"Pointless DLC"
This DLC was pretty much a complete joke to get through. The combat scenarios are very easy but repetitive, there is pretty much no plot/interesting writing to keep things interesting, and the rewards are pretty weak as well for the amount of time you have to sink into it. None of the mission designs are solid, most are just variations of generic multiplayer/challenge modes without the great gameplay additions to make them fun. A waste of time, and likely a blessing this code was lost for the remaster. Worst DLC I've ever played...
Final Verdict: 1/10 (Terrible)
This DLC was pretty much a complete joke to get through. The combat scenarios are very easy but repetitive, there is pretty much no plot/interesting writing to keep things interesting, and the rewards are pretty weak as well for the amount of time you have to sink into it. None of the mission designs are solid, most are just variations of generic multiplayer/challenge modes without the great gameplay additions to make them fun. A waste of time, and likely a blessing this code was lost for the remaster. Worst DLC I've ever played...
Final Verdict: 1/10 (Terrible)
"More Of The Base Game"
This is a pretty run of the mill expansion pack. Some minor updates to the mechanics like adding a way to sprint and a few new weapons, but otherwise it plays the same. The story is still all over the place, and the best one is the relatively short yet diverse British campaign wince it had some stealth, action, and segments like flying in the bomber (ironically the worst one in the main game). The worst campaign was the Russian one since there were multiple segments with endless enemies assuming you don't push forward, and I felt so much frustration from this after a while. Played through it but didn't think too highly of it, but it's competent enough. Still, it gets lost in the bunches of other average games for me.
Final Verdict: 5/10 (Average)
This is a pretty run of the mill expansion pack. Some minor updates to the mechanics like adding a way to sprint and a few new weapons, but otherwise it plays the same. The story is still all over the place, and the best one is the relatively short yet diverse British campaign wince it had some stealth, action, and segments like flying in the bomber (ironically the worst one in the main game). The worst campaign was the Russian one since there were multiple segments with endless enemies assuming you don't push forward, and I felt so much frustration from this after a while. Played through it but didn't think too highly of it, but it's competent enough. Still, it gets lost in the bunches of other average games for me.
Final Verdict: 5/10 (Average)
"A Poor Transition To Console"
What seemed be a port of the first game in the series to consoles ended up being something that was slightly original, at least in the case of it not being a port at all. "Finest Hour" contains a standalone campaign built specifically for consoles, which is no easy feat for a studio that had barely gotten its series started. However, the awful controls, lack of good shooting feedback, empty story, and all too familiar level design of the first game (yet worse) resulted in a pretty forgettable first entry for "Call of Duty" on home consoles.
The controls in this game were really bad. Aiming is really stiff yet doused in stick acceleration, meaning it feels much harder to fight enemies than it should've been. Hitboxes being as poor as they were didn't help either, so you would constantly miss shots that would have been a breeze on PC (aim assist was useless here as well).
Levels were sort of similar to the first game, though there are plenty of original missions here. Unfortunately, these ones aren't really exciting and mostly involve things like wave defense or tank segments (at least during the first third of the game). There is a new setting in North Africa which at first sounded appealing, but the actual gameplay is so repetitive that I figured the change of scenery wouldn't matter.
There are characters introduced in the story that you do take control of, but they also weren't notable. Most had some slightly generic backstory with an okay voice actor, but they lacked personality throughout each of their two missions. The plot is, well, WWII again, but Exact Ent. didn't really seem interested in forming any stories with a particular character or squad like future games in the series would go on to do.
This is just a really bland FPS that controls like crud on console. The only shooter I can sort of think about that had this issue was "Brothers in Arms: Road to Hill 30", though in "that" game you couldn't even hit enemies with your gun most of the time. It's better than that here, though not by a huge margin. This one isn't really worth the time playing through since it mostly boils down the core COD mechanics while also failing to create a fun game out of the remains.
Final Verdict: 3/10 (Poor)
What seemed be a port of the first game in the series to consoles ended up being something that was slightly original, at least in the case of it not being a port at all. "Finest Hour" contains a standalone campaign built specifically for consoles, which is no easy feat for a studio that had barely gotten its series started. However, the awful controls, lack of good shooting feedback, empty story, and all too familiar level design of the first game (yet worse) resulted in a pretty forgettable first entry for "Call of Duty" on home consoles.
The controls in this game were really bad. Aiming is really stiff yet doused in stick acceleration, meaning it feels much harder to fight enemies than it should've been. Hitboxes being as poor as they were didn't help either, so you would constantly miss shots that would have been a breeze on PC (aim assist was useless here as well).
Levels were sort of similar to the first game, though there are plenty of original missions here. Unfortunately, these ones aren't really exciting and mostly involve things like wave defense or tank segments (at least during the first third of the game). There is a new setting in North Africa which at first sounded appealing, but the actual gameplay is so repetitive that I figured the change of scenery wouldn't matter.
There are characters introduced in the story that you do take control of, but they also weren't notable. Most had some slightly generic backstory with an okay voice actor, but they lacked personality throughout each of their two missions. The plot is, well, WWII again, but Exact Ent. didn't really seem interested in forming any stories with a particular character or squad like future games in the series would go on to do.
This is just a really bland FPS that controls like crud on console. The only shooter I can sort of think about that had this issue was "Brothers in Arms: Road to Hill 30", though in "that" game you couldn't even hit enemies with your gun most of the time. It's better than that here, though not by a huge margin. This one isn't really worth the time playing through since it mostly boils down the core COD mechanics while also failing to create a fun game out of the remains.
Final Verdict: 3/10 (Poor)
2005
"Slowly Refining Itself"
A sequel was "quickly" released for the first "Call of Duty" (two years seems slow now for a COD cycle), and it looked to push the series ever further with its technical performance and gameplay addiction. The healing system was streamlined to fit the new level designs, shooting was improved to feel crisper, and the visuals were sharpened ever further to deliver one of the better military shooters at the time of release. While the gameplay didn't exactly see any large changes or tweaks, level design saw a more open-ended approach come to fruition for better or worse. "Call of Duty 2" is a good example of a solid sequel that doesn't change the formula much, though in my opinion this improve help my opinion of the series as much as I had hoped.
The biggest change is the switch to regenerative health, which in my opinion feels much more natural for the series. On easier difficulties I can see this being far too unrealistic, but I play most of the titles on "Hardened" and this felt just right. It wasn't as brutally difficult as the first game and its expansion, so engaging in firefights felt more natural and I relied on cheap tactics far less. The level design has also been opened up involve less cover and more dynamic set pieces, though this still led to frustration on higher difficulties since you still die in a few bullets.
Enemies are still far too accurate which definitely hurt my experience. You would barely peek around a corner and enemies would beam you right in the face, and this led to more situations where I cowered in cover waiting for a chance to peek out. Funny enough, this helped with immersion for a bit, but it started to get a bit old after a while.
Guns are unfortunately still a bit underwhelming. I didn't really find them to feel that good to use, and you do still have a pretty limited arsenal at this point in the series. They also don't feel super powerful at higher difficulties, and most enemies will die in two shots to the chest which is less than ideal during larger enemy attacks.
I do still hate the fact that there are so many defense sections in this series so far, and they tend to be filled with far too many enemies with not enough cover. The defense of "Hill 400" was really tedious, though thankfully not on the scale of "Pavlov's House" in the original game. The regenerating health does help a ton, and this title surely made improvements on the poorer parts of the original.
However, there is still something lacking for me with this game. The story is a tad bit less linear, at least with the ability to choose which campaign you want to play in. I still didn't care about most of the characters, and I pretty much felt like generic Russian/British/American soldier-boy most of the time. This would be improved starting with "Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare", but at this point in the series the writing is still pretty much nonexistent.
