Fat Princess Review

By Dan Whitehead Published 3 August, 2009

Blubber and squeak.

Version tested: PlayStation 3

It's probably bad form to start a review with a cultural reference that is alienating to anyone who didn't grow up in England in the 1970s, but you're going to have to bear with me.

Back in the time of polyester and oven chips, there was a show on Children's BBC called We Are The Champions. Essentially a televised schools sports day, it pitted provincial comprehensives against each other in a frankly bewildering range of beanbag and quoits challenges. The finale always took place in a swimming pool filled with inflatables, and thus the only bit anyone was ever interested in was the very end, when gruff presenter Ron Pickering would bellow "Away you go!" and all the kids would hurl themselves into the water for a few blissful minutes of anarchic arsing about while the end credits played.

Fat Princess often feels a lot like that - a giddy, noisy catharsis that makes a big splash, but to no great lasting effect.

It's a cartoony multiplayer game that combines the game modes of an FPS with the character classes of an RPG and the resource-gathering of an RTS. Up to 32 players can take part in four game modes, plus a bizarre and not entirely successful Soccer option, spread across eight maps. Ellie already did a sterling job of describing the gameplay in detail in her hands-on preview but, to recap, it's a big old battle in which you can put on one of five hats at any time and change your role in the action.

'Fat Princess' Screenshot 1

Fat Princess features lashings of blood and guts, but you can switch it off if it puts you off your pudding.

Workers can harvest wood and metal to improve and fix castle fixtures, Warriors are your standard melee fighters, Rangers shoot arrows, Priests can heal while Mages use fire magic. Once the relevant hat machines are upgraded, each class also offers advanced functions. Workers can lob bombs, Warriors gain a dash attack, Rangers use slow but powerful muskets, Priests can leech health from enemies and Mages add ice to their repertoire of spells.

There are also lots of environmental benefits that can be accessed, such as gates that block enemy advances, ladders that let you scale castle walls and a catapult that can fire you and your friends directly into the enemy stronghold. There are shortcuts around the map, magic potions that turn people into chickens, and torches that can add fire damage to weapons.

There's also cake. Lots and lots of cake, growing from the ground. And this is where the Fat Princess concept comes in. In two of the game modes - Rescue the Princess and Smash & Grab - the aim is to snatch these confection-loving royals and bring them back to your base, while preventing the other team from doing the same to you. In the first mode it's your princess you're saving from the dungeon, in the latter the situation is reversed and you must swipe their princess and throw her in your cells three times. To make life harder, you can take the cake off the ground and feed it to whichever princess you're defending. The fatter she gets, the slower the enemy will have to move if they seize her.

'Fat Princess' Screenshot 2

You're in there somewhere, so just keep mashing the square button and hope for the best.

It's Capture the Flag with a calorie-rich twist, in other words, and it's ironic that despite giving the game it's title, these are the weakest elements of the game. There are no time limits, and the task of getting these chubby lasses across the map without losing your meagre health so unlikely, that matches can drag on for upwards of 45 minutes. With only one upgrade level to attain for each character class, each side soon reaches maximum strength and then it too often becomes a tiresome stalemate. Princesses will be snatched, lugged a short distance, and then hordes of enemies smash the kidnappers to bits and it all starts over.

During one such fruitless tug-of-war match, I eventually gave up, put the controller down and went to make tea. Not a cup of tea, mind you, but cooked tea. Dinner, if you want to be posh. I cooked and ate an entire meal, returned to the joypad and the match was still going on. Neither team had made any progress. As games drag on, I've found more and more characters are just left standing motionless, as players clearly drift away to do something else.

Part of the problem seems to be that a lot of players just don't seem that interested in the teamwork that is essential to victory, but it's equally plausible that the game simply offers so many different tasks to perform that it's a Herculean task trying to impose some kind of purpose on a gang of strangers, each seemingly more interested in their own score than the victory conditions of the map.

