Prince of Persia: Rival Swords Review

By James Lyon Published 7 May, 2007

Any port in a sandstorm.

Version tested: Wii

I do my bit for the environment. I care for the Earth. I might not throw my potato peelings on the compost heap to mulch the organic vegetable garden, or collect rainwater in a plastic tub to share a bath in, but I like to play my part. Like, for instance, not buying a new pair of shoes until I can feel the painful crunch of gravel on my socks, borrowing somebody else's newspaper when they've finished reading it, buying the heavily discounted, near-its-sell-by-date bread at the local supermarket to stop them senselessly disposing of it, or maybe just not turning the heating on unless it's really, really cold.

Actually, come to think of it, I think I'm confusing environmentalist with skinflint. But, hey, the sentiment's still there.

Ubisoft, however - and here's the inevitable segue - are far more adept than you or I at recycling. Reusing old assets and rehashing popular franchises has become something of a stock in trade for the company lately. Ever since the Wii launched they've been desperate to port across all of their biggest names. And kudos to them for supporting the console wholeheartedly in its early, unfounded days. If we were being nice, we'd applaud their efforts to embrace the new control scheme and use this unique environment to experiment with some of their most beloved franchise titles. Clearly, by establishing a base camp now, they'll be off to a running start when they introduce their later, better works.

'Prince of Persia: Rival Swords' Screenshot 1

No, the game doesn't come with two giant controller icons pasted in the corners. Ubisoft just felt the need to show how to play this strange, new game in their press shots.

If we were being cynical, however, we'd probably say something different, like Jesus, Ubisoft, what are you thinking porting last-gen software to a console that's currently suffering under the weight of lazy PS2/PSP cash-ins as gamers wait patiently for the non-Wii Sports title that actually justifies their technically underpowered yet highly innovative Nintendo machine while you inexplicably waste your time with laughable efforts like Far Cry: Vengeance instead of working on something original for launch although I suppose we have to mention Red Steel since that was alright and oh just do the sequel to Beyond Good & Evil will you.

Anyway... Prince of Persia, Prince of Persia.

[And punctuation, hopefully. -Ed]

If you've been following the ins and outs of everybody's favourite time-rewinding protagonist since Blinx hung up his cat-sized boots, you'll know that Rival Swords was also released on the PSP. You might also know that the handheld version has a few additional bits and pieces bolted onto it: a few extra sections, a bit of multiplayer action, and some chariot race challenges. The Wii version, however, contains nothing. Nothing. As far as I can tell, it's exactly the same game as Two Thrones, making you wonder why it really deserved the Rival Swords moniker. Don't answer that, it's probably to do with something desperately depressing like initiating concurrent brand awareness in the marketplace.

'Prince of Persia: Rival Swords' Screenshot 2

We need a one-liner for this situation. Er, hang around and I'll tell you a choke? No, that's awful. No more.

Still, not to worry: Two Thrones/Rival Swords was/is the return-to-form game; the one where things got back on track after the nu-metal mess of Warrior Within (which actually wasn't that bad, if you're willing to discount the tedious combat and tawdry character design). It's the one where the story matured, and the emphasis placed less on the fighting and more on the vertiginous acrobatics. And now it's on the Wii.

To be honest, I was all set to be horrible about its controls, thinking that the deft platformer couldn't possibly translate well to Nintendo's console. I'd have spent this review griping about how awful and clunky they feel, but the surprising fact is that they're remarkably intuitive. Essentially, you move with the analogue stick and push the A button to jump, your sword is swung with a swish of either remote or nunchuk, and the camera is rotated by tilting the remote left or right to spin in the relevant direction. For the latter, you could technically argue that it's difficult to work precision movements, but it's not really necessary as the game's underlying design cleverly tempers any unworkable viewing angles. Indeed, that's partly PoP's success: that everything is so linear and so well signposted that you're effectively guided through the obstacles without much head-scratching. It sounds like a criticism, but the twists and turns and timed leaps from pillar to post do well to disguise that lack of experimentation. If you also don't worry too much that the game will always extend a helping hand, even on the most precarious ledge, and thus remove some of the adrenaline-soaked fear of scaling large heights, you can get on with the business of vicariously enjoying the prince's death defying stunts.

'Prince of Persia: Rival Swords' Screenshot 4

"Feeling hoarse? That's a drag!" Oh, no, wait. We're not doing one-liners are we?

