Feature

When a lot of words gather in one place, be careful. It might be a feature.

Are videogames trying to make me contemplate my mortality? Fine. I shall.

The quantified life

No one can account for their time on Earth quite like a player of videogames. It's hard not to, as software and hardware conspire together to tally up your time gaming and taunt you with it at every turn. Steam helpfully logs how many hours you've spent on a game right below the Play button, Nintendo Switch users can see their hour counts in their player profiles, and just about every platform will send you a year-end email tabulating how many days your combined hours of gaming add up to. No one — not my partner, not my employer, not my very anxious dog — keeps tabs on my time quite like the videogames I play. 

Decades of this quantification has cultivated an unusual relationship between the player and time. Countless souls, intrigued by a game, will habitually check HowLongToBeat.com to see what a new game they're interested in might ask of them. It does not matter that, statistically, almost no players finish games. The ritual persists: a given videogame's estimated completion time is weighed against the player's feather of Anubis, and depending on some arcane calculus based on genre, cost, prestige, marketing, and prior commitments (both to other games as well as people), a game is deemed worthy in its demands or preposterous. 

I find this behaviour absurd. Bonkers. Strange. A terrible relationship to have with an art form or leisure pursuit. I object because I have identified it in myself, and recoil in horror. How unfortunate that there are some games for which the first thing you hear about them is how long they are! Dragon Quest VII, for example, is "the one that's a hundred hours long," necessitating an abridged remake. Assassin's Creed games have a similar reputation, as if those not in the habit of playing them ought not to start unless they have some sort of lengthy medical leave planned. And then there are the truly outrageous feats like this month's Trails in the Sky 2nd Chapter, a remake of the second game in Falcom's 13-parts-and-counting soap opera, one of the most staggering time-sinks in the medium. 

This post is for paying subscribers only

Already have an account? Sign in.

What's On Your Bookshelf?: Esoteric Ebb's Christoffer Bodegård

"I've heard it's similar to Disco Elysium. But Miéville’s must be better, because he has two"

Hell is ascendant. The nightmare moon hangs askew in the rust-blighted sky, low enough to reach down and steal a bite of your waffle cone. Again!

To your left, a battle-worn clowder of gangrenous strays mew the theme to The Godfather, miring your senses in discordant trills : Meooow Mow-mow mooow mow mow-mow.

From beyond the veil, exactly 58 tiny voices scrape at your fragile subconscious, each trying to tell you about a different roguelike card-battler released in the last four hours. Every one of them is 'must play', they insist. (whispery voice) Must play. Must play. Must Play.

Quick. Get inside. It's safe here. We have gathered all the videogames and burned them alive. Only books remain.

Welcome.

Welcome to the inaugural Jank-dition of What's On Your Bookshelf - our regular chat with a selection of excellent game-humans about books! Kicking things off, it's none other than Esoteric Ebb's Christoffer Bodegård! Cheers Chris - mind if we have a nose at your bookshelf? 


What are you currently reading?

Liberal Fascisms! One of many essay collections of Žižek, his latest I believe. Once I got out of the slump of extreme-hardcore-crunch, writing thousands of words a day all throughout 2025 and up to Ebb's launch, I needed a cleanser. Or at least a solid hook to start reading again. I find Slavoj Žižek's pop-culture zeitgeist lens incredibly entertaining, and his work gives me the exact same dopamine rush I get from watching overtly political YouTubers rant about current day topics, except I get to actually stop and look up/learn about new sources/concepts/words every other page or so.

I'm also working my way through the Tales of Dunk and Egg! For one reason: I very much enjoyed the dread of watching Game of Thrones slowly collapse into complete sadness - starting with season 4 - since I read ahead to Dance after season 2 dropped. After watching AKOTSK with the boys (which was an experience), I decided to jump onto that same ship once more. I mean, I really hope the following seasons hold up. But now I'm invested, so bring on the pain!

