the game is structured, players are always acquiring new objectives every game round. You always have your own objectives to accomplish, even late in the game. So most players are going to be claiming tokens that actually accomplish their own objectives or improve their own score, rather than wasting a valuable turn by claiming a token specifically to keep it away from another player. If you do claim a token that another player wanted, it's likely because it's also something that benefits you.

This high focus comes from the fact that every game round the players acquire new short-to-medium-term goals to work towards. Even in the last round of the game, you will still be acquiring a new objective (whether you'll be able to accomplish it or not). These goals always feel viable to attain. I've never seen a situation in which its outright impossible for a given player to compete for at least one of the goals that's available, if they work to try to achieve it. I'm sure it's possible, but I haven't seen it happen yet.

Acquiring new objectives throughout the game
keeps play focused and goal-oriented.

Each player is also given a secret goal during game setup. In most games, this would likely be an end-game goal that could make or break your strategy. But in Cosmogenesis, this initial goal is the same kind of short-to-medium-term goal as all the other objective cards in the game. This initial goal will likely influence your game-long strategy, but it isn't the end-all-be-all. Instead, it just gives every player something to work towards right from the start of the game, in order to keep everyone's play laser-focused. From turn 1 all the way through round 6 (the final round of the game), every player has goals to work towards.

Continuing to go through my back-log of shorter games that I've bought in bulk on sales, I spent a couple nights going through an indie game called Exo One. Exo One is a sci-fi ... um ... adventure game? Puzzle game? Platformer? Infinite runner? I'm really not sure how to classify this game ludically. Exo One feels like somebody thought "let's adapt the last 10 minutes of 2001: A Space Odyssey into a game" So it's part 2001, with a little bit of Contact thrown in for good measure, and plays similarly to Journey (but without any of the multiplayer aspects that made Journey such a beloved insta-classic). Basically, it's a game about going somewhere, but without really knowing where that "somewhere" is supposed to be. As such, it's the journey that matters; not the destination.

The basic plot, as I understood it (because it's a bit trippy and difficult to follow), is that an alien civilization transmitted data to Earth containing plans on how to build an exotic interstellar space craft (hence, the Contact reference). When a crew of astronauts travel to Jupiter to test the spacecraft, there is some kind of accident or unexplained phenomena that causes one of the astronauts to become lost in space. We play as that astronaut trying to return home -- well, actually, it's a little bit more complicated than that, but what's actually happening falls into spoiler territory, so I'll just leave it at that for now.

The spacecraft itself is a metallic, shapeshifting ball that can transform into a discus-shaped glider. It is equipped with a "gravity drive" that allows it to temporarily multiply the the force of gravity that is applied to it. As such, the core gameplay loop consists of rolling this ball across alien landscapes, using the gravity drive to pick up speed whenever you are falling or rolling downhill, and then jumping and transforming into the discus glider in order to reach higher elevation or travel long distances.

What if the climax of 2001: A Space Odyssey were a game?

Yeah, it's a weird one...