The graphics are noticeably improved, and the game just feels even smoother to play. Colors pop a bit more, though there is still an overreliance on the dull grays and browns of wartime Russia and France. The final mission definitely made things more interesting visually. I also liked the smoke effects - they last a lot longer and look far more natural, even if the game is dated by nearly two decades of superior game visuals and tech in general. Audio is still nice and crisp, a huge boon for immersion and game feel.
Still no comments on multiplayer since the servers are mostly dead, but I don't think playing it currently would change my mind much. It seems very simple with some solid maps, but also not too interesting what with the changes with the series itself and in the shooter genre as a whole.
This is a solid game, but not really one I see myself playing again. It feels like a tweaked version of "Call of Duty", which is great but a bit too simple. It needs something else - more bite, more edge, and more story. More guns would help too! It's worth a look if you're interested in the series, since I think the presentation is just fine and sort of captures the formula. However, it feels like one of those generic WWII games the industry has memed now, which is sad considering it was one of the better ones at the time.
Final Verdict: 5/10 (Average)
A sequel was "quickly" released for the first "Call of Duty" (two years seems slow now for a COD cycle), and it looked to push the series ever further with its technical performance and gameplay addiction. The healing system was streamlined to fit the new level designs, shooting was improved to feel crisper, and the visuals were sharpened ever further to deliver one of the better military shooters at the time of release. While the gameplay didn't exactly see any large changes or tweaks, level design saw a more open-ended approach come to fruition for better or worse. "Call of Duty 2" is a good example of a solid sequel that doesn't change the formula much, though in my opinion this improve help my opinion of the series as much as I had hoped.
The biggest change is the switch to regenerative health, which in my opinion feels much more natural for the series. On easier difficulties I can see this being far too unrealistic, but I play most of the titles on "Hardened" and this felt just right. It wasn't as brutally difficult as the first game and its expansion, so engaging in firefights felt more natural and I relied on cheap tactics far less. The level design has also been opened up involve less cover and more dynamic set pieces, though this still led to frustration on higher difficulties since you still die in a few bullets.
Enemies are still far too accurate which definitely hurt my experience. You would barely peek around a corner and enemies would beam you right in the face, and this led to more situations where I cowered in cover waiting for a chance to peek out. Funny enough, this helped with immersion for a bit, but it started to get a bit old after a while.
Guns are unfortunately still a bit underwhelming. I didn't really find them to feel that good to use, and you do still have a pretty limited arsenal at this point in the series. They also don't feel super powerful at higher difficulties, and most enemies will die in two shots to the chest which is less than ideal during larger enemy attacks.
I do still hate the fact that there are so many defense sections in this series so far, and they tend to be filled with far too many enemies with not enough cover. The defense of "Hill 400" was really tedious, though thankfully not on the scale of "Pavlov's House" in the original game. The regenerating health does help a ton, and this title surely made improvements on the poorer parts of the original.
However, there is still something lacking for me with this game. The story is a tad bit less linear, at least with the ability to choose which campaign you want to play in. I still didn't care about most of the characters, and I pretty much felt like generic Russian/British/American soldier-boy most of the time. This would be improved starting with "Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare", but at this point in the series the writing is still pretty much nonexistent.
The graphics are noticeably improved, and the game just feels even smoother to play. Colors pop a bit more, though there is still an overreliance on the dull grays and browns of wartime Russia and France. The final mission definitely made things more interesting visually. I also liked the smoke effects - they last a lot longer and look far more natural, even if the game is dated by nearly two decades of superior game visuals and tech in general. Audio is still nice and crisp, a huge boon for immersion and game feel.
Still no comments on multiplayer since the servers are mostly dead, but I don't think playing it currently would change my mind much. It seems very simple with some solid maps, but also not too interesting what with the changes with the series itself and in the shooter genre as a whole.
This is a solid game, but not really one I see myself playing again. It feels like a tweaked version of "Call of Duty", which is great but a bit too simple. It needs something else - more bite, more edge, and more story. More guns would help too! It's worth a look if you're interested in the series, since I think the presentation is just fine and sort of captures the formula. However, it feels like one of those generic WWII games the industry has memed now, which is sad considering it was one of the better ones at the time.
Final Verdict: 5/10 (Average)
2014
"Back In Black...And Blue"
After the 2009 release of the riveting yet flawed "Bayonetta", PlatinumGames had a lot of turmoil with getting a sequel put together. Despite the success of what should have been a niche title, the studio had trouble figuring out a vision and advertising that vision to a publisher. Thankfully, Nintendo took a chance with PlatinumGames, one that they would not forget. PlatinumGames' "Bayonetta 2" shows off the style and substance of their premier action series while also proving that it has a rightful place near the top of the action genre.
The explosive intro to this game is easily one of the best I have ever seen, not just in the action genre but in the medium as a whole. Everything about the characters, universe, and gameplay is perfectly captured in an exhilarating fight on top of a friggin' fighter jet flying through Ney York City. Combat is shown to be smoother yet more forgiving (something I found too frustrating in the first title), the spectacle is even more over-the-top, and the humor within the somewhat stupid plot finds a way to distract you enough so that you're just having a ton of fun.
And this is what "Bayonetta 2" captures so well - the feeling of "fun". Things don't really have to make much sense; they just have to make you feel good. The story is an example of this done fairly well - the character motives are unclear, the goal is repetitive and simple, but their personalities and crazy abilities make it all worth going through. This is transferred well into the gameplay side of things since you're able to do the same awesome moves you see in cutscenes in REAL TIME. This wasn't lost much in "Bayonetta", though the removal of those awful QTE instant-death segments certainly helped Bayonetta feel more powerful.
The soundtrack is also even catchier this time around, which is always welcome to me. The "Fly Me To The Moon" theme in the first game certainly felt stylish, but I got just a bit tired of it by the end. "Tomorrow Is Mine" does an even better job of setting the mood and brings enough energy to make it to the end credits. Supporting tracks inside of the shop, menus, or cutscenes also do well at playing up certain emotions. The visuals are also much sharper and has a wider color palette, which helped with the game feeling a bit less dull as the chapters progressed.
The addition of the "Umbran Climax" helps with combat flexibility and leads to moments in combat where you debate whether mass crowd damage or an insta-kill on a target is more necessary. It keeps things dynamic, fun, and fresh throughout the campaign. I also like that when you are hit you don't lose as much magic as in the first title, allowing you to keep the action exciting and relentless. Weapon diversity is even stronger this time around as well, and I felt that I wanted to play around with more options for different situations compared with keeping things simple in the first game.
The story is still a weak aspect once again, in fact even weaker than before. The plot is revolved around time travel and is not a particularly good example of it being used well. However, the characters make up for this by being unique, stylish, and having some additional depth being added to their backstories/vibes.
This game was pretty much a blast from start to finish, and definitely makes me want to replay the games to get better and unlock more items. There are less underbaked/bad ideas, and even the weaker sections are still full of sick spectacle. The story could have been better, but at least the characters were expanded upon and served their quirky roles well. A great sequel for sure, and I'm looking forward to inevitably playing the third entry.
Final Verdict: 8/10 (Great)
After the 2009 release of the riveting yet flawed "Bayonetta", PlatinumGames had a lot of turmoil with getting a sequel put together. Despite the success of what should have been a niche title, the studio had trouble figuring out a vision and advertising that vision to a publisher. Thankfully, Nintendo took a chance with PlatinumGames, one that they would not forget. PlatinumGames' "Bayonetta 2" shows off the style and substance of their premier action series while also proving that it has a rightful place near the top of the action genre.
The explosive intro to this game is easily one of the best I have ever seen, not just in the action genre but in the medium as a whole. Everything about the characters, universe, and gameplay is perfectly captured in an exhilarating fight on top of a friggin' fighter jet flying through Ney York City. Combat is shown to be smoother yet more forgiving (something I found too frustrating in the first title), the spectacle is even more over-the-top, and the humor within the somewhat stupid plot finds a way to distract you enough so that you're just having a ton of fun.