What's On Your Bookshelf has returned thanks to new supporters of Jank helping us to reach one of our subscriber goals! Thanks to everyone who signed up over the past month.

Not yet a member?

Sign up here to fund more great writing

What did you last read? 

This post is for paying subscribers only

Already have an account? Sign in.

How much money can we make in Wardogs on a $0 budget?

Paupers, please

They finally invented Ayn Rand's Battlefield. Wardogs is the sort of huge multiplayer team battler you are familiar with, except now you have a bank balance. You earn a wad of cash with every kill, revive, heal, drop-off, or bit of construction work. Destroy a sandbag for a meagre $14. Blow up a vehicle to pocket a cool $300. Kill a person - that's $2,250. You then use that cash to buy weapons, armour, ammo, and vehicles. The profit motive drives everything.

"You have to spend money to make money," says a gruff NPC vendor, expounding the game's philosophy. Well, fuck you, shop with a mouth. We will not spend a single dollar. Instead, the Jank writers have instigated the ultimate test of tightfistedness. Which of us can make the most money in Wardogs without spending anything? Let's find out.

The rules

Our goal for this challenge is to earn as much cash as possible. We must spend $0. We are allowed five lives, and we are going in cold. That means we have not played the game before, except to do the tutorial. Less Wardogging, more Rawdogging, if you will.

This will not be easy. Even a hammer to build sandbags, or a wrench to fix vehicles can cost 50 warbucks. Reliable firearms are much dearer. Spawning a fighter jet is out of the question. Every player starts with $10,000 when they buy the game. We're not allowed to use any of it. Let's see how we get on.

This post is for paying subscribers only

Already have an account? Sign in.

These folks put Spelunky (1) in Spelunky (2) so you can Spelunky (1) while you Spelunky (2)

HDMod sends you back to the worlds of the original Spelunky with all the polish of the sequel

Spelunky 1 is the best game ever made. I prefer its pacing, difficulty, and variety to its sequel. And yet if I was to recommend one of these games to a new player, I would find it difficult to advocate for the original. Spelunky 2, released eight years later (and twelve years after the original freeware version), has better player movement, better art, and a dozen small design changes that make it a smoother experience. Spelunky 1 is the better game - the best game! - but it feels old by comparison.

Enter the creators of the HDMod for Spelunky 2, which recreates the original Spelunky's world generation, enemies, characters and items within the sequel. So now I can play Spelunky 1 inside Spelunky 2 and experience the best of both.

"Spelunky 2 feels like an improvement in almost every aspect," says Super Ninja Fat (SNF), one of the mod's creators, speaking to me over email. "The engine alone made many fixes, mechanic improvements and quality of life changes over the original. However, many fans like myself miss the first game's pacing and content distribution."

This post is for paying subscribers only

Already have an account? Sign in.

The new Onimusha has won parrying, now give it a rest

Sekiroverkill

Parrying is gaming's best and raddest adoption - a decisive and effortlessly stylish retort that serves instant, embarrassing karma to threats as diverse as lightning bolts, chainsaws, and freight trains. Press R1 to pay absolutely no respect. It's also a cheap trick that shrinks gods and monsters to the tiny space where your blades meet, reducing the shadows of colossi to whimpering bunny silhouettes. At their best, nailing a string of parries and ripostes feels like performing Swan Lake while winning a rap battle against god. At their worst, they're the design equivalent of blending a bag of spinach into sugary pasta sauce so fussy toddlers don't realise they're eating quicktime event. 

I recently discovered my least favourite parry ever in Marvel's Spider-Man 2. Fights in Insomniac's Spidey games fizzle with fistly pyrotechnics so ill-suited to requiring you to anticipate incoming hands that Spidey's glowing head halo does it for you. In Spider-Man the first, you don't even have to consider danger until the same second you respond to it. This lets you focus your entire brain on what matters: doing stuff that makes you nod and go: "Oh yes. That's some shit Spider-Man would do".

