Prince of Persia Classic Comments by Richard Leadbetter

The "7" is obviously a typo - it's meant to be a "9".

Okay, move along...

Another world has already been redone for the PC, with updated visuals that is more or less perfect.
Flash back has been recently ported to XP, NDS, PSP, etc.

As with most games from the Amiga age they used digital controls and normally joysticks, so a pad will never really feel right even more so seeing that the quality of D-Pads have been decreasing in recent years.

I wonder if the Competition Pro Joystick (USB) work with the xbox360 then you would get a real stick to play these classics with.

Hori EX Turbo pad has an excellent d-pad, but this game doesn't support it.

Anyway - nice remake, I appreciate things like this just as much as old arcade ports - which is a lot.

"... not to mention (according to IGN.com) that it only takes a couple of hours to complete."

Sigh. No it doesnt.

If you want to COMPLETE it PROPERLY you'll need to do it within the 1 hour time limit.

But unless you're cheating/using a walkthrough or just god.. there's no WAY you'll do it in an hour first go.

If on your first attempt you do it in less than 10, then i'd say you're probably lying.

"Can you guys just settle on a way of scoring these games please?"

Look, surely all that matters to anyone who isnt a retarded geek is whether or not the game is good or not and worth your money. Looking at the review and score together - yes it is.

Gees.. and they say games make kids dumb. You dont see people on movie forums arguing that one film got 4/5 but another got 3.5/5 do you?

Gees.. and they say games make kids dumb. You dont see people on movie forums arguing that one film got 4/5 but another got 3.5/5 do you?

Maybe not but I have seen hordes of people killing each other over StarTrek vs. Star Wars. So where's the difference? Arguing about 7 or 8 seems to me a bit more sane than arguing about 0/10 vs 10/10

I agree with Peew971: At least, we should be told the reasons for that 7. Maybe the game's too short for an 8.

I don't care if it's a 7 or a 10 if the text does not suffer from artistically induced lack of solid criticism. If the game is too short or has some flaws that seriously hurt the game than I can judge by myself whether this game is for me or not. But if the review only mentions positive things without anything bad but it still gets a "not very, very good" rating then I am missing something and the only thing left is to compare it with other games. Reading the review the only real problem with the game is sudden deaths - then again this is something that simply has to be in the game because otherwise it would not be the original Prince of Persia. And I'd bet quite a lot of money that if those deaths would be gone the forgivingness of a health bar would have to face equal criticism.

The team behind the game has put great effort to get this game technically up to date and add modes to give the game long lasting appeal; And it certainly plays well. Yet something is missing that seems to justify a 7. But what is it? There is no possibility to share ghosts. I agree, that would have been nice. But what else? What should the game do better to get the same score like many other Arcade titles that got a better score? Yes, 7 or 8 is not a huge difference but the review really praises the game yet the score seems to contradict. I don't really have a problem with the score I just have a problem putting everything into context. Take the Catan review. The game also received a 7 and it adds up very well reading the review with justified and fair criticism of a lacking singleplayer mode and sometimes bad controls which to be honest is a very important part. Catan is a great game and the review lists both the positive and negative things about it and this is exactly where this review is a bit lacking. Maybe there are no bad things to say about Prince of Persia and if there indeed were no flaws in this game, then why does it 'only' get a 7?

I know I sound like I bitch about the score but I really am not. I just want to state that I can understand why people moan about the inconsistency in the reviews.

Sometimes reading this forum reminds me of comic book guy from the simpsons.

Is that good or bad?

one hour game... No 2 hours game!. omg you guys. Its like you wont get to play Portal cause its actual gameplay is less than 4 hours. ( When you have finished the game around 3-4 times and you get perfect at it that is. )

No more noob comments so i wont be checking back in this topic tbh.

okay.. im going to resort to shouting.

IT IS NOT A ONE HOUR GAME!! THERE IS NO WAY YOU'LL FINISH IT IN ONE HOUR (well not on yer first go through anyhows).

Expect it to take at LEAST 5 to 10 hours.. Even if you DO manage to do it in the hour that wont take into account the level restarts when you die.

PLEASE STOP!

I've been stuck on level 2 (2!!!) for the last hour.

I am officially old and crap at games =(

It's a pity that the game doesn't have the Sands of Time to help with the sudden deaths really... Apart from that I'm having a blast with the game too!

Maybe the Live Arcade / Retro games should be scored out of 5 in stead of 10. They do that on GC.

4/5 no complaints

edit: Like Flightrisker said (only just read the 1st page)

>4/5 no complaints

wtf? Are you retarded?

4 out of 5 is 8 out of 10 - simple maths.

so therefor it makes f-all difference.