biteho.com

When a basketball player gets into “the zone,” people say it can feel like time slows to crawl. They can see things before they happen, every little detail about their opponent stands out, and the rim seems to get bigger and more inviting. NBA 2K22 hasn’t quite managed to get me into the zone during my early time playing it so far, but the improved gameplay and breadth of content of this iteration get it closer than it’s been for the past few years. From important changes to how stamina impacts shooting to a City filled with diverse ways to improve your MyPlayer character, 2K22 feels like a breath of fresh air.

With only a day with the PlayStation 5 version under my belt, both I and the community are still in the early stages of learning this latest iteration of NBA 2K. I haven’t put in the hours to learn all its ins-and-outs yet, making it hard to say how it will hold up over time at the moment. However, certain things already stand out about developer Visual Concepts’ latest installment that are exciting for me as a long-time player.

NBA 2K22 has made some important tweaks to the on-court action that help make it play like a more realistic game, most noticeably how it handles stamina loss while dribbling. In 2K21, it was easy to run at a defender on the perimeter, hit a Curry slide, and drain a three without breaking a sweat. Against the CPU, that tactic was almost undefendable, especially in MyTeam where player cards were quickly made ridiculously overpowered. With 2K22, you can still employ tactics like that, but the stamina loss you suffer from sprinting and doing dribble moves is made much more significant to balance out its effectiveness.

As your player gets more tired their shot meter will shrink, making it tougher to hit shots. That leads to a game that initially seems slow compared to 2K21 – but if you play under more control and don’t just hold that sprint button, you’ll actually have an easier time putting the ball into the bucket because of your larger shot meter. It may not seem like an important change at first, but it leads to a playstyle that feels closer to real life than 2K21 ever did.

On top of that, I’ve noticed some of the more problematic legacy issues not popping up as much. Things like bump steals aren’t gone completely, but I certainly haven’t seen them happening as much as last year. That could, of course, all change as players get more familiar with 2K22, but for now, I’m happy to see Visual Concepts taking steps to iron out some of those more annoying tactics. There are still quite a few instances of weird animations that took me out of the experience, but those too are lessened from previous years.

Improved gameplay doesn’t mean much if you don’t have good places to take advantage of it, but fortunately, so far Visual Concepts seems to have provided plenty of things to do throughout its selection of modes. I’ve spent most of my early time playing in MyTeam and MyCareer, and they’re both full of options like the new multiplayer options in MyTeam and the increased variety of off-the-court activities in MyCareer. MyTeam, in particular, has so many options if you’re looking to grind toward your dream team, be that playing with the world’s best current NBA superstars or legends of the past. Unfortunately, its lackluster multiplayer options don’t follow suit.

Unlimited and Limited modes are back with basically no changes. That means most players will probably never sniff the top tiers of Unlimited rewards and Limited continues to be a luck fest in terms of rewards. Visual Concepts has also changed Triple Threat Online to something it’s calling “The 100.” You start the mode with 100 points, and after each game your opponent’s score will be subtracted from that total as you work your way up the prize board until you hit zero points. That could’ve been a great casual option since you’re guaranteed to at least make it to the second tier on the prize board. But, in practice, it’s unrewarding compared to the single-player modes for casual players and more annoying for dedicated players who will now have to struggle to get to the top tier of the board much more than in previous years.

The new Draft mode looks interesting and will hopefully make up for those multiplayer shortcomings, but I haven’t had time to play much of it yet. If you’re looking to get into MyTeam, I would definitely focus on the single-player content during your early days and then go online afterward if you want to.

On the MyPlayer front, Visual Concepts gives players tons of interesting things to do in NBA 2K22. From the jump, you can run around The City, completing quests and meeting NPCs… like Jake from State Farm. It’s a very silly world where your soon-to-be pro baller can just skateboard around to his heart’s content (complete with ludicrous skating physics), go to the gym for some weightlifting mini-games, and then get in a 3-on-3 game against other elite players. The story mode seems a bit scaled back compared to last year so far, but I’m still early and it’s impossible to say how some of the off-the-court action will impact the mode.

After spending a little over a day with it, NBA 2K22 is at least shaping up to be a firm step in the right direction following a disappointing 2K21 release. I am still early in my time playing, so my thoughts could easily change as I learn more about what has or hasn’t changed, but I’m hopeful that the gameplay tweaks I’ve already come to love and all of the different options Visual Concepts has given me to take advantage of them will stand up over time. Check back next week for the full review and score.