And this is what "Bayonetta 2" captures so well - the feeling of "fun". Things don't really have to make much sense; they just have to make you feel good. The story is an example of this done fairly well - the character motives are unclear, the goal is repetitive and simple, but their personalities and crazy abilities make it all worth going through. This is transferred well into the gameplay side of things since you're able to do the same awesome moves you see in cutscenes in REAL TIME. This wasn't lost much in "Bayonetta", though the removal of those awful QTE instant-death segments certainly helped Bayonetta feel more powerful.
The soundtrack is also even catchier this time around, which is always welcome to me. The "Fly Me To The Moon" theme in the first game certainly felt stylish, but I got just a bit tired of it by the end. "Tomorrow Is Mine" does an even better job of setting the mood and brings enough energy to make it to the end credits. Supporting tracks inside of the shop, menus, or cutscenes also do well at playing up certain emotions. The visuals are also much sharper and has a wider color palette, which helped with the game feeling a bit less dull as the chapters progressed.
The addition of the "Umbran Climax" helps with combat flexibility and leads to moments in combat where you debate whether mass crowd damage or an insta-kill on a target is more necessary. It keeps things dynamic, fun, and fresh throughout the campaign. I also like that when you are hit you don't lose as much magic as in the first title, allowing you to keep the action exciting and relentless. Weapon diversity is even stronger this time around as well, and I felt that I wanted to play around with more options for different situations compared with keeping things simple in the first game.
The story is still a weak aspect once again, in fact even weaker than before. The plot is revolved around time travel and is not a particularly good example of it being used well. However, the characters make up for this by being unique, stylish, and having some additional depth being added to their backstories/vibes.
This game was pretty much a blast from start to finish, and definitely makes me want to replay the games to get better and unlock more items. There are less underbaked/bad ideas, and even the weaker sections are still full of sick spectacle. The story could have been better, but at least the characters were expanded upon and served their quirky roles well. A great sequel for sure, and I'm looking forward to inevitably playing the third entry.
Final Verdict: 8/10 (Great)
"Welcome to PS3, But Farewell To This Series' Charm"
After taking an extra year to develop "Ratchet & Clank's" next-gen showcase, "Tools of Destruction" feels like a step back in tone for the franchise. Gone are the snarky jabs at capitalistic deep-space and gone is the goofy charm of all of its characters. Now R&C is a "mature" franchise going for a "deeper" story, and I think this direction hampered the development of this game big time.
This game's story explores Ratchet's existence as a Lombax, and goes into some depth about the species' disappearance from the galactic community. This already makes no sense because there was another Lombax in "Going Commando", so this change of direction bothered me throughout my playthrough. The story pretty much has R&C battle a new villain, Percival Tachyon, who is the last of a species called the Cragmites that the Lombax eradicated from the galaxy following some sort of war. It's "fine", but there is never enough depth or intrigue throughout the story that made me care. I much preferred the exploration aspects and the goofy side characters, which have pretty much been removed from this entry.
There are some new characters to meet, but none of them are that interesting. There's a smuggler and parrot duo...called smuggler and parrot, who pretty much act as a set of NPCs who you give materials to in exchange for bolts or a special weapon. There are the old-timer robots Cronk and Zephyr, who are literally just old robots that make lame jokes and act old. There's Captain Quark, who is pretty much flanderized beyond belief at this point by just being a whiny, unfunny baby and an incompetent "hero". And finally, there's Talwyn Apogee, the bland team member that help R&C uncover the lost Lombax secrets that her father helped uncover in the past. All of these characters are lame to see and doesn't really add to the series' legendary knack for fun cutscenes.
The gameplay is thankfully still pretty solid, and there's a good mix of combat and exploration that I believe captures a bit more of the first games' energy, at least for the first half of the game. Weapons do tons of damage, and the difficulty is pretty low. I do think the arsenal is a bit disappointing at times, especially with the prevalence of the Sixaxis controls for some of them.
The game has some weird obsession with displaying the PS3's Sixaxis controller, seemingly using any and every opportunity to present a mechanic involving motion controls. It doesn't really work outside of the solid hacking minigame, and most of the time it feels unintuitive and gimmicky. It's not so bad where it derails the experience, but I think most of it should have been removed.
The visuals are pretty good for early PS3 era, but there are some slight technical issues. Some checkpoints triggered weirdly, and I encountered a glitch or two that required a death to fix character pathing. I also think the game's style is a bit bland, since it tries its very best to be something akin to a Pixar movie while lacking any real flair or charm to make it memorable.
This was a solid R&C game, but I kind of get the sense that this is where the series lost its original identity. It still plays great and looks solid, but it's missing a lot of the personality that made the original trilogy so great. There's a nice balance of exploration and combat, but the story just didn't capture me at all. The characters are weak and feel generic. It's a fine entry to the series, but a let down at the same time.
Final Verdict: 7/10 (Good)
After taking an extra year to develop "Ratchet & Clank's" next-gen showcase, "Tools of Destruction" feels like a step back in tone for the franchise. Gone are the snarky jabs at capitalistic deep-space and gone is the goofy charm of all of its characters. Now R&C is a "mature" franchise going for a "deeper" story, and I think this direction hampered the development of this game big time.
This game's story explores Ratchet's existence as a Lombax, and goes into some depth about the species' disappearance from the galactic community. This already makes no sense because there was another Lombax in "Going Commando", so this change of direction bothered me throughout my playthrough. The story pretty much has R&C battle a new villain, Percival Tachyon, who is the last of a species called the Cragmites that the Lombax eradicated from the galaxy following some sort of war. It's "fine", but there is never enough depth or intrigue throughout the story that made me care. I much preferred the exploration aspects and the goofy side characters, which have pretty much been removed from this entry.
There are some new characters to meet, but none of them are that interesting. There's a smuggler and parrot duo...called smuggler and parrot, who pretty much act as a set of NPCs who you give materials to in exchange for bolts or a special weapon. There are the old-timer robots Cronk and Zephyr, who are literally just old robots that make lame jokes and act old. There's Captain Quark, who is pretty much flanderized beyond belief at this point by just being a whiny, unfunny baby and an incompetent "hero". And finally, there's Talwyn Apogee, the bland team member that help R&C uncover the lost Lombax secrets that her father helped uncover in the past. All of these characters are lame to see and doesn't really add to the series' legendary knack for fun cutscenes.
The gameplay is thankfully still pretty solid, and there's a good mix of combat and exploration that I believe captures a bit more of the first games' energy, at least for the first half of the game. Weapons do tons of damage, and the difficulty is pretty low. I do think the arsenal is a bit disappointing at times, especially with the prevalence of the Sixaxis controls for some of them.
The game has some weird obsession with displaying the PS3's Sixaxis controller, seemingly using any and every opportunity to present a mechanic involving motion controls. It doesn't really work outside of the solid hacking minigame, and most of the time it feels unintuitive and gimmicky. It's not so bad where it derails the experience, but I think most of it should have been removed.
The visuals are pretty good for early PS3 era, but there are some slight technical issues. Some checkpoints triggered weirdly, and I encountered a glitch or two that required a death to fix character pathing. I also think the game's style is a bit bland, since it tries its very best to be something akin to a Pixar movie while lacking any real flair or charm to make it memorable.
This was a solid R&C game, but I kind of get the sense that this is where the series lost its original identity. It still plays great and looks solid, but it's missing a lot of the personality that made the original trilogy so great. There's a nice balance of exploration and combat, but the story just didn't capture me at all. The characters are weak and feel generic. It's a fine entry to the series, but a let down at the same time.
Final Verdict: 7/10 (Good)
"I Am Rubber, You Are Glue..."
"Monkey Island" is a standout series for its whimsical humor, and "The Secret of Monkey Island" marks the series' first steps at sailing the seas of early 90's videogame stardom. After finally getting my hands on this classic point-n-click, I have to say that it's still a relatively funny experience. The puzzles can be a bit annoying, the story a bit slow paced, and the characters a bit dull at times, but the charm and adventure that brims throughout was a memorable treat.