It's not entirely fair to decry a game for the behaviour of its players, but at some point the design of the game has to become a factor. Titan Studios has boasted that the experience has been designed to be as intuitive as possible, with players able to grasp what needs to be done without overt direction, but judging by the experience since launch, that's not been the case. Unless you happen to have 15 friends online, it's really the luck of the draw whether you end up on a team of mindless idiots or not, and, combined with the limitless lengths of the Princess modes, that can't help but make the multiplayer core of the game feel frustratingly inconsistent. What should be a gleeful battle royale becomes fruitless drudgery.

This is less of an issue in the Team Deathmatch and Invasion modes, since they both have a finite length by design. The former is self-explanatory - you keep killing the enemy until they're all dead - while the latter requires you to control at least half of the outposts on the map to steadily decrease enemy morale to zero. These modes play to the game's inherent chaotic strengths, and mean that even when everyone else is running around like a nutter, you can still at least contribute to victory by doing your own thing.

'Fat Princess' Screenshot 3

Slim Princesses are much easier to kidnap. OMG SEXISMS.

Even then, combat is complicated by the fact that, with their hats on, everyone looks much the same. Get into a scrum of more than four or five players and everything just becomes a splurge of red and blue. The lock-on feature feels flaky under such conditions, unable to keep up with characters dashing on and off screen, and the square button takes the brunt as you bash away at the mass of pixels, hoping that your vaguely disconnected attacks are doing something useful.

Those hoping for a single-player distraction from the ups and downs of multiplayer will be poorly served. The story mode is nothing more than a glorified tutorial, taking you through the different modes and maps in missions that bear little resemblance to the rather enjoyable storybook scenes that introduce them. They're also blighted by inconsistent AI. Team-mates are either too efficient, often winning the match without your input on the early stages, or infuriatingly dumb. You can prod up on the d-pad to get a handful of nearby characters to follow you, but they frequently dawdle off-screen and vanish, or hurl themselves into deadly hazards, trying to reach inaccessible enemies. The final levels are almost impossible to beat, unless you exploit the enemy's equally dim AI and take advantage of pathways that will keep them distracted with inessential encounters while you leg it with their lardy lady.

Much like the cakes that the princesses so greedily scoff down, the game is delicious at first, an overwhelming confection of bright colours and varied flavours, but the sugar rush wears off much too quickly, leaving you bloated and exhausted. There's the basis of a really enjoyable and original multiplayer experience here, but it's simply too chaotic to encourage the co-operation required to keep the gameplay moving. Packed with lovely ideas, yet lacking focus, balance and pacing, it's little more than a guilty snack.

6 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Dan.

About Dan Whitehead

Dan has been writing for Eurogamer since 2006 and specialises in RPGs, shooters and games for children. His bestest game ever is Julian Gollop's Chaos.

Read more articles from Dan by visiting the Dan Whitehead archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (83) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • chudders #1 3 years ago

    Ooh, cutting.

    But some fair criticisms none the less.
    Edited by 1 at 03/08/09 @ 08:26

  • Bloodloss #2 3 years ago

    Dayum...

  • Fletche #3 3 years ago

    6? Hmmm maybe a little low although at the moment due to the connection issues 6 would be about right, but without them it is easily an 8, great fun and I think in time the people who play this will begin to understand the need for teamwork a lot more than they do now which will make the experience a lot less frustrating.

  • mowgli #4 3 years ago

    I always wondered why the fuck people were getting excited over it, it always looked shit.

  • Triggerhappytel #5 3 years ago

    Shame. I'll probably still be getting it though, as feedback on the forum has mostly been really good, and I would like a proper online multiplayer game that isn't a FPS.

  • RobertFoster #6 3 years ago

    The hype machine rolls out another stunner.

  • bag-in-box #7 3 years ago

    So nothing changed from the beta then.. money saved, thank you.

  • El-Dev #8 3 years ago

    Fair review, gets a bit chaotic all the time. Fun though.

  • WiseGuy #9 3 years ago

    Still find it a massive struggle to get an online game going with this. When i did get on again i found it far too much of a rabble to really enjoy. This is going on the back burner for a bit now while i get started on Bioshock (which cost only £2 more from play....hmm)

  • woodyrulesok #10 3 years ago

    It's not a bad game at all. A few things which I'm sure will get ironed out soon.
    My main issue with it is it doesn't feel like a £12 game. At £3.99 it would have been brilliant.