Marvel’s live-action New Warriors comedy series featuring Squirrel Girl was cancelled because it was “too gay,” according to the series’ showrunner.

As reported by Gizmodo, former New Warriors showrunner, Kevil Biegel, tweeted out three behind-the-scenes images of Milana Vayntrub’s Doreen Green, aka Squirrel Girl. Naturally, that tweet was quickly deleted, but Gizmodo was able to take a screenshot of the photos before Biegel took them down.

Biegel also tweeted a brief explanation as to why the show was cancelled, citing that it was “too gay.”

“A SINGULAR power that be killed the show,” Biegel reportedly wrote in a now-deleted tweet chain, according to Gizmodo. “Because it was too gay. A rich, straight, Brentwood turd. He got fired for being vile at his company. We, on the other hand, live.”

Other tweets made by Biegel, which also have been deleted, allege that New Warriors was cancelled by a homophobic executive that took aim at the show for being “very, very proudly gay.” Biegel did not reveal who that executive was, but the former showrunner did clarify that it was not Jeph Loeb, who left Marvel when the studio closed its Marvel Television arm.

The three photos posted by Biegel overnight show Vayntrub (who you might recognize from those AT&T commercials) standing in what appears to be a studio space wearing a Doreen Green outfit with a large squirrel tail prosthetic attached to her backside. Another photo shows Vayntrub with a puppet of Tippy-Toe, who is Squirrel Girls’ real-life squirrel sidekick, on her shoulder.

The third photo was artwork from the Unbeatable Squirrel Girl comic run helmed by Erica Henderson, Rico Renzi, and Ryan North, according to Gizmodo.

Details of this now-cancelled New Warriors comedy TV series first came out way back in 2017, when it was revealed that Freeform had ordered the series from Marvel. It was then revealed in 2018 that the series would focus on Squirrel Girl.

New Warriors was quietly cancelled in 2019 alongside the shuttering of Marvel Television and it was revealed a couple of months later that the show would have featured a live-action M.O.D.O.K.

Wesley LeBlanc is a freelance news writer and guide maker for IGN. You can follow him on Twitter @LeBlancWes.

Malignant is now showing in theaters and streaming on HBO Max.

After five years away from directing in the genre that put him on the map, James Wan returns to horror with Malignant. Wan has long-since established his technical skill as a filmmaker, a key factor of how he’s been able to stretch low budgets into focused, effective scarefests like The Conjuring, Insidious, and Saw. That’s why it’s surprising that, despite Wan working in a format he usually excels in, Malignant is an overstuffed mess more concerned with sound and fury than tension and dread.

Malignant follows Maddie Mitchell (Annabelle Wallis), a mother-to-be who begins to experience in real time the murders of a supernatural shade named Gabriel as he tears his way through enemies who wronged him early in life. Maddie soon realizes that Gabriel is a figure from her own mysterious past and that their connection may be the only thing that can stop his killing spree. Gabriel is a frustratingly inconsistent antagonist, whose physical and supernatural abilities shift from scene to scene, such that you never quite know what he’s capable of. He does, however, cut an imposing figure. The rage-filled murderer is brought to life with a nice blend of different practical effects (with subtle CG touches) which become more prevalent as the movie progresses and result in some great body horror during the climax.

But Malignant is at its best early on, when the unclear nature of Gabriel’s existence and abilities make each attack an opportunity to learn something new about him. An early success in that department comes when Maddie’s abusive husband, Derek (Jake Abel), encounters Gabriel, first noticing signs of his presence through electrical malfunctions throughout the house. Gabriel’s command of (or effect on) electricity is passingly mentioned here and there, but its utility is almost exclusively reserved for turning the lights off when it’s time to get spooky or giving him an excuse to make threats and laugh maniacally through nearby speakers.

After a first act which functions well enough as straight horror, Malignant morphs into more of a supernatural action flick, becoming preoccupied with Gabriel’s brutal acumen for snappin’ arms and doin’ harm. Wan knows how to stage action beats and fight scenes, but here, they tend to feel excessive and out of place. By the end, Malignant feels more like a supervillain origin story, with Gabriel balletically flipping and spin-slashing his way through armed opponent after armed opponent. Lost in all of this chaos is Maddie, whose journey to overcome her trauma reads like an afterthought. Aside from the numerous tragedies in her life presented to generate sympathy for her, there’s very little about the milquetoast Maddie that makes her a hero worth rooting for. That makes the increasing presence of Maddie’s sister, Sydney (Maddie Hasson), an aloof actress, a welcome change of pace as the film goes on, bringing much-needed energy and levity to Malignant’s frequent exposition dumps.