The graphics are of course going to be aged, but damn do they charm. I love the little smiley faces and stupid details that made me grin, and the characters are so simple-looking when they're not in your face with detail. This paired alongside the soundtrack is nice, but there is far too much ambient sound without the help of any tracks, which can make the game feel slow at times.
The humor is very deadpan, especially with the lack of VA in the original. It fits pretty well, and most jokes toe the line between clever and stupid (in a good way). The puzzles play into the humor very well, but I have to say that there were some frustrating moments where I just needed a guide to continue. Too much back-and-forth on the world map, and a far too extensive fighting quest made the game crawl to a halt.
The writing is fairly good, if a bit outlandish because of the comedic elements. It's all in good fun though, and the characters you meet are snarky, rude, and cliche. Yet they made me chuckle here and there! I do wish more characters were fleshed out besides Guybrush, but I'm sure sequels will do a better job at this.
Again, this is a fairly solid game that just struggles with solid puzzles and pacing a lot of the time. The presentation and humor make it a fun experience, but it felt lacking. I hope the future entries manage to shore up the weaknesses, and then we'd be talking about a truly great game.
Final Verdict: 7/10 (Good)
"Monkey Island" is a standout series for its whimsical humor, and "The Secret of Monkey Island" marks the series' first steps at sailing the seas of early 90's videogame stardom. After finally getting my hands on this classic point-n-click, I have to say that it's still a relatively funny experience. The puzzles can be a bit annoying, the story a bit slow paced, and the characters a bit dull at times, but the charm and adventure that brims throughout was a memorable treat.
The graphics are of course going to be aged, but damn do they charm. I love the little smiley faces and stupid details that made me grin, and the characters are so simple-looking when they're not in your face with detail. This paired alongside the soundtrack is nice, but there is far too much ambient sound without the help of any tracks, which can make the game feel slow at times.
The humor is very deadpan, especially with the lack of VA in the original. It fits pretty well, and most jokes toe the line between clever and stupid (in a good way). The puzzles play into the humor very well, but I have to say that there were some frustrating moments where I just needed a guide to continue. Too much back-and-forth on the world map, and a far too extensive fighting quest made the game crawl to a halt.
The writing is fairly good, if a bit outlandish because of the comedic elements. It's all in good fun though, and the characters you meet are snarky, rude, and cliche. Yet they made me chuckle here and there! I do wish more characters were fleshed out besides Guybrush, but I'm sure sequels will do a better job at this.
Again, this is a fairly solid game that just struggles with solid puzzles and pacing a lot of the time. The presentation and humor make it a fun experience, but it felt lacking. I hope the future entries manage to shore up the weaknesses, and then we'd be talking about a truly great game.
Final Verdict: 7/10 (Good)
"So Close, But Still So Far"
This is one of those games where I feel sort of upset by the fact that I chose to replay it. About four years ago I completed my first playthrough, and while it was a flawed experience, I still found a massive amount of enjoyment in its strange fantasy world, dorky characters, and complex narrative. However, having recently abandoned this game, I see it as one of the most uneven, unpolished gaming experiences that I have ever experienced. Strangely enough, both of these things are true about this first entry in "The Witcher" trilogy...
Starting off with the presentation, it's definitely a bit rough on the eyes at first glance. Textures aren't the sharpest, colors aren't super bright, and character models are gangly and repetitious. The voice acting is definitely intriguing, with some truly great emotional lines in one scene while an NPC can also blare "my balls itch" in the background like it was the first and only take ever recorded. It's a strange balance that gives the game world a lot of charm (even some realism), but it doesn't really scream quality.
The music is absolutely weird and wonderful. You have these genuinely masterful background tracks that capture the mystery of adventure - the complicated, rugged fantasy of the Witcher world. And then you have someone's attempt at thrash metal mixed with folk rock playing with the most random combat encounters? It's utter madness, but again adds charm.
The story is very interesting and has a strong plot, though the layout of this is very unpolished and wacky. You'll have some interesting plotlines which interweave within and around different chapters, but then you'll get sidetracked for a few real-life hours doing some unrelated tasks before continuing what you were doing. There's LOADS of potential for character moments, and even random NPC interactions give you the chance for a belly laugh based off of how random they can feel. It's chaotic but feels somewhat cultural, and really captures some manic energy of Polish humor that I, a random American who just happens to love this universe, can't really describe. It just works, and it keeps you interested until the end.
So, with all of these flawed yet hilarious, charming, and interesting aspects, why didn't I finish this game? Simply put, this likely has some of the worst combat in any game ever made.
Now the structure of combat makes some sense - timing based attacks, agility, potion creation, and proper use of signs. However, it's all sorts of f!cked up. Almost every encounter follows one of two distinct prep phases: Either find the perfect mix of potions to find a way to kill your foe, or literally do nothing and steamroll them. The problem here lies in the fact that the game has an awful difficulty curve, so sometimes prepping potions does nothing while randomly fighting and getting lucky does.
Potion prep takes an awkward amount of time, not so much because of the actual time it takes to make them, but with when you can make them. You must sit at a fireplace, initiate a shot "loading screen", go to the potions tab, click on the one you want to make, craft it, and then repeat until finished. This would be fine if it happened every so often, but the way this game works is that to be successful (especially on a higher difficulty level), you must do this before EVERY encounter if you want to be safe. Even then, you might still lose because some enemies are overpowered.
This is a damn shame considering that combat itself is horribly janky. There is poor feedback for attacks, as animations look stiff and repetitive while the audio commits all sorts of f!uckery with your ear canals. It's DATED, and makes this game seem even older than a 2007 title. This got so bad by the end of the game that I outright got stuck with a certain boss almost 95% of the way through the game.
This could have been remedied by a competent upgrade system, but "The Witcher" is a very limiting RPG combat-wise. You pretty much MUST pick Igni skills if you want to not cringe with combat for 50-ish hours, otherwise have fun running around using crap like "heliotrop". Equipment is limited so there's little chance to pimp your version of Geralt out, so forget that route. Don't bother trying to spec certain sword combat types, since you're bound to have a headache with one mob or another anyways since leveling feels too slow and too limiting.
This is a damn shame because this game's writing allows for some truly tough choices, ones that don't necessarily impact your stats, but ones that impact the world. Friendships can end or face extenuating circumstances, enemies can either be slain or spared, and Geralt can be molded in many different ways. Yet it stays fairly faithful to the books in the fact that Geralt is still his own character, therefore he has his own realm of personality. You simply make choices for him, but you don't change who he naturally has been introduced in 1990 by Andrzej Sapkowski himself. That's the beauty of this universe, but it's a shame that a game like this just teetered too strongly in the direction of awful gameplay. I loved this game so much, at least until I just plainly hated it.
There's a lot to love here, but if you're like me and just can't stand trash combat, stay away. Yet if you can put up with it enough, the engaging narrative and complex world will grip you. CD Projekt Red certainly proved their capabilities with capturing the spirit of "The Witcher", but in 2007 they still had a lot to prove as video game developers. This is one of those game where if a proper remake was made, I would be all over it so long as the heart and soul is still retained. Lucky enough, that's exactly what CDPR has in store for the future of this franchise...
Final Verdict: 6/10 (Above Average)
This is one of those games where I feel sort of upset by the fact that I chose to replay it. About four years ago I completed my first playthrough, and while it was a flawed experience, I still found a massive amount of enjoyment in its strange fantasy world, dorky characters, and complex narrative. However, having recently abandoned this game, I see it as one of the most uneven, unpolished gaming experiences that I have ever experienced. Strangely enough, both of these things are true about this first entry in "The Witcher" trilogy...