  • Dizzy #11 3 years ago

    Part of the problem is that it is tricky to translate FPS 3D gameplay to a 2D game. 2D games have a tendency to be much more "over-viewable" and hence players can react much faster to stuff that happens because they can see the combat hotspots. So mass zerging the princess-carrying-team for example.

  • UncleLou #12 3 years ago

    I always wondered why the fuck people were getting excited over it, it always looked shit.

    You're confusing your dislike of the artstyle with the criticism of gameplay mechanics.

  • tonynibbles #13 3 years ago

    This review is a 6/10.

  • Mooey #14 3 years ago

    Thanks Eurogamer. Thanks for reassuring me that I'll make sure to add you to my list of blocked websites so I never visit this carwreck of a website again.

    Crappy navigation, too much going on in the sidebars, logo sucks, comments are bland, always pleading for hits with joke reviews such as this one, and the reviewers make watching paint dry look like a blast.

    Website score: 3/10

    Edit:
    Look at these little kiddies give me a negative score. Like this is going to make me commit suicide. HAHAHAHA. Close-minded fools.

    Eat the cake, Fatty!

    Edit again:
    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, -7? Pathetic just like all of you peons.

    Edit again:
    Only -35 now? Is that how many retards come here to get their reviews cause this site blows.

    Edit again:

    Eurogamer debunked:
    [link url=http://www.g amerswithjobs.com/node/46012
    ]http://www.g amerswithjobs.com/node/46012
    [/link]
    [link url=http://www.vg247.com/2009/06/22/eu rogamer-re-reviews-grand-slam-tennis-at-810/
    ]http://ww w.vg247.com/2009/06/22/eurogame...[/link]
    This just goes to show you that you can't trust garbage that these reviews spit out of their shit-infested, anus-sucking mouths.
    Edited by 7 at 03/08/09 @ 10:00

  • mowgli #15 3 years ago

    ""I always wondered why the fuck people were getting excited over it, it always looked shit."

    You're confusing your dislike of the artstyle with the criticism of gameplay mechanics."

    No I'm not.
    Edited by 1 at 03/08/09 @ 09:03

  • DDevil #16 3 years ago

    @Mooey - Bye then dickhead!

  • optimusprym8 #17 3 years ago

    It's enjoyable for a five minutes then just annoying. Not tried MP yet, can't find my headset but single player is pointless as the AI is so retarded, you'll never do anything on your own. Am sure a team communicating effectively will be more fun though

    Although thanks EG for mentioning the D-pad [up] command, didn't see it mentioned in the tutorial/control screens anywhere, was wondering how to try and gather other team members.

    Was also massively disappointed that there's no split-screen local MP

  • Vanmunt #18 3 years ago

    Bought it, played it for 5 mins went straight back to Demon's Sous... just can't stop playing Demons Souls, its like fricken crack'.

    Hopefully all the above issues will be sorted by the time I get back to Fat Princess.

  • Beano #19 3 years ago

    It's incredible that they (the developers) decided to make a 32 player online game with peer-to-peer architecture instead of using dedicated servers like Resistance 1+2, Killzone 2, Warhawk, BF 1943, etc. Peer-to-peer and 32 players is an open invitation to connection and lag problems. Idiots!

    EDIT: I'm also very fond of Demon's Souls :D
    Edited by 1 at 03/08/09 @ 09:36

  • Vistrix #20 3 years ago

    The game is 8/10 at £8.

    Theres nothing much wrong with the game. Connection issues and other people are the only problems
    Edited by 1 at 03/08/09 @ 09:36

  • Kremlik Verified Co-Founder, Crash To Desktop #21 3 years ago

    For a downloadable title it's still damn fun to pick up and play once in a while - once the bugs have been fixed it'll be better, +1/2 to the score because I always feel EG is a bit overcritial these days what was it again '7 is the new 9'?

