Currently in free-to-play beta mode, Ninza is a combination platformer and brawler!!! From Indie developers Klakmioch, this game has a homepage, twitter and discord.
I tried it out, and while I’m not much of a brawler -or platformer- it’s a lot of fun! I love the characters, and the actual controls are pretty simple! The concept of the game itself is gret, too.
The main menu is easily traversable, and there are 4 game-modes available for play (for now at least). The game is relatively easy on the eyes, with minimal of the bright, flashy, effects that can hurt your eyes, and the animations are very readable. The backgrounds are done in a way that reminds me both of Japanese woodblock prints and those old-style story books done in paints and colored pencils.
If you have your eyes open for a brawler to play around with your pals, this one may be the one you want your mitts on.
This is a game made by architecture students. I see it more of an art piece, for those times when people say that video games are an art- which this game really proves.
The Stages of death mark the stages seen in the game, rendered lovingly by first-time creators, by a team of 3 students from National Superior School of Architecture of Versailles. It’s a variation on 3-D platformers with stunning lighting an easy-to learn gameplay.
Even if the entire game runs for a mere hour, I believe that it will be an hour well spent.
Any piece taken by you becomes your piece. You can then drop onto your side of the board in any free location, at any point in time.
Difficulty: Just above average chess; 5.5/10. The difficulty is now in placement and knowing gthe consequences of losing a piece.
Fun: 10/10!!! Rub salt in your enemies wounds by using what they lost. Adds an additional boost to eating and really reinforces the consequences of losing pieces.
Edits to be made: Have an extra set of pieces set aside for use.
Dark/Fog of War Chess:
Your opponent’s moves and pieces are not visible. Pawns, who’s movement may be blocked by a piece will be informed that a move forward is an illegal move- on this point some variety is seen on informing players, as some versions have an umpire who can decide on whether they announce what piece has moved or where it may be moved to.
Difficulty: Extreme: this style of game play requires knowledge of common moves and tactics. It works best for people who know how to play, and play well. 10/10.
Fun: If you like puzzle games and riddles, and deductive reasoning, this is the variation for you. If you love battleship, this is perfect.
Edits to be made: For an in-person game, this version would require 3 boards (you, opponent, 3rd party) and an umpire (to decide legality of moves).
Omega Chess:
Two pieces are added: The Wizard moves 1,3 or 3,1. It’s placed in the corners of the board, starting just off it. The Champion can either jump 2 diagonally, or move up to 2 horizontally or vertically, reminiscent of Chaturanga.
Difficulty: With a larger board and two new pieces, I feel the difficulty will be found in learning and adapting to the new pieces over anything else. 6/10.
Fun: Yeehaw WIZARDS!!!!!!! The names of the new pieces and the added gameplay gives this version a 7.5/10.
Edits to be made: 10×10 board, 4 additional pieces per side (2 wizards, 2 champions)
Cannibal Chess:
Difficulty: Definitely on the higher end: Remembering all the pieces that were eaten, and by whom, and doing so for your opponent as well is hard. A good way to train one’s memory!
Fun: Perfect opportunity for obnoxious munching noises during gameplay. 10/10.
Edits to be made: None to the board or pieces themselves. I would recommend marking the figures with some sort of symbol and then writing out which ate what on a sheet of paper.
Sometimes, research turns into something else entirely.
Yesterday, as I was researching more historical board games for a few other artcles, I came upon a website that sold a few dozen physical variations on chess. It not only caugfht my eye, but also sent me on a fun wikipedia dive.
Today, I’ll be rating different chess variations by aesthetic, readability, and how much they made me want to play that particular variation.
3-person chess (Hexagonal)
Aesthetic: 10/10 a blast to boggle at. The squares merging in the center is incredibly pleasing.
Readability: 10/10: clearly readable!!! Lovely.
Want to Play: 10/10 YES. Wish I knew more people IRL who liked chess to play this version of the game!
3-person chess (circular)
Aesthetic: 10/10 a joy to look at, makes a fun centerpiece, will fit on a circular table and not look ridiculous.