Me when I'm being used as a comparative example to make a larger point.

But in the sequel, just knowing that a wiley thugoon might spring a parry-only punch forces a shift in priorities from "I want to do this" to "I don't want that to happen" which messes with the cadence something awful. It's so ill-fitting it feels like it emerged from a focus group, run by and consisting entirely of suits, each of them focused on suit-dazzling the other suits with the suitiest suggestions possible.

This is how so much of parrying feels to me now. It's Chris Pratt. It's Timbly Charmander. It's 20g of added bison protein in an 18g Chocolate Hobnob. I used to crackle with glee at clinching a "not today, fucko" against Ray's clanging mechasnout in Metal Gear Rising. Now I long for a game brave enough to snap my sword in half forever if I'm stupid enough to think I can deflect even a swerving bumper butt from a medium-velocity rat ambulance. 

Onimusha: Way Of The Sword is not that game. It has five different varieties of not-today-fuckos you can use during a day in the life of true Edo period geezer Miyamoto Musashi, and something like four extra fucko-be-gones. You can block, dodge, super dodge, parry, and deflect, which is basically a parry with extra steps. Dodging fills an execution gauge, and parrying fills a gauge that engulfs your sword in crackling anti-fucko energy.

This post is for paying subscribers only

Already have an account? Sign in.

House Of The Dying Sun rescued space from the nerds, but we let it go again

This machine kills traitors

This is not a war. There is no glory or prize to be won, no victory to be had. There are no gods to satisfy or rewards to covet. There is nothing to gain. You are not here to save the galaxy or prevent the apocalypse. There is a truth, but it is not holy. It is beyond holy. It is this:

Twelve traitor lords remain.

House Of The Dying Sun begins with an imperative tolling bell, and can only end in ruin. That is your explicit purpose. It tells you upfront, not with a cutscene or Sim Cameraman prologue, but in black and white, with intoxicating immediacy.

Levels open with thrumming drums and full engines warping you in to the target, under a beautiful classic font declaring dramatic titles like "Vengeance at Ember Field" and "Slaughter at Horuus Gate", in keeping with its almost 1970s filmic energy. Suns blot out enemies. An ally flies through the fire of missiles you shot down. One HUD marker doesn't rotate with you, and that feels better. Every level is a careful diorama, a stage.

This post is for paying subscribers only

Already have an account? Sign in.

A ride in the war taxi

The Commander Goes Zapping in Hell Let Loose: Vietnam

"War is fun," says the commander. "You get to shoot things."

The radio is cracking heavy static, the helicopter blades are whud-whud-whudding over our heads, bullets are whipping past, or plinking loudly against the chopper's hull. The commander in the seat next to me is still speaking but I can only hear snippets of what he says. It's almost impossible to make out the rest of his rubber-banding words. 

"It's -— and yeah -— sometimes you -— shot at -— that's -— "

I'd like to say this is an atmospheric feature of Hell Let Loose: Vietnam, the latest multiplayer shooter to be set in the jungles of 1960s Vietnam. But it's really just the game's comm systems buckling under the pressure of a war sim that relies on wall-to-wall chatter. The pilot, who has a clearer radio channel with me, translates. 

"Basically, he says: war is fun!"

Like the conflict it's based on, the warfare in Hell Let Loose: Vietnam is not symmetrical. The two factions don't have matching abilities. US players can fly helicopters and drop napalm strikes. The North Vietnamese have tunnel systems and better camouflage. The first Hell Let Loose, set during WWII, had the same hardcore tactical battling and quick deaths. But the factions generally used the same explodey technologies and methods of war. Here, each side has a distinct flavour. The sound of choppers either makes you anxious or relieved. 

Down on the ground, you either can't see ten feet ahead of you for jungle bushes, or you can see for miles (and be sniped for miles). You can take a boat downriver, but a dozen muzzle flashes might erupt from the bushes at any moment. You almost never see the person who riflewrecks you from a mysterious position in an abandoned fishing village. The safest place, surely, is a hundred feet up in the sky.