    If your still on the fence or put off by the review - wait for the demo - It's still a gem to play with friends imo

  • hello_fi #22 3 years ago

    ps3lol

  • Fatbobbybob #23 3 years ago

    Have to agree about the lack on on screen MP. The game has a lot of potential but the connection issues are crippling it at the minute. Spent half an hour tryingt to get a game yesterday without luck. There doesn't seem to be much choice in how to pick a good server.

    Hopefully as someone stated things will settle down and people will become more accustomed to working in teams.

  • 3william56 #24 3 years ago

    Seems a bit harsh - the main criticisms here apply to any multiplayer game - get a bunch of folk who know how to play and co-ordinate, and Killzone2 is a joy. Get too many grenade spammers on a too small level, and it's chaos and carnage with little fun to be had. FP sounds the same. God knows how MAG will manage.

    Give it a few weeks, and maybe the strategy message will sink in and the games will start to straighten out (or a leveling patch will ease it up a bit).

    Meanwhile - Shatter is excellent, and half the price.

    /hopes the door doesn't hit Mooey in the ar$e on his way out.

  • ChrisS #25 3 years ago

    Absolutely bang on for me, this. It looks lovely, and you really WANT to like it, but ultimately it feels a little too frenetic for its own good. You'll alternate between periods where you're well away from the action and just doing a bit of (fairly dull) busywork to help the cause, or rushing into a huge pitched battle where you die within seconds of reaching the frontline. Like the battlefield itself after a few minutes of frenzied slaughter, it's just a bit of a mess.

  • septimus #26 3 years ago

    Wait for a patch to these issues me thinks. If they have any sense, and can of course, they should sort this out asap, otherwise this game will die off online very quickly.

  • flaming.carrot #27 3 years ago

    Titan are working on a patch for connection issues, but this game really needs dedicated servers IMHO.

  • Godhather08 #28 3 years ago

    I think Fat Princess is really fun and addictive. To me it's an 8 out of 10. Didn't like this review though.

  • sickpuppysoftware #29 3 years ago

    The review is pretty much spot on. You spend 30 minutes having some fun but can't shake the feeling that your actions haven't made the slightest difference to the outcome.

  • TopKatt #30 3 years ago

    Calm down dear, it's only a review.

    I think the review is quite reasonable, I'm having enough fun with the game that I would give it a 7/10 rather than a 6 though.

  • miiiguel #31 3 years ago

    Mooey 73 days ago on a 7/10 infamous review:
    [link url=http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/in famous-review/comments?comment_start=150
    ]http://ww w.eurogamer.net/articles/infamo...[/link]

    So I hope you look through your huge database and see my name some day with post count: 1 and a last login: May 21, 2009 because this is the last and ONLY time I take a look at this shitty-ass site.

    I guess the guy/gal loves to *not come here*. Well, I guess will see him by 8/10 GT5 review. Harder, whiner, and more bad ass.

  • Dizzy #32 3 years ago

    "I guess the guy/gal loves to *not come here*. Well, I guess will see him by 8/10 GT5 review. Harder, whiner, and more bad ass. "

    Lol.. owned ;)

  • kinky_mong #33 3 years ago

    Hahaha! Mooey's toys at the pram episode is the funniest thing I've seen in ages!

    "I'm leaving this site forever!!!!!


    ... after I come back a few times to see the karma rating on my comment...


    ... and update my comment to tell people they're retards for giving me negative feedback...


    ...and update it again with some links to articles that support my backwards view on a review (which is ultimately just someone's opinion)"

    See you soon Mooey. Possibly when the next overhyped PS3 exclusive gets an average review.

  • Widge #34 3 years ago

    Miiiigs deserves a +9129419184794 for that! :D

  • Cloonix #35 3 years ago

    This review is just right. Fat princess is not as good as many other previews and reviews say. The game really sucks.

  • Miths #36 3 years ago

    "Unless you happen to have 15 friends online, it's really the luck of the draw whether you end up on a team of mindless idiots or not"

    This is the main reason I enjoyed the first hour or two - where I was still learning the basics and didn't really mind the directionless chaos - but suspect I won't be loading up Fat Princess again more than sporadically and briefly now and then, if at all.