Starting off with the presentation, it's definitely a bit rough on the eyes at first glance. Textures aren't the sharpest, colors aren't super bright, and character models are gangly and repetitious. The voice acting is definitely intriguing, with some truly great emotional lines in one scene while an NPC can also blare "my balls itch" in the background like it was the first and only take ever recorded. It's a strange balance that gives the game world a lot of charm (even some realism), but it doesn't really scream quality.
The music is absolutely weird and wonderful. You have these genuinely masterful background tracks that capture the mystery of adventure - the complicated, rugged fantasy of the Witcher world. And then you have someone's attempt at thrash metal mixed with folk rock playing with the most random combat encounters? It's utter madness, but again adds charm.
The story is very interesting and has a strong plot, though the layout of this is very unpolished and wacky. You'll have some interesting plotlines which interweave within and around different chapters, but then you'll get sidetracked for a few real-life hours doing some unrelated tasks before continuing what you were doing. There's LOADS of potential for character moments, and even random NPC interactions give you the chance for a belly laugh based off of how random they can feel. It's chaotic but feels somewhat cultural, and really captures some manic energy of Polish humor that I, a random American who just happens to love this universe, can't really describe. It just works, and it keeps you interested until the end.
So, with all of these flawed yet hilarious, charming, and interesting aspects, why didn't I finish this game? Simply put, this likely has some of the worst combat in any game ever made.
Now the structure of combat makes some sense - timing based attacks, agility, potion creation, and proper use of signs. However, it's all sorts of f!cked up. Almost every encounter follows one of two distinct prep phases: Either find the perfect mix of potions to find a way to kill your foe, or literally do nothing and steamroll them. The problem here lies in the fact that the game has an awful difficulty curve, so sometimes prepping potions does nothing while randomly fighting and getting lucky does.
Potion prep takes an awkward amount of time, not so much because of the actual time it takes to make them, but with when you can make them. You must sit at a fireplace, initiate a shot "loading screen", go to the potions tab, click on the one you want to make, craft it, and then repeat until finished. This would be fine if it happened every so often, but the way this game works is that to be successful (especially on a higher difficulty level), you must do this before EVERY encounter if you want to be safe. Even then, you might still lose because some enemies are overpowered.
This is a damn shame considering that combat itself is horribly janky. There is poor feedback for attacks, as animations look stiff and repetitive while the audio commits all sorts of f!uckery with your ear canals. It's DATED, and makes this game seem even older than a 2007 title. This got so bad by the end of the game that I outright got stuck with a certain boss almost 95% of the way through the game.
This could have been remedied by a competent upgrade system, but "The Witcher" is a very limiting RPG combat-wise. You pretty much MUST pick Igni skills if you want to not cringe with combat for 50-ish hours, otherwise have fun running around using crap like "heliotrop". Equipment is limited so there's little chance to pimp your version of Geralt out, so forget that route. Don't bother trying to spec certain sword combat types, since you're bound to have a headache with one mob or another anyways since leveling feels too slow and too limiting.
This is a damn shame because this game's writing allows for some truly tough choices, ones that don't necessarily impact your stats, but ones that impact the world. Friendships can end or face extenuating circumstances, enemies can either be slain or spared, and Geralt can be molded in many different ways. Yet it stays fairly faithful to the books in the fact that Geralt is still his own character, therefore he has his own realm of personality. You simply make choices for him, but you don't change who he naturally has been introduced in 1990 by Andrzej Sapkowski himself. That's the beauty of this universe, but it's a shame that a game like this just teetered too strongly in the direction of awful gameplay. I loved this game so much, at least until I just plainly hated it.
There's a lot to love here, but if you're like me and just can't stand trash combat, stay away. Yet if you can put up with it enough, the engaging narrative and complex world will grip you. CD Projekt Red certainly proved their capabilities with capturing the spirit of "The Witcher", but in 2007 they still had a lot to prove as video game developers. This is one of those game where if a proper remake was made, I would be all over it so long as the heart and soul is still retained. Lucky enough, that's exactly what CDPR has in store for the future of this franchise...
Final Verdict: 6/10 (Above Average)
2007
"Bloated But Competent"
BioWare's "Mass Effect" trilogy has grown to represent a pretty legendary high point of RPGs since the series' end over a decade ago, and it's a strange consideration after playing through the first game. There's a massive universe introduced with some in-depth lore, a few memorable characters, and a large space-faring journey of revenge...and more. Unfortunately, it's held back by some average components like its combat system, the lack of many interesting side quests, the sloppy and limiting dialogue trees, and the worst vehicle in modern gaming. It's a hugely mixed bag, but at the end of the day it still manages to stick out as a worthwhile entry to consider.
BioWare has always seemed to be best at crafting a game world, and with "Mass Effect" it's no exception to that rule. The diverse alien races you encounter all have in-depth background, politics, and personalities, yet they feel like potentially real races that could exist just out of our current scientific lens. This series takes these new species and crafts an interesting space opera out of it, essentially throwing humans (and thus you, the player) into the mix without much else to do but tag along for the ride. Without delving into spoilers, "Mass Effect" manages to capture the feel of an epic movie while providing the player with some depth towards shaping their personal experience in the game.
Unfortunately, it is not without its flaws, and man can they be rough to experience. The combat is pretty clunky here, mostly boiling down to a shooter where you have squad-based commands and special powers. While the shooting is fine, it lacks a lot of punch. The extra components also feel a bit tacked on, though there is something interesting when it comes to the dynamic between tech hackers and "force-like" biotics running around causing mayhem. Future titles would do this much better, and it's appreciated that they tried this right off the bat, but it's pretty sloppy.
The world, or well "universe", is also huge. You have dozens of planets to explores in dozens of systems, which adds a sense of scope and scale...at least on a surface level. See, "Mass Effect" allows you to explore these areas, but the missions don't really extend to anything more than simple fetch quests, small combat encounters, or some slight lore-based quests. It gets super repetitive and stretches the game out by a few dozen hours as well. This should have been cut back a bit, as the repetitive nature of landing on a planet, slowly exploring it, and walking away with minimal interaction and reward starts to wear thin after the first few times. Despite this, the planets that do make an impression do so strongly, though these are generally the main mission planets due to their potential for stronger questlines and more diverse interactions.
The game is very dialogue driven most of the time, and this is both super cool and frustratingly limiting due to the karma system and unclear responses from the "dialogue wheel". Conversations are generally well-paced, but the players is pretty much forced into becoming either a "paragon" or "renegade" type. Most of the time, the "paragon" route involves a more sane, courteous, and logical Shepard, whereas the "renegade" route involves a childish, immature, and illogical Shepard. This gets frustrating for two reasons: first, the more you focus on one route, the more you're locked out of the other; second, the developers abbreviate the responses, but are sort of inaccurate more times than not, leading to situations where you say something you didn't intend to say.
This is still a fine system for dialogue, and the saving grace is that the writing keeps situations interesting and tense. Yet it could have been much stronger had BioWare been clearer with their dialogue design alongside easing the restrictions that were put in place.
Finally, I have to mention the stupid Mako. This vehicle is probably the worst I've ever seen in a game, and it's the primary reason why side quests are so frustrating. The handling is atrocious, it's boring to drive, and the armor/weaponry make it simultaneously weak as all hell yet brokenly overpowered. The planets you explore are also horribly designed, with what feel like randomly generated landscapes that provide little to no traction for movement. A complete failure from BioWare, and something that actively ruined large chunks of the game for me.
"Mass Effect" is a fine example of a flawed but fine game. It manages to set up some solid plot points for the trilogy, and it establishes the core of the franchise. However, it has so many flaws that it is a bit hard to recommend. It's worth it for the main quests, but the side content is just not good. This goes for the remastered version as well, since I felt like little was improved outside of some technical issues and graphical fidelity. This title manages to capture the spirit of BioWare's overall vision, but I don't think they managed to nail it until the release of its sequel two years later...