A trail of white smoke whooshes past our helicopter. 

"Wow," says the pilot. "Rude."

The commander stirs next to me. "Was that an RPG?" he asks.

"Uh, maaaybe," says the pilot cheerfully.

This post is for paying subscribers only

Already have an account? Sign in.

Death to the self-playing game

You auto know better

Vampire Survivors is a self-playing videogame. 

Maybe you've observed this too. There's a line some games cross past which you no longer feel like you're playing the game. The game is playing itself, and you are there to be fed feel-good brainjuices. I'm not talking about idle games - you're doing something, but you're not really doing something. Sometimes you click a glorified "next" button and flashy numbers rocket upwards. Sometimes you put a pip into a skill tree over here, instead of over there. Poncle's bestselling bulletnothing is the leading exemplar of this. I think it's rubbish, partly because it feels like treacle. But mostly because it is accelerating a dull trend in game design: to make the game auto-go while building a coffin of upgrades around the player until they have precisely zero thoughts, swimming in whatever the opposite of a sensory deprivation tank is, flooded with dopamine. Death, I say! Death to the self-playing videogame.

Vampire Survivors is not alone in hoodwinking me into the sensation that I am doing something when in fact I am a sad void pressing left and then right. Loop Hero sets your hero autotumbling around a circuit of monsters, and the closest it comes to having meaningful decisions is in the basic Carcassoning of resource and monster tiles. Ball X Pit is a roguelike ransacking of a classic arcade brickblooper with autofiring bullets. It eventually contains a full admission of defeat to the automaton approach to game design: an unlockable character called "the Radical" who will play brickblasting runs on your behalf and choose upgrades without any input from the player whatsoever. 

Vampire Survivors turned a basic shmup into a karmic hamster wheel. BallXPit is an LCD brickpong toy running on cruise control.

The self-playing game automates a primary verb of play. That is a fancy way of saying: Me no shoot, game shoot for me. It then gets you as fast as possible onto a trundling treadmill of dopamine and ostensible progress, while sort of reminding you of another game you played before. The physicality of this "kernel" genre underneath is not really needed. It just needs to look like bullet hell. It just needs to seem like Breakout. They can become lauded, successful games, praised for their addictive charms and approachability.

To me, they are automated fun. Poisoning hand-to-eye happiness with the anti-activity of the idle game. We are lurching toward the idlefication of all genres. Why stop at Asteroids and Breakout? Let us automate Doom. Let us automate Street Fighter. Let us automate Rogue. You think I'm joking, but somebody is already working on the latter and it's giving me a bad case of the squinty eyes.

Self-playing games take microdecisions away from you in favour of macrodecisions. You don't need to choose where to aim your gun every second, but you will need to decide what ammo upgrade to select for the next level. This is an inviting approach for game designers (and not unique to the self-playing game). It allows designers to sidestep the difficult psuedoart of "gamefeel", and player skill becomes less of an issue to account for. You can focus on the metagame, the upgrades and abilities and perks and extras. The exofun. All you need to do is make the braintickling numbers work, and then make it look flashy.

But what if some genres are the microdecisions?

If somebody automated Devil Daggers, I would stab them in the hands with a barbeque fork. If somebody automated Tetris, I would have them arrested. When a designer of a racing game makes drifting round corners feel the perfect balance of scrapey and buttery, this feeling can carry the entire racer despite how bad its story mode inevitably is. On the other hand, when somebody strips an essential verb out of Asteroids and claps on an incremental skill tree, I can't help but feel they have piggybacked on the physical feeling unlocked by bygone engineers to deliver what is effectively Cookie Clicker under the hood. This is not a revolutionary new form. It is Candy Box sans the sense of humour, with a lobotomised arcade classic attached. 

This post is for paying subscribers only

Already have an account? Sign in.