    Playing with "mindless idiots" (and I suspect that label regularly suits myself :), even when I do my best to help the disorganized team) in multiplayer in first person shooters can still be a lot of fun even when you're on the losing team. There's still - to me at least - a lot of satisfaction in simply shooting people in the head with a well aimed shot, or sneaking up and knifing them in the back.
    Not so with Fat Princess - it just feels like a team sport rather than an entertaining hunt or a battle for survival. And personally I don't find much enjoyment in team sports if you're getting your ass mercilessly kicked by the opposing team because they actually manage to work properly together.

    If you get two functioning teams up against each other in Fat Princess I would probably give the experience an 8/10. So far I've only seen that happen in one match (and the team work was lost when we moved to the next map, despite the teams being almost intact), which makes that 6 score look a lot more appropriate.

  • Xerx3s #37 3 years ago

    Beano: Not true. There are various technology demonstrations that show that, with the right technology, you can have a very large or even an unlimited amount of players over a p2p network. p2p offers possibilities that aren't possible with dedicated servers.

    The problem of course is that even with p2p networks, coders still thinking in in outdated concepts such as main hosts and such. That is the real problem.

  • Retroid #38 3 years ago

    Cake?

    /Portal song

  • Emth #39 3 years ago

    The problem with P2P in this country is that most people have such horrendously castrated upload traffic capabilities you are always going run into problems.

    Still, it seems to be the closest thing to WoW battlegrounds without spending 200 hours getting a character built up so I'm still going to buy it.

  • Metalfish #40 3 years ago

    I really wanted this to be good, as the concept is rather clever (and those who decry it as feminist-baiting may wish to ponder why they're always rescuing princesses in video games, obese or not -I like the fact that they want her whether she is chubby or not). As it is it seems a bit more undertow than BF1943....

  • thedaveeyres #41 3 years ago

    Meh, I'm enjoying it. 6 is very harsh for a 13 quid game that's pretty good.

  • penhalion #42 3 years ago

    I remember saying that this was pretty much like playing a fps in 2d and that as a result it simply didn't work. At the time I guess not enough people had played it at the shows etc. etc and so didn't understand what I meant. I'm glad that now people have had a chance to play it, they have vindicated what I was saying.

    This game could have been much better as I and others pointed out to the developers, that the gameplay was flawed because you couldn't tell who was who and the fat princess was too hard to recover etc. etc.

    Hopefully thay iron out the issues. The annoying thing is that if they had just been open minded enough to listen to what people were saying after playing the show demos, they would have created a much better game.

  • serpantdarius #43 3 years ago

    Should have been £9.99 or lower
    Edited by 1 at 03/08/09 @ 11:25

  • bavobbr #44 3 years ago

    Dont know how good it is to score a multiplayer game on the gameplay of the players involved if the game is actually brand new and so are the players. Isn't it very logical that actually nobody will know what to do at that time? How can you expect to see the dynamics the devs aimed for during their tuning phase?
    You need to let it ripe for a bit, make sure the player base is at least half filled with experienced people before judging that aspect. This review can be totally outdated in a month. That's what you get for wanting to be the first, you lose quality due to a lack of sigh on the mechanics involved.

  • Les #45 3 years ago

    "The annoying thing is that if they had just been open minded enough to listen to what people were saying after playing the show demos, they would have created a much better game."

    Might be, but then again, with that kind of reasoning ultimately there shouldn't be any bad games...

  • JohnnyWashnGo #46 3 years ago

    Sounds like one to avoid if you are not a fan of online gaming.

    Perosonally, I prefer to play games solo so that when things go wrong, I have only myself to blame.

  • serpantdarius #47 3 years ago

    @ johnny i have to agree i prefer solo gameplay, as i hate relying on anyone else ingame and when i make a mistake i can learn from it and adapt my style.

  • mingster #48 3 years ago

    Mooey your last comment said this:

    So I hope you look through your huge database and see my name some day with post count: 1 and a last login: May 21, 2009 because this is the last and ONLY time I take a look at this shitty-ass site.

    So you you came back against your word.. you should self delete your account in shame.

  • phatb0y #49 3 years ago

    Some fair points made there, if a little sensationalist.

    Single player Fat Princess IS just a tutorial and a trophy grind, but I can't see anyone imagining it to be any different given this type of game.