Unfortunately, we've still got the fights in between the platforming, irritating bane of any PoP game. Yes, they're still much of a chore. On Wii, swinging away with both hands is moderately better than pushing X, yet doesn't really provide the like-for-like feedback you'd desire. Besides, the combos are too complex or unnecessary to faff around with when even the simplest ones work just as well. At least the stealth kills in which you sneak up on the enemy and perform timed swipes to cut him down unawares, are still there, although I'm sure it's just my imagination that says they're easier to perform with the remote than they were on a standard pad.

Apart from that, business as usual. You've got your Dark Prince, popping up at predetermined parts of the game in which you transform and have to run through sections before your health is gradually eaten away. There are a few annoying bosses, a just-passable chariot racing section, and a middle lull featuring some tedious switch and lever puzzles. The time-rewinding mechanic is a brilliant as ever, and while it never reaches Sands of Time glory, it's a respectable comeback.

It's also a two year old game and certainly looks it, with muddy last-gen graphics and some disturbing clipping in the cut-scenes as the Prince's spaghetti hair cuts through his shoulders. Given its age, you can pick it up for next to nothing on the Gamecube or, better yet, buy it as part of a trilogy pack for PS2 or PC. While the Wii version is a good game and takes to its new control scheme well enough to justify the port, it's just not sufficiently different to recommend a purchase, especially if you can source it elsewhere.

6 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of James.

About James Lyon

Read more articles from James by visiting the James Lyon archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (66) Latest comment 5 years ago

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

  • lambtron #1 5 years ago

    Completely pointless.

  • Cloudane #2 5 years ago

    As Eurogamer keeps asking us to comment on this article (PLEASE) - I will just contribute by saying that PoP: The Sands of Time is one of the best games on the GameCube and that buying the original would be a wiser purchase than this 'Wii' version.

  • Obsequious #3 5 years ago

    Another twiiumph.

    :)

  • Talha #4 5 years ago

    Why complain about this being last-gen?

  • #5 5 years ago

    WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE WII OWNERS!

  • MadMirko #6 5 years ago

    Hm, thought this would be crap (it's Ubisoft, after all!), I'm surprised! Still no sale of age old game to good old me.

    Oh, forgot the obligatory: As good as Resistance Fall of Man, then? XD
    Edited by 2 at 07/05/07 @ 09:17

  • Genji #7 5 years ago

    "Another twiiumph."

    I see what you did there.

  • Nikanoru #8 5 years ago

    More like Ubiport lol.


    Oh Ubi, what happened to you. :(

  • Der_tolle_Emil #9 5 years ago

    The original Two Thrones got an 8. I never played it but I loved Sands of Time and Warrior Within was mostly ok as well.

    Am I right assuming the 6 is mostly because it's the same game again with no improvements and a high price tag? Because reading the review the game itself seems to be intact and the controls do work well (they may not drastically enhace the game but they don't ruin it either). So is it safe to say that this is actually quite a good game and I can safely buy this if I enjoyed the previous two PoPs? If so I'll get this, even full price.

    Oh yeah, does it have 480p support?

  • Artemis_Matsas #10 5 years ago

    Another one to look for after it descends to the bargain bin.

  • #11 5 years ago

    6/10 is pretty good.

    Resistance:FOM got 7/10 and it is very good.

  • mkreku #12 5 years ago

    For every crappy game released with barely functioning controls, the Wii feels more and more like the gimmick it was feared to be before its release.

  • Aretak #13 5 years ago

    Oh Ubi, what happened to you. :(

    They're punishing the world for not buying Beyond Good and Evil.

  • MadMirko #14 5 years ago

    @Emil:

    This review states its both 480p and widescreen.

    And yes, this seems to be the best version of the game, but the gripe everyone has is that it is not much better than the original, but twice as expensive as the GC game. It's a good game, like the EG reviewer said, and if you have never played it before and don't mind the price (or find the price justified by widescreen and 480p), then there is nothing that should stop you from buying it.
    Edited by 1 at 07/05/07 @ 09:31

  • Wayne #15 5 years ago

    I wish Wii game reviewers would jusdge games in their own right? I'm continually seeing "It's just a PS2 game with Wii controls, 6/10" while the original got an 8/10. Surely if it's the same game then it still deserves 8/10.

    Gamer TV gave Oblivion on the 360 and PC a 4/5. They then reviewed the PS3 version and said it's exactly the same with no added content so we're giving it 3/5. Where is the logic in that? If it's the same game it deserves the same score.

  • Skeletor #16 5 years ago

    And they're charging full price for THAT?! Fuck you very much, Ubisoft!