For a movie that’s built around Maddie being psychically linked to the killer, the majority of Malignant’s revelations about Gabriel come from diving through old boxes, research files, and archival tapes which build out the pair’s history in uninteresting fashion. Wan further muddies Malignant’s sense of self by spending an outsized stretch of time with the detectives investigating Gabriel’s crimes. Shaw (George Young) and Moss (Michole Briana White) are a boilerplate, “been there, done that” pair and incidents of them pushing the plot forward with new information feel like wasted opportunities to give Wallis more of an active role.

While Malignant suffers from numerous problems on a script level, the movie works much better on the visual front. Whether it’s a dusty old house, an apartment awash in red neon, or a derelict tunnel beneath Seattle, Wan is an expert of establishing space, orienting us to all the nooks and crannies that they’re going to have to watch out for when the lights go out. For as many supernatural stories he’s set in a big, airy house, Wan still finds new ways to move the camera through halls, up and down stairs, even into appliances in ways that draw us in. Did that long shot of Maddie contemplating her situation need to be shot from the inside of the open dryer she’s unloading? No, but it’s a more interesting shot, and that’s an ethos Wan carries through all of his compositions. Wan even finds novel ways to illustrate Maddie’s experiential view of Gabriel’s killings, with her reality melting around her and reconstituting as the crime scenes.

Malignant’s score, by longtime Wan collaborator Joseph Bishara, doesn’t fare as well, often undercutting dramatic moments with discordant electronic strings. One crucial revelation about Maddie’s past is transitioned out of with a pulsing orchestration of Nada Surf’s “Where Is My Mind?,” which distractingly recurs numerous times throughout the movie.

The Last Duel was reviewed at the Venice Film Festival, where it made its world premiere. It will hit theaters on Oct. 15.

The Last Duel takes us back to a dark chapter in French history as director Ridley Scott strikes an unforgiving tone for this tale of gruesome, bloody combat. Based on true events, the film’s grim story and overwhelming bleak atmosphere sets the stage for an emotional tale of one woman’s fight for justice in the face of honor, duty, and so-called chivalry.

Fourteenth century France can be a hostile place – especially for a woman. This is even more true for a woman accusing a man of rape, as Marguerite de Carrouges (Jodie Comer) soon finds out. Although The Last Duel largely focuses on how this plays out in a medieval court, it opens with the cut and thrust of the titular last duel. It’s certainly serious business, as knights Jean de Carrouges (Matt Damon) and Jacques LeGris (Adam Driver) gear up for a fight to the death. It’s all in the name of honor – Jacques has been accused of raping his former friend’s wife. But hold your horses, as there’s a lot more at stake than meets the eye.

After giving us a brief yet brutal glimpse of the duel that’s about to ensue, takes us back to the very beginning, telling the story in several chapters. Breaking it down by individual testimony, we watch the same story unfold several times. First, we see the truth according to Jean de Carrouges, followed by that of the accused, Jacques LeGris. Finally, the whole truth is revealed by none other than Jacques’ victim, Marguerite de Carrouges. At first glance, it may seem like a labored way to tell this story, but it’s used to sublime effect, highlighting the unreliable nature of each man’s version of events as they bend and twist the truth to suit their own ends. It’s a damning examination of both Jean and Jacques as their individual character flaws are laid bare. The first scene in both of their testimonies underscores this perfectly – an epic, sweeping battle sees both men claiming to have saved the life of the other. Clearly, they both want to paint themselves as the heroes of their own story, and by basking in heroic light, they embody the very meaning of honor and chivalry. At least, that’s how they see themselves.

Soon enough, even bigger cracks begin to form between each man’s version of events. Jean enamours us with a love story: a chance meeting with Marguerite unfolding as the pair relishes in the smaller, more intimate moments with a glance here, a knowing smile there. Meanwhile, Jacques paints a very different picture. His story depicts Jean as a cold, callous man with very little love for his wife. Instead, Jacques says it is he who really loves Marguerite… and he claims that she feels the same.