Final Verdict: 6/10 (Above Average)
BioWare's "Mass Effect" trilogy has grown to represent a pretty legendary high point of RPGs since the series' end over a decade ago, and it's a strange consideration after playing through the first game. There's a massive universe introduced with some in-depth lore, a few memorable characters, and a large space-faring journey of revenge...and more. Unfortunately, it's held back by some average components like its combat system, the lack of many interesting side quests, the sloppy and limiting dialogue trees, and the worst vehicle in modern gaming. It's a hugely mixed bag, but at the end of the day it still manages to stick out as a worthwhile entry to consider.
BioWare has always seemed to be best at crafting a game world, and with "Mass Effect" it's no exception to that rule. The diverse alien races you encounter all have in-depth background, politics, and personalities, yet they feel like potentially real races that could exist just out of our current scientific lens. This series takes these new species and crafts an interesting space opera out of it, essentially throwing humans (and thus you, the player) into the mix without much else to do but tag along for the ride. Without delving into spoilers, "Mass Effect" manages to capture the feel of an epic movie while providing the player with some depth towards shaping their personal experience in the game.
Unfortunately, it is not without its flaws, and man can they be rough to experience. The combat is pretty clunky here, mostly boiling down to a shooter where you have squad-based commands and special powers. While the shooting is fine, it lacks a lot of punch. The extra components also feel a bit tacked on, though there is something interesting when it comes to the dynamic between tech hackers and "force-like" biotics running around causing mayhem. Future titles would do this much better, and it's appreciated that they tried this right off the bat, but it's pretty sloppy.
The world, or well "universe", is also huge. You have dozens of planets to explores in dozens of systems, which adds a sense of scope and scale...at least on a surface level. See, "Mass Effect" allows you to explore these areas, but the missions don't really extend to anything more than simple fetch quests, small combat encounters, or some slight lore-based quests. It gets super repetitive and stretches the game out by a few dozen hours as well. This should have been cut back a bit, as the repetitive nature of landing on a planet, slowly exploring it, and walking away with minimal interaction and reward starts to wear thin after the first few times. Despite this, the planets that do make an impression do so strongly, though these are generally the main mission planets due to their potential for stronger questlines and more diverse interactions.
The game is very dialogue driven most of the time, and this is both super cool and frustratingly limiting due to the karma system and unclear responses from the "dialogue wheel". Conversations are generally well-paced, but the players is pretty much forced into becoming either a "paragon" or "renegade" type. Most of the time, the "paragon" route involves a more sane, courteous, and logical Shepard, whereas the "renegade" route involves a childish, immature, and illogical Shepard. This gets frustrating for two reasons: first, the more you focus on one route, the more you're locked out of the other; second, the developers abbreviate the responses, but are sort of inaccurate more times than not, leading to situations where you say something you didn't intend to say.
This is still a fine system for dialogue, and the saving grace is that the writing keeps situations interesting and tense. Yet it could have been much stronger had BioWare been clearer with their dialogue design alongside easing the restrictions that were put in place.
Finally, I have to mention the stupid Mako. This vehicle is probably the worst I've ever seen in a game, and it's the primary reason why side quests are so frustrating. The handling is atrocious, it's boring to drive, and the armor/weaponry make it simultaneously weak as all hell yet brokenly overpowered. The planets you explore are also horribly designed, with what feel like randomly generated landscapes that provide little to no traction for movement. A complete failure from BioWare, and something that actively ruined large chunks of the game for me.
"Mass Effect" is a fine example of a flawed but fine game. It manages to set up some solid plot points for the trilogy, and it establishes the core of the franchise. However, it has so many flaws that it is a bit hard to recommend. It's worth it for the main quests, but the side content is just not good. This goes for the remastered version as well, since I felt like little was improved outside of some technical issues and graphical fidelity. This title manages to capture the spirit of BioWare's overall vision, but I don't think they managed to nail it until the release of its sequel two years later...
Final Verdict: 6/10 (Above Average)
2008
"The Spin Off No One Wanted"
What a crock of sh!t this was! Why did this game get approved in the design room, and why was this handed over to High Impact Games, the creators of the very bland and clunky "Ratchet & Clank: Size Matters"? Simply put - money and development downtime. I (sadly) put myself through playing a good chunk of this game, so I'm here to tell you why you should stay away.
The visuals are very bland and lack pop, even despite being squished into a PSP resolution screen. Audio tracks are amateurish and there's a severe lack of decent tracks, and you're likely to hear the same few songs blare throughout the experience.
Levels are super linear and predictable with its art, but the actual gameplay is random and unfocused. You'll encounter really crappy stealth sections, stupid racing segments, unfun Ratchet combat, and some of the worst rhythm minigames ever introduced into a game. Oh yeah, and there's the jumbled together Quark sections as well. None of the mechanics feel very good, and the controls don't suit the console at all either. Everyone in this game controls weirdly, and it's a dumb thing when it feels better to move with the D-pad compared with the console's movement stick.
The writing is atrocious. It's so cliche, so unfunny, and so uninteresting with its premise, purpose, and punchline. Clank is already not the strongest character in the series, which is why his pairing with Ratchet is so important. Here, he's just a very bland robot James Bond. Ratchet is yet again purposeless and whiny. Quark is a sniveling man child that is actually not important to the overall plot at all.
The kicker is that High Impact Games didn't even understand the lore of the series and decided to make Clank an actual secret agent. In "Up Your Arsenal", Clank is just a TV star who plays the SAC character while Ratchet serves as HIS sidekick, a clever poke at the series and their dynamic. High Impact decided that this was apparently an ACTUAL part of his character, and thus this load of garbage was written. On top of this, they decided Clank was the perfect main character for "Ratchet & Clank", a series that had never (and still has not) created a solid gameplay loop around him. The mechanics are not similar to "Up Your Arsenal's" sections, but instead involve a score metric and slow, repetitive stealth takedowns.
This game is a waste of time and a useless addition to the franchise. I was more impressed with the flip phone game since that somehow managed to stay true to the series, and this game somehow managed to fumble expectations and mess with the formula. Not worth playing, not even for free.
Final Verdict: 3/10 (Poor)
What a crock of sh!t this was! Why did this game get approved in the design room, and why was this handed over to High Impact Games, the creators of the very bland and clunky "Ratchet & Clank: Size Matters"? Simply put - money and development downtime. I (sadly) put myself through playing a good chunk of this game, so I'm here to tell you why you should stay away.
The visuals are very bland and lack pop, even despite being squished into a PSP resolution screen. Audio tracks are amateurish and there's a severe lack of decent tracks, and you're likely to hear the same few songs blare throughout the experience.
Levels are super linear and predictable with its art, but the actual gameplay is random and unfocused. You'll encounter really crappy stealth sections, stupid racing segments, unfun Ratchet combat, and some of the worst rhythm minigames ever introduced into a game. Oh yeah, and there's the jumbled together Quark sections as well. None of the mechanics feel very good, and the controls don't suit the console at all either. Everyone in this game controls weirdly, and it's a dumb thing when it feels better to move with the D-pad compared with the console's movement stick.
The writing is atrocious. It's so cliche, so unfunny, and so uninteresting with its premise, purpose, and punchline. Clank is already not the strongest character in the series, which is why his pairing with Ratchet is so important. Here, he's just a very bland robot James Bond. Ratchet is yet again purposeless and whiny. Quark is a sniveling man child that is actually not important to the overall plot at all.
The kicker is that High Impact Games didn't even understand the lore of the series and decided to make Clank an actual secret agent. In "Up Your Arsenal", Clank is just a TV star who plays the SAC character while Ratchet serves as HIS sidekick, a clever poke at the series and their dynamic. High Impact decided that this was apparently an ACTUAL part of his character, and thus this load of garbage was written. On top of this, they decided Clank was the perfect main character for "Ratchet & Clank", a series that had never (and still has not) created a solid gameplay loop around him. The mechanics are not similar to "Up Your Arsenal's" sections, but instead involve a score metric and slow, repetitive stealth takedowns.