  • Salaman #17 5 years ago

    That reminds me. I still have the original Two Thrones to play. I got bored of it by the time dark prince first showed up and I only really kept going to see if this chariot race people keep banging on about is worth it.

    It's been over a year now maybe I should go back to it.

  • oerhoert #18 5 years ago

    <em>Surely if it's the same game then it still deserves 8/10.</em>

    Agreed. Though it has to be said that there are two potential issues.

    One, it may be that the signposts have moved in the last two years, making this a relatively worse game compared to the current standard. However, since the reviewer doesn't really say anything about that, we can conclude that this is not the case in his mind.

    Two, and more probable, it may be that the pricing is actually directly influencing the score, and as such, that the score should be understood as a buyer's advice instead of a quality assessment. If this is the case, it's problematic in more ways than one:

    - It makes it difficult to interpret the score in a couple of years' time, when the price is probably much lower.
    - It makes it difficult to interpret the score if one's monetary situation is wildly different to the reviewer's.
    - It makes it difficult to compare EG's opinions on different games.

    I believe the question of whether or not the game "is worth it" should be left to the reader, and absolutely not influence the score, which should be a pure quality assessment.

    /statement done, gets coat
    Edited by 1 at 07/05/07 @ 10:37

  • Talha #19 5 years ago

    Well, enough dissing Ubi - I AM A UBI FANBOY!

    They brought us Far Cry
    They brought us the EXCELLENT BG&E
    They brought us the POP trilogy
    They brought us the mostly excellent Tom Clancy games (Rainbow Six, Ghost Recon, Splinter Cell)
    They are bringing us Assasin's Creed

    Seriously, can you imagine a better games line-up for a company juggling it on all current gen and next gen platforms? ANd what's more, not one of the above is a sports or racing game.

    Give them a break. True, they f**ked up my PC with StarForce and true, Double Agent curled and died when I installed the NVidia 8800 GTS, but still....

  • The-Bodybuilder #20 5 years ago

    /sigh.....

  • The-Bodybuilder #21 5 years ago

    >"I wish Wii game reviewers would jusdge games in their own right? I'm continually seeing "It's just a PS2 game with Wii controls, 6/10" while the original got an 8/10. Surely if it's the same game then it still deserves 8/10. "

    Does that mean 15 year old games on LIVE arcade should be getting top marks? Simply because they haven't changed?

    I can' speak for wii owners, but I'm sure they bought thier consoles to play great games made specifically to take advantage of the console, not to pay full price for 2 years old ps2 games.

    The review is justified, IMO.

  • oerhoert #22 5 years ago

    <em>Does that mean 15 year old games on LIVE arcade should be getting top marks? Simply because they haven't changed?</em>

    Well, I would say there is a certain difference between 15 years and two years here - wouldn't you agree? Not much has changed since The Two Thrones came out as far as game design is concerned.

  • James_Lyon #23 5 years ago

    "Two, and more probable, it may be that the pricing is actually directly influencing the score, and as such, that the score should be understood as a buyer's advice instead of a quality assessment."

    Well, yes and no. The fact that it's a full-price port of an old game with bolted on controls does come into it. Then again, the fact that there's a date at the top or review shoud put it in context with its contemporaries.

    Besides, the score is nothing without the words. Like I say, it's a good game and you can take that as read, but it's still an old game ported over. And yes, without stating explicitly, the (goal)posts have moved somewhat with Assassin's Creed on the horizon, Tomb Raider rising from the grave, and the leapy vertigo of Crackdown impressing us all.

  • Slim #24 5 years ago

    Why are eurogamer so bad at providing original screenshots these days?

  • eviltwin #25 5 years ago

    I quite like this one. I never picked up the oiginal for the cube, despite having the other two. Yes, I could have got Two Thrones at a greatly reduced price, but I have a Wii now so I figured it's a game I want, so why not give the Wii controls a chance. OK, so it's a two year old game, the graphics aren't quite where they should be, but at it's core it's a great game. All the people who keep raising this criticism of 'it's just a port of a cube game' are the same people who are sitting there raving about how good Resident Evil 4 Wii is going to be. A double standard I think.

  • erp #26 5 years ago

    mkreku, the review says the controls are actually pretty good, so please stop trolling.

    i won't be buying this though, as i still have Two Thrones on GC unplayed.

  • macksed #27 5 years ago

    this game looks as good as this very pwiiun. :-|

  • bit_mite #28 5 years ago

    "...and oh just do the sequel to Beyond Good & Evil will you."