These discrepancies are played perfectly all round by Comer, Damon, and Driver. The real cleverness in Scott’s approach to this story is in how its relationships change in the most subtle of ways from one version to the next.

The coy flirting between Jean and Marguerite becomes a “strange match” when Jacques recounts his story. And while there’s undeniable chemistry between Comer and Driver – especially in Jacques’ version of events – this soon breaks down into a gruelling, hard-hitting depiction of rape by the time Marguerite gets to tell her story.

Scott doesn’t shy away from the brutal, horrific nature of it, either. Instead, you’re forced to face the reality of Marguerite’s full testimony, watching in horror as it all unfolds. This, too, changes from one account to the next – Marguerite recounts a harrowing moment when she fights back against Jacques’ violent demands. However, Jacques claims that it was all consensual, and merely the “customary protest” of a married woman who has fallen in love with another man.

Comer is the standout star here, vacillating in each account between dutiful wife, adulterous woman, and world-weary rape victim as the scene demands, playing each with staggering realism. But the question remains – will Marguerite de Carrouges find justice?

“There is no right,” remarks Jean’s mother (Harriet Walter). “There is only the power of men.”

That’s essentially what The Last Duel boils down to: a fight between two men to determine the veracity of a woman’s rape claim. It’s a stark and self-aware reminder of the struggle that many women face, even today. As much a cautionary tale as a legendary one, the seriousness of the story is backed by its atmospheric setting. Scott uses a palette of subdued greys and stony castle walls to create a grim, almost claustrophobic feel. You can feel the weight of the film’s world in almost every scene.

That said, a memorable performance by Ben Affleck as the eccentric (and thoroughly debauched) Count Pierre d’Alençon adds a touch of levity when it’s needed most. The foul-mouthed slurs of a nobleman who does as he pleases break up the often grinding tone of the movie, while a glimpse of his bedroom antics reminds us that even the noble house is not without corruption.

The Last Duel is a masterclass in slow-burn storytelling, allowing its complex plot to unfold naturally over three distinct chapters. Re-treading that story from different perspectives allows Ridley Scott to break down the virtues of those involved, calling them into question as they’re put under the spotlight.

Throw in some sweeping, epic battle scenes for good measure and you have an almost scientific examination of the medieval historical epic. But it’s far more than that – it’s also a keen look at a moment in French history which reflects the struggles women face to this day.

Anyone who enjoyed the fifth episode of Marvel’s What If…? will want to check this out. Four new Funko Pops that are based on the episode are now up for preorder at Amazon. You can get What If…? zombie versions of Captain America, Iron Man, Scarlet Witch, and Falcon. They run $10.99 each, with release dates in December or January.

You can also get keychains of the characters for $6.99. And if you’re interested in the living versions of various characters, you can check out the full lineup of What If…? Funkos here.

Marvel’s What If…? Funko Pops

For more upcoming Funkos, check out our rundown of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2: Secret of the Ooze Funko Pops. And for some holiday Funko action, check out the 2021 Funko Pop advent calendars that are available for preorder.

Mad Max: Fury Road prequel, Furiosa, has been delayed to 2024.

Warner Bros. announced the news today, citing that the Anya Taylor-Joy-led movie has been delayed from its original release date of June 23, 2023, to May 24, 2024. The studio did not reveal why this nearly year-long delay occurred, however.

The original June 23, 2023, release date was announced last December and since then, details of the movie’s plot have remained under wraps. However, plenty of details about the movie’s cast and structure have come out over the past few months.

For example, we know that Taylor-Joy will be playing a younger version of Furiosa, a character originally played by Charlize Theron in Fury Road. Director George Miller teased in April of this year that Furiosa’s structure will be very different from the structure of Mad Max: Fury Road, too.

Miller also recently revealed that fellow filmmaker Edgar Wright screened him an early cut of his latest movie, Last Night in Soho, which stars Taylor-Joy, and it was that viewing that showed Miller that Taylor-Joy could play a younger version of Furiosa.

Elsewhere in the world of Mad Max, Fury Road star Tom Hardy recently revealed that he thinks Fury Road “was ultimately Furiosa’s movie.” If you’re a Fury Road mega-fan who’s always wanted a car from the movie, you can purchase one now in a new auction.

Alongside today’s Furiosa delay, Warner Bros. also announced that Salem’s Lot, its Stephen King remake coming from The Conjuring’s James Wan and Gary Dauberman, will be released on September 9, 2022. Wan is set to produce the film alongside Michael Clear and Mark Wolper while Dauberman will write and direct it.