Readability: 4/10 Makes my eyes hurt: The board tries to be more readable by adding diagonal lines through the squares, but I feel that makes the board even more confusing to try to decipher in a game. It looks cool, sure, but doesn’t do well for play. the colors for the pieces are standard, I suppose, but better choices could have been made.
Want to Play: 5/10 Due to the board, it’s not high up on my play list, regardless of how cool it will look on a coffee or café table.
Stacked Chess
Aesthetic: Not so much for me: a 6/10. The boards and pieces are very standard, and while the connecting spire adds a bit of flair, it doesn’t do much for the look. The pieces look cheap.
Readability: The individual boards are perfectly readable, 10/10, this is what standardization is good for.
Want to Play: ehhhhh *wiggle hand in a so-so manner* 4/10. If I wanted to do something like this, there’s quite a few digital versions which do a better job with the concept of multiple boards, one of which is “5D chess with multiverse time travel“.
Peace Chess (Paco Sako)
Aesthetic: Cute!!! I honestly love the way the piece designs were modified for the new gameplay. 10/10
Readability: 10/10: standard board, and the pieces retain enough of their silhouette to remain distinctive.
Want to Play: 6.5/10. The concept of “peace chess”, in which the kings try to reach each other by jumping through other pieces is enough to warrant a try, but I’m not entirely sure about the replayability. Since you can’t take pieces off the board, I feel that there’s not many moves to h=be had after a few plays.
Jester Chess
Aesthetic: Overall, really standard: other than the titular piece and extra spaces, nothing else is added, visually. 5/10: it works, I guess.
Readability: Looks Just like your average chess board but with more squares: it’s a 10×10 black and white board. The pieces are the same as your average ones, with the exception of the added, titular piece: the Jester. 10/10. Unique piece design, recognizable board.
Want to Play: Definitely intriguing! The added piece (whose rule for movement is literally “whatever piece your opponent just moved”) would add interest to your usual game, with extreme annoying sibling energy attached. Prefect for people who want to aggravate their family, 8.5/10.
I Love Gaming! I Love E3, Gamescom, and anything related to new games and the industry as a whole. I Love reporting on games and hearing about them. Alas, I do not have time to pursue that passion as my life has taken a different turn. Chris Jones Gaming came into fame when we had a team modifying Star Trek: Legacy. I will not ever shut down Chris Jones Gaming – and on that note I am making the following offer:
I want to give someone FULL CONTROL over this website with regard to gaming news and reviews. No Gambling sites, lol. Seriously – If you are passionate about the gaming industry and want to write reviews, talk about new releases, or ANYTHING related to the video game industry for any Platform – please call me 518-223-6044 or email chrisjones@chrisjonesgaming.net.
I am very serious about this, and will conduct interviews. You would need to be familiar with WordPress – if you have a theme suggestion I am all eyes and ears.
I have to admit that I was not a fan of Star Trek Discovery in the beginning. I saw some inconsistencies in the timeline, like Tribbles, site to site transport, and Klingons that don’t look like Klingons, at least not how I know them. At first glance it looks like a JJ Abrams type reboot, which at first, caused me to take pause.
There has been some mention, I’ve been reading other people’s opinions and things, that the Captain is unethical, Starfleet’s FIRST unethical Captain.
Captains
I disagree with that assessment. Captains Kirk, Picard in addition to Sisko, Janeway and Archer were all mentioned as exceptional captains. That leads me to believe that a lot of not so exceptional captains exist. The Captain of Discovery is one of those slightly unethical captains but he’s getting the job done, living on the edge. Starfleet needs people like that. The show continues to grow on me. It didn’t grow on me first. I see a lot of Discovery bashing, saying it is looking like the JJ universe along with other such things but no, I think the show will do well.
In Conclusion, There’s room for Discovery. All these people that are crying foul that it looks like JJ or it looks like something just not Star Trek, keep an open mind. Many people like ‘The Orville’ which, I love that show, as well as Discovery. I’m very interested to see how Star Trek Discovery plays out. I read that it’s going to be leading up to TOS. The Spore drive may develop a flaw which renders it useless, one of the things leading up to TOS. I say give this thing a chance, let it go.
Side note: The Harry Mudd character was done well, I thought.