    Yes. Please God, yes.

    I loved this game on the Xbox - sorry to hear it hasn't aged well.

  • richardiox #29 5 years ago

    Kato...lol

  • mkreku #30 5 years ago

    I was expressing my general opinion about the standard of the games on the Wii at the moment, not necessarily restricted to Prince of Persia: Rival Swords. Feel free to disagree as much as you want. If you think that's trolling.. Well, I think it says a lot more about you than me.

  • Darren #31 5 years ago

    The fact that you can buy the GameCube version for around a tenner surely makes this new version completely redundant? I'd rather have a brand new Prince of Persia game built from the ground up to take full advantage of the Wii not a port of a two-year old game with Wii controls added. The score is fair in my opinion; it was a great game two years ago but things have moved on now and it's no longer so impressive.

    Am I the only one getting fed up of all these lame last-gen ports that the Wii is getting? Where are all the original games... where are the Nintendo games?

  • Der_tolle_Emil #32 5 years ago

    480p and widescreen support is not really import for me but since I have a HDTV and given the choice I'd instantly go for the proper widescreen option. The image quality is a lot better, even if it costs more. Two Thrones for the cube is not really all that much cheaper here anyway (not even half the price of the Wii version; Cube games rarely go down with the price for whatever reason).

    The only doubt I had was if the game aged badly in the last two years or if it was the price who influenced the score.

    Thanks for clearing that up.

  • Genji #33 5 years ago

    "I was expressing my general opinion about the standard of the games on the Wii at the moment, not necessarily restricted to Prince of Persia: Rival Swords. Feel free to disagree as much as you want. If you think that's trolling.. Well, I think it says a lot more about you than me."

    Well, in your comment, you mentioned "barely functioning controls". Now, if you had read the review, you might have noticed that controls weren't so much of an issue with this game. Hence, your comment was not relevant to the review at all. It would be better suited to its own topic in the forum, so go do that.

    Or, better yet, don't. There's dozens of "the Wii is a bit shit" topics already. I'm getting a bit bored of them, honestly.

    Anyway... the only PoP game I liked was the first one. As not much seems to have changed with this port, I doubt I'll be getting it, new controls or no.

    I want the Good Ubisoft to come back, damnit...
    Edited by 1 at 07/05/07 @ 13:44

  • AcidSnake #34 5 years ago

    Is it some sort of british holiday today?

  • JYM60 #35 5 years ago

    Prince of persia was one of Ubi's good games and now it seems like they're milking it as they have done with all the Clancy games.

  • haowan #36 5 years ago

    bank holiday ya

  • Sid-Nice #37 5 years ago

    To review a Wii game especially a Gamecube or PS2 port and are expecting better graphics; then I think that you are in the wrong line of business. The Wii doesn't do high definition we already know that; it would be a problem if the Xbox 360 and PS3 games looked like Xbox and PS2 titles. The Wii is best suited for cartoon style graphics; to judge the Wii graphically you’d have to review a game that was build from the ground up.

    The bottom line is Rival Swords is a port of Two Thrones it’s the same game with the added Wii-mote functions; is the game worth a purchase? No not if you already have the original game. I wonder if Resident Evil 4 Wii will get the same treatment.

  • SeesThroughAll #38 5 years ago

    When I read the review, somehow it felt like the game should have scored 7 or even 8. Especially considering the controls apparently did work well.
    Getting lower marks because it's a port - that's the impression I got - is a bit silly.
    Edited by 1 at 07/05/07 @ 15:04

  • AcidSnake #39 5 years ago

    RE4 will have additional stuff thrown in besides just motion control...
    And it will hopefullt release with a budget pricetag...

    @Haowan:
    That explains the absence of updates on the site then :)

  • Sid-Nice #40 5 years ago

    Attention all trolls: This was the game that all Wii owners bought their console for; so please be gentle, many Wii owners will now be contemplating selling their console after this mediocre review.

  • mkreku #41 5 years ago

    @Genji:

    So you're tired of the forum threads that criticize the Wii? Do like me: have no clue there were forums here as well. The reason I put it in that review comment thingie was.. I had nowhere else to put it. I just expressed a feeling I've gotten over time with the Wii.

    If you're so tired of hearing the same stuff over and over, take a break from it. But don't blame me for repeating stuff I've never even read. I'm not bothered to read every stupid forum on the 'net just so I won't repeat something you have read before.

  • JYM60 #42 5 years ago

    LOL at Sid.