    The gameplay seems more chaotic than it actually is. I'd put this down to the graphical style and the amount of players on-screen when things get busy. If you approach Fat Princess with a FPS team-orientated game in mind you're going to be disappointed, if anything it plays like PVP in an MMO. If you've ever spent more than a couple of hours fucking around on the battlegrounds of WoW or DAoC you'll be well at home here. The mechanics are absolutely identical. Healing, crowd control, tanks - its all there.

    People are starting to get their shit together already in this game and some great teamplay is emerging. Sure, you'll always get the bellends that want to play lone wolf, but they'll either get bored and go back to sniping in COD 4 or eventually they'll realise that they have to play as a team or they'll be bottom-feeding on the scoreboard every time. Although it looks like a novelty title I honestly think this has the potential to eclipse most team-based games doing the rounds on the PS3 at the moment. If only half of one side plays together properly they can completely dominate the opposition.

    Technical issues aside (which like every other game will get patched out in due course) its a great little game and in my book worthy of a much better mark than the one thats been born of frustration here. Personally I'd have gone for a solid 8, but there you go.
    Edited by 2 at 03/08/09 @ 14:00

  • neilqpr #50 3 years ago

    Glad I bought this before the review came out, as it might of put me off buying it.

    The connection problems are terrible at the moment but I've really enjoyed the few games I've played.

  • SonyXp82 #51 3 years ago

    My main problem with this game is it's price, no way is it worth £12.
    How do they come up with these prices?

    When you can get new & sealed retail games for less, it just seems not worth it.
    I was planning on getting it before saw how much it was going to cost me
    then I decided I'd rather buy some xbox points & get splosion man instead along
    with turtles in time when it comes out which will cost less then the price of this
    game on it's own, 2 for the price of 1. Hopefully they put it on sell one day & then
    maybe I'll buy it.
    Edited by 1 at 03/08/09 @ 12:57

  • Weebleboy #52 3 years ago

    We get the BBC in Scotland too you know.

  • flaming.carrot #53 3 years ago

    I think there should be a way of damaging enemy hat machines (so they lose their upgrades), is this already in the game? Not sure. It would certainly help the stalemate that frequently occurs once both teams are fully upgraded.

  • SeesThroughAll #54 3 years ago

    "See you soon Mooey. Possibly when the next overhyped PS3 exclusive gets an average review."

    And this last sentence here makes you no better than Mooey...

  • phatb0y #55 3 years ago

    'I think there should be a way of damaging enemy hat machines (so they lose their upgrades), is this already in the game? Not sure. It would certainly help the stalemate that frequently occurs once both teams are fully upgraded.'

    Catapult and chicken bomb does the job nicely.

  • Kenshin001 #56 3 years ago

    I think the game is the sort of thing thing you're better off playing with people on your friends list or at least talking to other players. The review sounds like the experience of someone who jumped on with a bunch of randoms and likely wasn't using a headset (judging from the tea comment). Pretty sure if you are playing with friends it will be a bit more rewarding.

  • Edz72 #57 3 years ago


    Bought it, played it for 5 mins went straight back to Demon's Sous... just can't stop playing Demons Souls, its like fricken crack'.

    Same as, Demon Souls should be the bench mark for every game out there, it really shows gamers how shallow games are these days.
    Edited by 1 at 03/08/09 @ 14:50

  • flaming-carrot #58 3 years ago

    The ridiculous overpricing of this PSN title now looks even more of a mistake in light of the review. Shame, because this looked like it could have been fun. £3.99 would have been spot on for a bit of multiplayer mayhem, and a bare bones single player mode. £11.99 takes the ****.

  • Dismiss #59 3 years ago

    Phatb0y hit it right on the head. It's an EXACT cross of MMO-style PvP and resource gathering a la Megalomania (anyone remember that?). The concept is solid enough that when players start thinking seriously about winning it all becomes rather strategic and fun, not to mention offering some solid laugh-out-loud moments. As with every PSN multiplayer game, there will be times when you love the game, and moments that will have you cursing Sony for not bundling a headset with the PS3.
    Edited by 3 at 03/08/09 @ 19:03

  • BritishBlue1 #60 3 years ago

    "mowgli, it's not a good idea to troll when you have a public XBL Tag LOL"

    With a gamerscore of over 9000!