Alfred Woodard, Lewis Pullman, Makenzie Leigh, Bill Camp, Spencer Treat Clark, and William Sadler were listed as part of the Salem’s Lot cast.

Wesley LeBlanc is a freelance news writer and guide maker for IGN. You can follow him on Twitter @LeBlancWes.

With the ruling of the Epic v. Apple trial dropping today, we got answers to some of the most pressing legal questions brought up during the proceedings. Sadly, the answer to the question, “What is a video game?” was not among them.

The fact that this was a question at all during the court proceedings may sound absurd if you’re not familiar with how legal arguments work, but it turns out, agreeing on definitions of important and often common terms is necessary to make a case in court.

In Epic v. Apple, the question of “what is a video game?” came up during the first few days of court proceedings, but as noted in the court’s final ruling, “no one agrees and neither side introduced evidence of any commonly accepted industry definition.”

Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney tried to offer his own definition, but it involved trying to define Fortnite’s creative mode as…not a video game at all:

“I think game involves some sort of win or loss or a score progression, on whether it is an individual or social group of competitors,” he said. “With a game you’re trying to build up to some outcome that you achieve, as opposed to an open-ended experience like building a Fortnite Creative island or writing a Microsoft Word document. There is no score keeping mechanic and you are never done or you never win.”

Meanwhile, Apple’s head of app review Trystan Kosmynka offered that games are “incredibly dynamic,” “have a beginning, [and] an end,” and have “challenges.”

The court was unimpressed. In the final ruling, the judge acknowledged that video games did appear to “require some level of interactivity or involvement between the player and the medium” and “are also generally graphically rendered or animated, as opposed to being recorded live or via motion capture as in film and television” (though that second part might have been debunked had anyone introduced Telling Lies into evidence).

In the end, though, the judge threw up her hands on this particular question, saying the definitions she was given did not capture “the diversity of gaming that appears to exist in the gaming industry today.” She also pointed out that Sweeney appeared to be trying to define Fortnite as something other than a game — a metaverse, in fact. But she wasn’t impressed by that either.

“The Court need not reach a conclusive definition of a video game or game because by all accounts, Fortnite itself is both externally and internally considered a video game,” the ruling reads. “Epic Games markets Fortnite to the public as a video game, and further promotes events within Fortnite at video game related events. Although Fortnite contains creative and social content beyond that of its competitive shooting game modes, there is no evidence or opinion in the record that a video game like Fortnite is considered by its parts (i.e., the modes within the game) instead of in its totality.

“By both Mr. Sweeney and Mr. Weissinger’s own descriptions, the metaverse, as an actual product, is very new and remains in its infancy. At this time, the general market does not appear to recognize the metaverse and its corresponding game modes in Fortnite as anything separate and apart from the video game market. The Court need not further define the outer boundaries of the definition of video games for purposes of this dispute.”

While we were left without a legal definition of a video game from Epic v. Apple. we did get a definition of sorts for something a bit more unusual: Fortnite’s Peely.

Peely, who was brought up in court in his suited Agent Peely garb as a visual aid for what Fortnite players could do in Creative mode, briefly diverted proceedings when Apple’s attorney quipped that they thought it was “better to go with the suit than the naked banana, since we are in federal court this morning.”

This was brought back up later in the trial when Epic’s attorney countered this joke by asking Epic’s VP of marketing Matthew Weissinger if there was anything inappropriate about Peely without the suit.

“It’s just a banana man,” Weissinger replied.

During its final ruling, the court stated that it agreed with this characterization of Peely and that it found the suit Agent Peely wore “not necessary but informative.”

So much for video games, but at least Peely has a legal definition. (He also was exploded into banana goo by Ryu back in March in the Fortnite Chapter 2 Season 6 cinematic trailer, but he appears to be fine now.)

The court’s ruling today on Epic v. Apple will likely spark further challenges in court, especially with challenges on so many fronts already. There’s proposed legislation that would solidify the ability for developers to use their own payment systems on top of the ruling, as well as continued pushback on Apple from other developers upset at its walled garden policies.

Rebekah Valentine is a news reporter for IGN. You can find her on Twitter @duckvalentine.

Building on the legacy of 2008’s Pandemic board game, Pandemic: Hot Zone Europe features the same stress-inducing cooperative gameplay of its larger counterpart, albeit in a smaller, more portable option. With gameplay focusing solely on Europe as a whole, you’re no longer trotting the globe to discover a cure, but the overall experience remains largely the same.