This game is a waste of time and a useless addition to the franchise. I was more impressed with the flip phone game since that somehow managed to stay true to the series, and this game somehow managed to fumble expectations and mess with the formula. Not worth playing, not even for free.
Final Verdict: 3/10 (Poor)
"Another Bland Serving Of Content"
"Marvel's Spider-Man" had some problems with its open-world design, but overall it managed to be a great game with its solid gameplay cycle, fairly solid story, and large amounts of spectacle. It's DLC offerings, however, have not really been able to achieve any of these things, and "Turf Wars" marks a new low for Insomniac's newer "Spidey" games.
The plot here is as predictable as it can get: Mafia is out of balance, some new guy shows up and tries to take power, angry cop wants justice (and will go to any length to do it), and the hero saves the day. There is nothing in this plot that is remotely engaging because it takes all of its components from other stories while boiling it down to a formless palette. The characters are boring and one-note, and it just somehow feels underbaked while managing to have a few hours feel like twice the length.
The gameplay is the most solid part, since its mostly untouched from the main game. The only real additions are some new shielded enemies, and I didn't like them. They felt cheap to fight against while simultaneously being more broken than the normal shielded foes.
Missions are not very memorable in any good way, but holy crap did they fumble the side content. The legendarily annoying "Screwball" is back once again, and she's got another serving of awful side missions. These things were super cheap and repetitive, but the killer part of them is just how irritating her character is. Like I get it, she's supposed to be annoying, but there isn't anything else to her or her story other than being evil, childish, and constantly online. The writers clearly stretched their imaginations with what they "think" online culture is like, and it shows just how out of touch and talentless they are at times. This pretty much ruined most of the previous DLC for me, and this time it derailed all of my enjoyment.
There's a development with Yuri Watanabe where she essentially goes "Bad Cop" and kills a bunch of Hammerhead thugs as well as the boss himself, but I didn't really buy any of her character progression. I never found her particularly interesting in the main game, so here it just feels like forcing the issue with her whole angsty persona. Real cringey stuff honestly, since it just comes off as some pretentious look at a one-dimensional character.
This DLC just kind of sucked. Yes, you still have an open-world and decent combat, but the story is thrown out of the window, the characters are portrayed as cliches, and the mission design is just boring. Insomniac clearly just rushed this out to capitalize on the main game's success, but I wouldn't really push anyone to play these DLCs. When they're just decent at best, you know there's a problem.
Final Verdict: 4/10 (Below Average)
"Marvel's Spider-Man" had some problems with its open-world design, but overall it managed to be a great game with its solid gameplay cycle, fairly solid story, and large amounts of spectacle. It's DLC offerings, however, have not really been able to achieve any of these things, and "Turf Wars" marks a new low for Insomniac's newer "Spidey" games.
The plot here is as predictable as it can get: Mafia is out of balance, some new guy shows up and tries to take power, angry cop wants justice (and will go to any length to do it), and the hero saves the day. There is nothing in this plot that is remotely engaging because it takes all of its components from other stories while boiling it down to a formless palette. The characters are boring and one-note, and it just somehow feels underbaked while managing to have a few hours feel like twice the length.
The gameplay is the most solid part, since its mostly untouched from the main game. The only real additions are some new shielded enemies, and I didn't like them. They felt cheap to fight against while simultaneously being more broken than the normal shielded foes.
Missions are not very memorable in any good way, but holy crap did they fumble the side content. The legendarily annoying "Screwball" is back once again, and she's got another serving of awful side missions. These things were super cheap and repetitive, but the killer part of them is just how irritating her character is. Like I get it, she's supposed to be annoying, but there isn't anything else to her or her story other than being evil, childish, and constantly online. The writers clearly stretched their imaginations with what they "think" online culture is like, and it shows just how out of touch and talentless they are at times. This pretty much ruined most of the previous DLC for me, and this time it derailed all of my enjoyment.
There's a development with Yuri Watanabe where she essentially goes "Bad Cop" and kills a bunch of Hammerhead thugs as well as the boss himself, but I didn't really buy any of her character progression. I never found her particularly interesting in the main game, so here it just feels like forcing the issue with her whole angsty persona. Real cringey stuff honestly, since it just comes off as some pretentious look at a one-dimensional character.
This DLC just kind of sucked. Yes, you still have an open-world and decent combat, but the story is thrown out of the window, the characters are portrayed as cliches, and the mission design is just boring. Insomniac clearly just rushed this out to capitalize on the main game's success, but I wouldn't really push anyone to play these DLCs. When they're just decent at best, you know there's a problem.
Final Verdict: 4/10 (Below Average)
2022
"Short And...Alright"
Was recommended to play this one when I first received my Steam Deck, and I have to say that it was just an okay experience. The humor was solid and it was cool to see more added to the Portal universe, but the gameplay was very simplistic and lacking. Additionally, the game is very short, clocking in at around half an hour of my time. Nothing too groundbreaking, but it wasn't offensively long to the point of exhaustion by any means.
The story is simple: you work with another robot at Aperture and deal with the consequences of goofing around on the job. You get to meet Cave Johnson again for a solid cameo, but it amounts to a five-ish minute long scene before the game comes to a close. It's cool that they got J.K. Simmons to come back and reprise his role once again, but this short game just didn't do too much with its runtime.
There's a short turret sequence and some amusing jokes, but this is pretty light for a "platform experience". It's advertised as a tech demo, but it doesn't really go over all of the Deck functions in details the way that "Wii Sports" or "Astro's Playroom" do for their respective consoles. It could've been much worse though, and its at least short enough that I would possibly stop in to play it again if I really wanted some "Portal" flavor, though I don't see why I wouldn't just play the main games instead.
Final Verdict: 6/10 (Above Average)
Was recommended to play this one when I first received my Steam Deck, and I have to say that it was just an okay experience. The humor was solid and it was cool to see more added to the Portal universe, but the gameplay was very simplistic and lacking. Additionally, the game is very short, clocking in at around half an hour of my time. Nothing too groundbreaking, but it wasn't offensively long to the point of exhaustion by any means.
The story is simple: you work with another robot at Aperture and deal with the consequences of goofing around on the job. You get to meet Cave Johnson again for a solid cameo, but it amounts to a five-ish minute long scene before the game comes to a close. It's cool that they got J.K. Simmons to come back and reprise his role once again, but this short game just didn't do too much with its runtime.
There's a short turret sequence and some amusing jokes, but this is pretty light for a "platform experience". It's advertised as a tech demo, but it doesn't really go over all of the Deck functions in details the way that "Wii Sports" or "Astro's Playroom" do for their respective consoles. It could've been much worse though, and its at least short enough that I would possibly stop in to play it again if I really wanted some "Portal" flavor, though I don't see why I wouldn't just play the main games instead.
Final Verdict: 6/10 (Above Average)
"Filler Content"
Wasn't too excited to play this one, but figured I would at least give it a shot considering I did like some of the sandbox nature of the original game. This pretty much delivered something akin to that, though I wasn't happy to see that stages were locked behind completion of previous ones...which didn't make much sense for a training mode. Additionally, the content is just duplicated with a normal training mode and a time trial mode, meaning you actually get about half of the content the game advertises.
There's no plot to be found here, and instead it's to serve as a training module for the first game. The problem here is that the first game was already completed, so there isn't really a point to completing this if you've already played that. This would've been better if it was added as content to the first title, since as a standalone release it makes little sense to play it afterwards unless you really enjoy the idea of timed challenges and whatnot.
I don't really have much else to add for this one. The graphics aren't very special considering it's mostly a green VR area you run around. There's no real voice acting to really talk about. There isn't even a cleaning up of the game mechanics, they're pretty much copied over with some trials to complete with the same weapons and gadgets. To me, this was just a waste of my time and I'm glad to have just dropped it after about an hour of messing around with it.