  • MasterNameless #61 3 years ago

    "With a gamerscore of over 9000!"

    That's not so impresive... I don't consider my gamerscore that high and it's twice as much.

    I've been really enjoying Fat Princess myself, haven't touched the offline game(except for the hilarious credits!! XD) at all. Had troubles getting into games yes, but at most it has only taken 4 or 5 attempts to get in - granted, if the game is too quiet or too full, and laggy, I'll quit and look again. Within ten minutes I'm usually up and running in a good game though.

    I also agree with what others have been saying about the voice chat, it's definitely a much better game when people are talking and working together, or even better, playing on a team with friends so you can work together properly.

    I think time will fix both of these problems, with updates and people learning how to work together. I'm certainly going to keep playing, I just wish I had as many friends on PSN as I do on Xbox Live! ^_^
    Edited by 2 at 03/08/09 @ 21:03

  • MasterNameless #62 3 years ago

    "mowgli, it's not a good idea to troll when you have a public XBL Tag LOL

    You know what to do, guys ;)"

    He is trolling yes - laughably, with a complete lack of argument too, so it's easy to ignore him - but alas, if you mean for people to send him bad feedback, it's not possible unless you actually play in a game with him so he's in your player list. Which is a shame in a few select cases, but on the whole it's a good thing as the system would be totally abused. Unless there's a workaround that I'm unaware of...

    Besides, evilfoxhound, you can't complain about trolling. I've seen you trolling 360 threads plenty of times!

  • Arwin #63 3 years ago

    I've played this with friends on launch day and had lots of fun. It takes most people a while to figure everything out, but only a few games in we were already finding some awesome techniques working together (though also one game where we lost one princess and never found her).

    This review is rubbish though - this game has far too much depth to draw such conclusions so soon based on so little play. It's the basic 'oh this game didn't t instantly seem as good as I was lead to believe it would be by all the hype' trap some people keep falling into. Disappointing.

  • mowgli #64 3 years ago

    ""mowgli, it's not a good idea to troll when you have a public XBL Tag LOL"

    With a gamerscore of over 9000!"

    It happens when you have good games to play.

  • mowgli #65 3 years ago

    "mowgli, it's not a good idea to troll when you have a public XBL Tag LOL

    You know what to do, guys ;)"

    Then thank god you are a desperate loser of whom no one gives a flying fuck.

  • EuroStalker #66 3 years ago

    ONE reviewer's opinion is not correct. It's just an opinion.

    Fat Princess is a charming game, very enjoyable. There are many times I have disagreed with Eurogamer. MGS4 and Infamous being great examples. Infamous is a much better game then Prototype.

    Every reviewer is biased. There is aslo a link between commercial activities and reviews. I would love to see some sort of report of game ads taken out by publishers on Eurogamer and the score for the corresponding game. I'm sure you will find a link. ;)

  • Lamb #67 3 years ago

    "I always wondered why the fuck people were getting excited over it, it always looked shit."

    You're confusing your dislike of the artstyle with the criticism of gameplay mechanics."

    No I'm not."



    I have to agree with Mowgli, also the title Fat Princess what kind of self respect do you have to have to pick up a title like that? And that was rhetorical.

  • yzzlthtz #68 3 years ago

    Reviewing a game partially based on the people who play it and the fact that you have no friends to play with.
    Truly a new paradigm in media journalism.

  • ninjagoat #69 3 years ago

    IGN gave it a 9.

  • Dizzy #70 3 years ago

    IGN gives everything a 9

  • EvilBob_leeds #71 3 years ago

    For my money really, really good fun. Could be cheaper. Network issues are a pain, but apparently they're getting sorted to some extent.

    And "the other guys online are dumb and aren't as good as me" is a pretty crappy reason to mark anything down. I mean what the fuck? A game comes out with no similar predecessors; with nowt similar anything that I've seen on PSN/WiiWare, and you complain that in the first couple of days people haven't got their tactics together? Phrrrt.