While this may appear to be Pandemic “Lite” on the surface, it still features all the same components: multiple cures to discover, unique character roles, and a variety of different obstacles to interfere with your team’s progress. The streamlined gameplay is a double-edged sword, however. While it allows for quicker sessions that can be completed in about 30 minutes, it’s far less forgiving and requires players to execute near-optimal decisions during each turn to avoid an inevitable defeat.

What’s in the Box

Just like the game itself, Pandemic: Hot Zone Europe has distilled the packaging down to just the essentials. At roughly the size of a book, this box is perfect for travel, easily fitting into a bag or backpack. Inside, you’ll find the folded game board which features a map of Europe and various locations connected by a series of lines. Everything on the game board is color-coded and clearly labeled, making it easy to understand at a glance.

Below the board, you’ll find two compartments containing various playing cards, small bags of colored cubes, four player tokens, and more. The cards themselves are very small, roughly the same size as a Tic Tac container, further adding to the portable nature. Three small press-seal bags are included to store the small pieces in between game sessions, allowing you to keep everything nice and tidy.

Rules and How to Play

The core gameplay of Pandemic: Hot Zone Legacy revolves around players working together to discover three cures, indicated by the trio of colored cubes that will inevitably spread across the game board. Games can be played with two to four players, with each taking on a specific role as depicted by their character card.

Each role offers a unique perk that allows you to move around the game board more efficiently, more easily discover a cure, or keep diseases from spreading as quickly. Each role provides a unique strategy that synergizes with the team and makes each game session feel just different enough to not become repetitive.

Every turn, players will take four actions which involve moving around the game board in some way, treating a disease in a specific city, sharing cards with other players, or discovering a cure. At first, the number of options can be a bit overwhelming, but after a few turns it becomes second nature. Thankfully, each player can keep a reference card in front of them outlining every action they can take on a given turn, and the player turn steps are printed on the game board, as well.

Each player has a hand of cards, which are played face-up since everybody is working together. Among these cards are colored city cards that correspond with locations on the board and event cards which provide helpful one-time abilities for the team that can be played at any time. Players will work together to accumulate four city cards of the same color, whether by drawing them or trading between one another. Once a player has collected four city cards of the same color, they can discover a cure for one of the diseases. The overall win condition is to discover a cure for all three diseases.

While this may sound like a walk in the park, the cards are quite literally stacked against you as there are a number of conditions that — when met — result in an instant loss. This ranges from diseases spreading too rapidly, running out of disease cubes to infect new cities, or simply being unable to draw a card on your turn. Thus, each player’s turn is critical, as you’re all on the clock the moment the game begins. This creates a true sense of urgency and pairs perfectly with the theme of Pandemic — trying to save Europe from catastrophe before it’s too late.

There are a lot of moving pieces in Pandemic (no pun intended) and the cooperation between players is absolutely essential for victory. Each turn feels like a small puzzle that must be solved in the most efficient manner, and there’s no better feeling than seeing multiple turns of planning come to fruition. This is where Pandemic: Hot Zone Europe shines best — in the moment-to-moment decision-making between teammates.

Mutation Cards are unique to Pandemic: Hot Zone Europe and can be added to the draw pile during setup. When drawn, these Mutation Cards modify one of the existing diseases on the board and present new scenarios for teams looking for additional challenges or for veterans of the Pandemic series. This is a great option to artificially increase the difficulty, but in my experience, it makes winning near-impossible when playing with the maximum amount of Mutations.

Aside from the standard gameplay, there are additional rules and variations you can download from Z-Man Games’ website for free, including a solo game mode, unique challenges, and even the special Hemisphere Rules, which allows you to play in tandem with Pandemic: Hot Zone North America.

Games can be finished in 30 minutes or less, making this a great option for just about any game night with friends or family. However, the streamlined nature of Hot Zone Europe allows for little-to-no room for error during player turns, resulting in far more games ending in a loss than the original Pandemic. Many games came down to the final turn, which is equal parts exciting and stressful. While this is great for those looking for a challenge, it may be a bit discouraging for newcomers to the series.

Where to Buy

Pandemic: Hot Zone Europe is available to purchase from a variety of different retailers for an MSRP of $19.99.

• Get it at Amazon
• Get it at Asmodee