Final Verdict: 4/10 (Below Average)
Wasn't too excited to play this one, but figured I would at least give it a shot considering I did like some of the sandbox nature of the original game. This pretty much delivered something akin to that, though I wasn't happy to see that stages were locked behind completion of previous ones...which didn't make much sense for a training mode. Additionally, the content is just duplicated with a normal training mode and a time trial mode, meaning you actually get about half of the content the game advertises.
There's no plot to be found here, and instead it's to serve as a training module for the first game. The problem here is that the first game was already completed, so there isn't really a point to completing this if you've already played that. This would've been better if it was added as content to the first title, since as a standalone release it makes little sense to play it afterwards unless you really enjoy the idea of timed challenges and whatnot.
I don't really have much else to add for this one. The graphics aren't very special considering it's mostly a green VR area you run around. There's no real voice acting to really talk about. There isn't even a cleaning up of the game mechanics, they're pretty much copied over with some trials to complete with the same weapons and gadgets. To me, this was just a waste of my time and I'm glad to have just dropped it after about an hour of messing around with it.
Final Verdict: 4/10 (Below Average)
2012
"A Sonic Game For Sonic Fans...Not Much Else"
Don't really know what to say for this one. I tried so many "Sonic" games and none of them have stuck with me, and this is one of the more popular and beloved ones. The soundtrack is not too bad, but it feels like just about everything else is low-budget and crummy to play through.
The game has floaty controls and unfocused level design. There's another simple plot about Dr. Robotnik capturing the emeralds and yadda yadda. New hedgehog called Shadow, with a cliche personality to boot. Visuals are decent, but the world has a scattered art focus, which is a shame since I always liked the aesthetic of the 2D games. These 3D ones just do not match in quality.
The voice acting is comically bad, but the audio design somehow makes it worse. Low effort writing and dialogue combine to make poor scenes all around.
Again, I've sort of given up on these games. This one just took the aspects of the previous game and dialed them up to 11, which will work great for fans of that game but will still end up being niche for most people. The platformers I enjoy tend to have imaginative, focused, and properly flowing levels. Also, you know, good controls. I just don't like "Sonic" much as a concept, so this game likely serves as a final chance for me to have enjoyed the series.
Final Verdict: 2/10 (Bad)
Don't really know what to say for this one. I tried so many "Sonic" games and none of them have stuck with me, and this is one of the more popular and beloved ones. The soundtrack is not too bad, but it feels like just about everything else is low-budget and crummy to play through.
The game has floaty controls and unfocused level design. There's another simple plot about Dr. Robotnik capturing the emeralds and yadda yadda. New hedgehog called Shadow, with a cliche personality to boot. Visuals are decent, but the world has a scattered art focus, which is a shame since I always liked the aesthetic of the 2D games. These 3D ones just do not match in quality.
The voice acting is comically bad, but the audio design somehow makes it worse. Low effort writing and dialogue combine to make poor scenes all around.
Again, I've sort of given up on these games. This one just took the aspects of the previous game and dialed them up to 11, which will work great for fans of that game but will still end up being niche for most people. The platformers I enjoy tend to have imaginative, focused, and properly flowing levels. Also, you know, good controls. I just don't like "Sonic" much as a concept, so this game likely serves as a final chance for me to have enjoyed the series.
Final Verdict: 2/10 (Bad)
"A Classic Collect-a-thon From The PS2 Era"
One of Naughty Dog's earlier IP's, "Jak and Daxter" had an interesting beginning as a platformer focused on collecting as many items as possible. Its unique visuals combined a zany 3D art style with a wide color palate, and its quirky world filled with comedic characters mirrored the likes of Insomniac Games' "Ratchet and Clank". In fact, both of these franchises were created around the same time, and thus shared numerous qualities as both companies attempted to craft system selling IP's during the PS2 era. Was Naughty Dog's first attempt a success? Indeed it was!
"Jak 1" has a very simple gameplay loop - platforming involving jumping, diving, and sprinting around. You solve a few environmental puzzles here and there and engage in some pretty simple combat a la any of the 3D "Mario" games. You also try to collect as many eggs, flies, and orbs as possible in order to advance the plot.
The story is also simple - you're pretty much trying to stop some wizards from harvesting the power of "dark Eco", an element in the world that supercharges anything and everything it comes into contact with. Jak and his human-turned-ferret friend Daxter go on a quest within their community to save it from destruction.
This game is pretty basic mechanically, but man does it control well. Even a few decades later, platforming feels tight and responsive, and the combat isn't too shabby either. Completing platforming challenges is rewarding and slowly teaches you how to become a better player, and there's only a very short tutorial that breaks the immersion at the very start of the game. It's fun, easy to pick up, and progresses at a nice rate.
What's nice about this game is that it's a collect-a-thon without feeling repetitive or draining. I felt a decent push towards grabbing every item, but it wasn't necessary for completion. The game was smooth to play, and I liked seeing how each area managed to hide its secrets.
The game isn't without its flaws though. The story is pretty weak, and the characters don't have depth. The combat isn't too exciting, and pretty much stays the same throughout the game. There is also little point in collecting anything outside of a small, pointless cutscene and the inherent satisfaction of seeing your collection completed.
Still, it's a game that really showcases the quality and simplicity of platforming gameplay mechanics of the PS2 era, many of which were inspired by earlier Nintendo titles and continue to be a core component of modern platformers. The story and characters are pretty simple, but the presentation is great and the world is fun to explore. If future titles could expand the gameplay and story more, this series could really turn into something quite special.
Final Verdict: 8/10 (Great)
One of Naughty Dog's earlier IP's, "Jak and Daxter" had an interesting beginning as a platformer focused on collecting as many items as possible. Its unique visuals combined a zany 3D art style with a wide color palate, and its quirky world filled with comedic characters mirrored the likes of Insomniac Games' "Ratchet and Clank". In fact, both of these franchises were created around the same time, and thus shared numerous qualities as both companies attempted to craft system selling IP's during the PS2 era. Was Naughty Dog's first attempt a success? Indeed it was!
"Jak 1" has a very simple gameplay loop - platforming involving jumping, diving, and sprinting around. You solve a few environmental puzzles here and there and engage in some pretty simple combat a la any of the 3D "Mario" games. You also try to collect as many eggs, flies, and orbs as possible in order to advance the plot.
The story is also simple - you're pretty much trying to stop some wizards from harvesting the power of "dark Eco", an element in the world that supercharges anything and everything it comes into contact with. Jak and his human-turned-ferret friend Daxter go on a quest within their community to save it from destruction.
This game is pretty basic mechanically, but man does it control well. Even a few decades later, platforming feels tight and responsive, and the combat isn't too shabby either. Completing platforming challenges is rewarding and slowly teaches you how to become a better player, and there's only a very short tutorial that breaks the immersion at the very start of the game. It's fun, easy to pick up, and progresses at a nice rate.
What's nice about this game is that it's a collect-a-thon without feeling repetitive or draining. I felt a decent push towards grabbing every item, but it wasn't necessary for completion. The game was smooth to play, and I liked seeing how each area managed to hide its secrets.
The game isn't without its flaws though. The story is pretty weak, and the characters don't have depth. The combat isn't too exciting, and pretty much stays the same throughout the game. There is also little point in collecting anything outside of a small, pointless cutscene and the inherent satisfaction of seeing your collection completed.
Still, it's a game that really showcases the quality and simplicity of platforming gameplay mechanics of the PS2 era, many of which were inspired by earlier Nintendo titles and continue to be a core component of modern platformers. The story and characters are pretty simple, but the presentation is great and the world is fun to explore. If future titles could expand the gameplay and story more, this series could really turn into something quite special.
Final Verdict: 8/10 (Great)