    If you've got a PS3 and a few quid I would really recommend getting this. It's a blast.
    Edited by 1 at 04/08/09 @ 08:22

  • Eurogamerbiased #72 3 years ago

    As always Euroretarded.net punishes another PS3 exclusive. You really suck, kids, a game that's getting an average score of 8.5, and the master minds of Euroretarded make another biased review to destroy the brilliant work of an small development team . I'm willing to see when "smell a shit sim" it's released on XBLA and you give it a 10 ot of 10.

  • Beek4257 #73 3 years ago

    @Eurostalker
    Let's see: Wii Sports Resort is on the frontpage. EG review: 7/10. Metacritic score: 8/10.

    I'm not sure if I would call that a link...
    No, wait I am and I wouldn't.

  • Bilbo_bobbins #74 3 years ago

    Eurogamer really are shit at Reviews, why do you bother?

  • Bloodhunter #75 3 years ago

    hmm, i think some of the remarks are more about the players rather than the game itself

    i wouldn't know though, i dont bother much with buying stuff on psn

  • layleeloo #76 3 years ago

    What a shock! An online game ruined by the wankers that play them. Sounds like every online game made doesnt it? People too bothered about their own scores as if to say to people "look at the size of my cock" rather than play together to reach an objective. Online is such overrated shit its untrue. Wish people would concentrate more on SP which isn't ruined by human maniacal idiots

  • Arwin #77 3 years ago

    Yeah, or just play more with friends. If you can't manage that, that's already a bit suspect, don't you think? ;)

  • Mr_Gallows #78 3 years ago

    Eurogamer = Amateurs

    That's all there is to say about their random reviews.

    Do publishers BUY a score here... it seems so with the random crap. Stupid broken games getting high scores and solid games getting low scores. Eurogamer you remain an utter disgrace to the world of reviewers.

    [link url=http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps3/fatprince ss
    ]http://ww w.metacritic.com/games/platform...[/link]

    Check out their reviews on metacritic and watch the seemingly random nature of their low and high scores... and then ponder for a moment just why some big publishers get a big score for crap games.

    Sometimes they even complain about things that are hard, things that doesn't work, things that are confusing etc. And when I sit down to play as a game I get a 100% wtfness feeling, because I have absolutely no idea why they found the things, hard, confusing etc. Do they play the game for just 10 minutes so they never learn to actually play the games or are they just absolute noob gamers without any skill, making them frustrated and then overlook things that become obvious to the average gamer in minutes (the FN4 stamina issues that they never mentioned for instance).
    Edited by 3 at 04/08/09 @ 22:00

  • iago71 #79 3 years ago

    Ive been playing thisover the weekend and I have to asy Ive had a real blast with it OL. getting into a game can be tricky sometimes and a little annoying but no more so than Battlefield 1943.

    I have had afew games that were just a cluster fuck of mayhem with everyone just wanting to be the warrior class and no regard for teamwork so I agree with the points in the review.

    Nonetheless, I think it deserves more than a 6 tbh. :)

  • Big-Swiss #80 3 years ago

    I think the game idea was awesome, then they fucked it up. I can imagine, that the game will be more appreaciated when played longer and with teamwork, so as for me, I can advice, if you haven't purchased the game, wait and see how it continues with feedbacks, if you have it allready, play the shit out of it, it can only get better, and i think it will!

    Far more concerned I'm about all these "+" and "-", what complete useless bullshit!!

  • Mr_Gallows #81 3 years ago

    @Big Swiss

    The + and - were created by Eurogamer to make their rabid fanboys and emplyees discretely punish people who actually speak their mind instead of echoing EG.

  • Ergates_Antius #82 3 years ago

    Or so people can hide pointless comments from obnoxious trolls.

  • gbh08 #83 2 years ago

    I think that was a fair review,

    I had much bigger expectations of FP from all the vids and what not before release, but can relate to the review 100%, sloppy aiming, hard to keep track of character when alot of blood and people are on screen, get no help mineing stone or any defence from others while u do so!! l it just feels like a big ol mess and its way overpriced, it should be £5