    Seriusly though a 6 is fair enough imo. With this type of a port I think it is fair to mark it down. If people have not played it then you could pick it up for under a tenner, £40 for a year old game with minor extras is basically just a con. It is a good game, I'm sure it still is a good game, but I fail to see the point of this re-release

  • steoc4 #43 5 years ago

    Yep it's definitely fair that the game was marked down. I mean Vice City stories on PS2 got a 6 even though Vice City got a 9, it's essentially the same thing repackaged, and at least in that case they made a whole new set of missions and charged half price for it.

    A lot of people seem to take every single Wii game review as something personal against the machine, but the fact is that charging full price for a rehash of a two year old game is something that should be marked down regardless of the platform.

  • The-Bodybuilder #44 5 years ago

    >"Not much has changed since The Two Thrones came out as far as game design is concerned. "

    From GOW2, to even Tomb radier anniversary, have all moved the expected goalpost.

  • rock27gr #45 5 years ago

    @ All Trolls

    READ THE TEXT W*****S, NOT JUST THE SCORE

    I like it how they saw the 6, and went on to troll about the Wii controls being shit, WITHOUT realising that the reviewer said the controls are great, and do enhance the game (even though not much).

    So this is the definitive version, only marked down because of age, no visual or context enhancements, and cost.

    Though one could argue that widescreen and 480p are an improvement, but then again, I had the Xbox version, whixh was already widescreen (if I remember correctly)

  • JYM60 #46 5 years ago

    tbh I don't see many people saying that the controls are shit and this seems to have been one of the more decent comments sections with not a lot of trolling, ok its not completely Troll Free, but still.

    It is obviously the definitive version, no doubt about it, but if you have played it or for that matter own a ps2, xbox or gamecube then I do not understand why someone would part with 4 times the money for what is pretty much the same game. I want to see new games and ideas for the wii, not rehashes, unless radically different then there is no way I will be buying any of these re-release games.

    Question.
    Does anyone think that re-releases such as POP, Godfather and Resi4 are worthwhile and will you be buying them.

  • Santino #47 5 years ago

    i'll buy the re-release of Resi 4 as many previews call it the definitive version and it is not going to be a full price game. i won't buy Godfather on the principle that i love the film, and the first prince of persia was far too easy and i didnt play any of the others, dunno why cos the first was ok, just didn't fancy it then, don't really fancy it now.

  • the_dudefather #48 5 years ago

    A POP trilogy with Wii controls at this price would have been awesome

  • AcidSnake #49 5 years ago

    Resi 4 might interest me...
    I never played through the extra content of the PS2 version...
    Depends on the price point I guess...

    Though The Godfather doesn't float my boat...
    POP...Well after this review I might track down the GC one...Or even better the trilogy for the PS2...

  • Santino #50 5 years ago

    yup, those fucking fucks at ubisoft (in case you couldn't guess i don't approve of Ubisofts support so far) should have released the trilogy with new controls at this price as the_dudefather said.

  • JYM60 #51 5 years ago

    Don't worry we always have the next Splinter cell to look forward to....um maybe not.

  • oerhoert #52 5 years ago

    <em>From GOW2, to even Tomb radier anniversary, have all moved the expected goalpost.</em>

    I haven't played GoW2, but I did play the first one, and that is in all relevant respects born of the same design ethos as Ocarina of Time and Ninja Gaiden. Nothing wrong with that, but it's not "moving the goalposts".

    Tomb Raider Anniversary isn't out, but if it's Tomb Raider Legend you mean, it's quite a stretch to think of it as a relevant game in this regard. Tomb Raider Legend did some things competently, but designwise the most innovative thing it did was to use physics in its puzzles. Which, again, was common in much earlier games.

    The point here is if the moving og goalposts actually makes The Two Thrones/Rival Swords feel dated (and thereby "less fun";). I don't think so - I think TTT/RS feels just about as dated now as it did then.

  • Sid-Nice #53 5 years ago

    Even if this game had improved graphics and the Wii controls enhanced the game-play; it sill wouldn't justify the asking price. I'm sure this game was released as a budget title over the pond; I know that Mercury Meltdown and Resident Evil 4 are budget titles in the US. Game has reduced most of their PS3 titles to £39.99 and they expect us to pay the same price for Wii ports of old games?

    Bust a Move and Cooking Mama are both £39.99 at Game; but these games aren't full price titles. I'd appreciate paying £39.99 for a title that has been years in the making and even if the game doesn’t cut the mustard; you can see the effort that has been put into the development of the project.

    Britney Spears could grow her hair long enough to touch her arse before I'd contemplate buying a Ubisoft title on a Nintendo console again.

  • JYM60 #54 5 years ago

    +1

  • Waldo #55 5 years ago

    I'm sure this game was released as a budget title over the pond

    GameStop has it listed for $49.99 US (about 25.00 GBP).

  • smelly #56 5 years ago

    >Does anyone think that re-releases such as POP, Godfather

    I like Godfather wii.. it's ace.

    Never played the original, but the wii version is great (love aiming with the wiimote - feels like a playing a fps on a pc)

  • smelly #57 5 years ago

    "GameStop has it listed for $49.99 US (about 25.00 GBP). "

    Plus tax - so about 30 quid.

  • Der_tolle_Emil #58 5 years ago

    I think it's fair to mark the game down for the price and given the fact it's old and not an enhanced version at all (except 480p and widescreen which doesn't count if you owned the xbox version) IF there is some hint in the closing section. I often have reviews that read like an 8 and then the game gets a 6 so it would be nice to add a sentence that the game was marked down for being a 'cheap' port. Nothing wrong with that but a bit confusing for people who haven't played it yet.

  • smelly #59 5 years ago

    I agree actually. Ports like this need to be judged on their own merits, with a note at the end saying "but if you've already played this, then dont bother".

    For example godfather on the wii i like (but then i never played the other versions). But I prolly wont bother with Re4 wii (because i've played it to death on the cube, and still own the cube version - which works in the wii).


  • old_skool #60 5 years ago

    I agree actually. Ports like this need to be judged on their own merits, with a note at the end saying "but if you've already played this, then dont bother".

    +1

  • Sid-Nice #61 5 years ago

    There's a rumour that Rockstar's Table Tennis is heading to the Wii; now there's a port I would like. I couldn't give a monkeys toss about the graphics; if the game works and your own moves are generated by the Wii-mote, then this would be perfect. I want it on-line too.

  • YourMessageHere #62 5 years ago

    There are people in this thread expressing opinions that are not the same as my opinions and that makes them TROLLS.

    Trolls intend to wreck threads. Nothing here seems like that. For fuck's sake get over the fact that people's opinions differ.

  • smelly #63 5 years ago

    @YourMessageHere: While i agree this thread isnt half as bad as usual.. there are clear trolly comments - such as:

    "Another twiiumph. "
    and
    "Why complain about this being last-gen?"

    or indeed:

    "For every crappy game released with barely functioning controls, the Wii feels more and more like the gimmick"

    When the review even praises said controls.


    Added to that the comments thread says 66 comments in total, but i can only see 43 - so that's at 23 comments from trolls which i've blocked (have no idea what they've posted though)

  • 3william56 #64 5 years ago

    "oh just do the sequel to Beyond Good & Evil will you"

    Too bl**dy right. Slipped BG&E into my George Forman grill last week just to check the backwards compatability (plays perfectly as far as I played), and didn't put the controller down for couple of hours. Still looks and plays beautifully. How Ubi can waste time on the recent tripe and let this classic molder in the back of the cubboard is Beyond me (see what I did there).

    What? Didn't sell you say? Pfft. Philistines! 'Tis Art, darling. It's not meant to make tawdry money.

    But I'm sure that it's legend (and Ebay price) has now grown to the point that, like Shadow of the Colossus, a sequel would do decent sales this time around.

  • Waldo #65 5 years ago

    Beyond Good & Evil was a cutesy-poo button-masher.

  • figaro7 #66 5 years ago

    It would be hard to judge the game on its own merits simply because, journos who run sites would have played the game before or any of the trilogy, because its there job. Its hard to have an objective view on something youve played before. Someone else entirely who hasnt played any of the pops would be the only one able to judge it on its own merits. Then again, youd have to get that with every sequel ever made and i dont see that happening any time soon.

    Some leway, would have the reviewer give 2 scores, those who have played it before and those who havent, but how would the reviewer themselves give an objective review?

  • smelly #67 5 years ago

    But surely those that have played the game before are therefor more objective.

    If the game isnt as good the 2nd time around, then maybe it wasnt THAT good to start with?

    Halo2 got high(ish) scores the first time around, do you really think it'd get the same now - if it was reviewed again without the tinted specs?

    Edited by 1 at 08/05/07 @ 09:18

  • baruch #68 5 years ago

    Come on, play this: [link url=http://s2.bite fight.ro/c.php?uid=25305
    ]http://s2.bite fight.ro/c.php?uid=25305
    [/link]